An open letter to google regarding root access

[IOWA]

Here's an "open source" letter to google regarding root access. What do you guys think? Input is welcome

Dear google,

We love your Android operating system. We love to develop, tinker, and modify our Android devices. We love that Android is an open source project. However, manufacturers are making it harder and harder to achieve root admin access to our devices, devices in which we pay for. We are asking for your help. The modding community comes up with great ideas, and great kernel modifications. We can't do any of this without root access. Furthermore, some methods of root are seriously draining system resources, making persistant root unfeasable. What we are asking, is for google to provide a root access backdoor, that would be achievable through the android sdk. Some of the best applications on the google marketplace today require root access, including some applications that further secure our phone should we lose it, or have it stolen. If this is implemented, we would be enternally grateful. Also, make part of the licensing agreement state manufacturers can not remove this backdoor root access functionality. This way, we can easily achieve root access, and spend more time improving & submitting code to you, to possibly include in future Android releases. We can expand the capability, functionality, and design, all through this process, as a collective whole, as Open Source software is intended to.
Part of our argument is, if we choose to meddle with devices we bought, and void our warranty(ies) at will, then so be it. Its our money, its our hardware.

Thank you for reading, and we are looking forward to this option in the future.

 

[Eazail70x7]

I'm all for it.

 

[grainysand]

fastboot oem unlock

<3

 

[IOWA]

Persistent root. Maybe with password protection too.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

 

[HustlinDaily]

How to root the LG Optimus

- Turn on the device and click the icon to open the phone dialler
- Enter the code '3845#*540#'
- Select the option 'Module Test', then 'Stability Test' then 'Enable Root Permission'
- You will now be prompted for a password - enter :SWIFT::GT540:
- A toast message will briefly appear saying 'OK' - your root access is now enabled!
- Reboot your device, and now when you connect via ADB, you'll see you have a root prompt (#).



Write an open letter to LG- please make better phones.

 

[Ngo93]

That'd be really cool if they were open to rooting like this. Though I'm going to attempt to root my phone tomorrow, I hope it works ><

 

[grainysand]

How to root the LG Optimus

- Turn on the device and click the icon to open the phone dialler
- Enter the code '3845#*540#'
- Select the option 'Module Test', then 'Stability Test' then 'Enable Root Permission'
- You will now be prompted for a password - enter :SWIFT::GT540:
- A toast message will briefly appear saying 'OK' - your root access is now enabled!
- Reboot your device, and now when you connect via ADB, you'll see you have a root prompt (#).

Color me amazed. That's actually easier than the N1.

 

[Nex_1]

dear IOWA ... :

YOU ROCK !!

 

[bluenova]

Sounds great! Why not start an online petition?

 

[mpw]

Has anybody thought to ask handset manufacturers why they seem to be making accessing root admin privileges?

If so what reason is given? and if not what reason do people suspect this is being done? or is this simply not something that is being actively obstructed, just not being actively encouraged?

Are there any inherent 'dangers' of problems associated with rooting (other than warranty voiding)?

...However, manufacturers are making it harder and harder to achieve root admin access to our devices, devices in which we pay for...

typo

 

[mrqs]

Are there any inherent 'dangers' of problems associated with rooting (other than warranty voiding)?

if and when some viruses appear on android, root access gives them more power

@iowa: you might wanna capitalize Google in your mail...

oh, forgot to mention, i agree with the message

 

[bluenova]

if and when some viruses appear on android, root access gives them more power

Whilst that is true having root access doesn't mean an app or anything else can just run wild on your phone. You have to give an app specific permission before it can do anything as SU.

 

[mrqs]

i said virus, not app - viruses take advantage of security holes, meaning they bypass security, like the need to get permission to execute su operations

 

[Astridax93]

If people understood where the root command comes from and why it exists people may not be to happy to root. As of yet there is no malicious software that will launch itself on android. The root user account on a linux system provided complete control and functionality with every part of the system.

Why don't google enable shell prompt with basic access, and the equivalent of the su command in linux. This would enable you to give apps root access if they needed it, and perform root commands if you needed, without making the system insecure.

I'm all for root, but if it were implemented in format used by current linux os' that would be better. However this still would not enable you to flash custom roms, I believe if forced phone manufacturers to forgo flashing checks, i.e HTC roms on only htc phones etc. Then you would be able to flash any android firmware onto any phone, assuming you could everything working driver wise.

Unlocking the bootloader could be a su command.

 

[Jammy]

Looks great...

Just be sure to capitalise Google!

 

[Lukehluke]

It would be good if everyone had root access, however if someone can root a phone then they can probably install roms without an issue but if everyone had it then some people might mess up rom installs and brick their phone as not everyone can do it.

 

[mrspeedmaster]

Here's an "open source" letter to google regarding root access. What do you guys think? Input is welcome

I am going to disagree with root access and state it from the position of the carrier.

To the carrier, you don't actually own the phone unless you buy the phone without contract. Whether you agree w/ me or not is irrelevant. This is how the carriers see it.
My $179.99 Droid Incredible and $49.999 Motorola Backflip are subsidized. Unlike the Nexus One, the majority of Android owners on this site are subsidized. The $199 Evos, the MyTouch, Droid, Droid Incredible.

Because you don't own the product, in the eyes of the carriers, they don't want you to have complete control. Why? They don't want you to run a shell script that allows free tethering. They don't want you to install non-approved-carrier apps. Many times, I have to the pull the SIM out of my Motorola just to download certain apps not approved in the Marketplace.

The next issue is the fact that with Root, you can have easy access to malicious code. I store most of my .apk files on DropBox. I can SCP .apk files onto my phones easy. There are even apps on the marketplace that allows the install of .apks off email attachments.
I can run un-signed, self-signed apps easily. It is simply too easy. What I am saying, it is easy to install an executable on an Android Phone. People with Archos tablets, SmartQ, Chinese tablets do it all the time. Now with root, to the common man, you open up a Pandora's Box.

If you also notice the marketplace, there are apps that are signed with very dubious origins. The first time I looked for DropBox, there was an app that used the original logo from DropBox. It looked and operated like the real DropBox app that I have on the Iphone. But, it was made by an individual developer. Who is to say that developer is not malicious and want to send your login/password to a secret server of his? I don't know that. 2 days later, One of the tech blogs announced that DropBox had an official Android App. By that time, it was too late. I immediately went online and changed all my username/passwords. Google has this problem of not authenticating the apps. There are many various "facebook" apps on the non-official Android Marketplace. There are is one app that looks like Yahoo Messenger and is signed MSN talk. People will get confused. I am very particular of which app I download now.

Whether or not you think this is an issue of I am just blowing it out of proportion, I think Google needs to clean its house in terms of the marketplace.

Would I like root? Sure? But a Carrier should have the right to terminate their plan if they don't want you to. Users need to agree to terms if they do root, their warranties are invalidated in the event the phones are bricked.

 

[IOWA]

Here's an "open source" letter to google regarding root access. What do you guys think? Input is welcome

I am going to disagree with root access and state it from the position of the carrier.

To the carrier, you don't actually own the phone unless you buy the phone without contract. Whether you agree w/ me or not is irrelevant. This is how the carriers see it.
My $179.99 Droid Incredible and $49.999 Motorola Backflip are subsidized. Unlike the Nexus One, the majority of Android owners on this site are subsidized. The $199 Evos, the MyTouch, Droid, Droid Incredible.

Because you don't own the product, in the eyes of the carriers, they don't want you to have complete control. Why? They don't want you to run a shell script that allows free tethering. They don't want you to install non-approved-carrier apps. Many times, I have to the pull the SIM out of my Motorola just to download certain apps not approved in the Marketplace.

The next issue is the fact that with Root, you can have easy access to malicious code. I store most of my .apk files on DropBox. I can SCP .apk files onto my phones easy. There are even apps on the marketplace that allows the install of .apks off email attachments.
I can run un-signed, self-signed apps easily. It is simply too easy. What I am saying, it is easy to install an executable on an Android Phone. People with Archos tablets, SmartQ, Chinese tablets do it all the time. Now with root, to the common man, you open up a Pandora's Box.

If you also notice the marketplace, there are apps that are signed with very dubious origins. The first time I looked for DropBox, there was an app that used the original logo from DropBox. It looked and operated like the real DropBox app that I have on the Iphone. But, it was made by an individual developer. Who is to say that developer is not malicious and want to send your login/password to a secret server of his? I don't know that. 2 days later, One of the tech blogs announced that DropBox had an official Android App. By that time, it was too late. I immediately went online and changed all my username/passwords. Google has this problem of not authenticating the apps. There are many various "facebook" apps on the non-official Android Marketplace. There are is one app that looks like Yahoo Messenger and is signed MSN talk. People will get confused. I am very particular of which app I download now.

Whether or not you think this is an issue of I am just blowing it out of proportion, I think Google needs to clean its house in terms of the marketplace.

Would I like root? Sure? But a Carrier should have the right to terminate their plan if they don't want you to. Users need to agree to terms if they do root, their warranties are invalidated in the event the phones are bricked.

Well this is just plain silly. I do own the phone. The fact that it is subsidized doesn't matter. I am receiving the subisidy in return for a 2 year contract. Its part of the price of the phone. That's why they have the etf.

And obviously, this wouldn't apply the the common man. The common man, doesn't care about root access.

If you financed a computer from dell, and they said you can't have admin rights on your machine, would that be ok to you as well?

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

 

[mrspeedmaster]

]
If you financed a computer from dell, and they said you can't have admin rights on your machine, would that be ok to you as well?

Look, I agree with you 100%. I was just talking from a devi's advocate's point of few. I am just trying to see it from the carrier's point of view.

We don't live in a vacuum. You don't think Google is concerned with what the carriers think? When T-Mobile said not to pdanet, Google acted swiftly and removed it for t-mobile customer.

 

[IOWA]

]
If you financed a computer from dell, and they said you can't have admin rights on your machine, would that be ok to you as well?

Look, I agree with you 100%. I was just talking from a devi's advocate's point of few. I am just trying to see it from the carrier's point of view.

We don't live in a vacuum. You don't think Google is concerned with what the carriers think? When T-Mobile said not to pdanet, Google acted swiftly and removed it for t-mobile customer.

Tmo really killed pdanet? And given the mass adoption/popularity of Android... I would think google certainly has the upper edge here. Especially for a FREE os, both carrier and manufacturers have struck gold with Android. There's no (fiscal) reason Android phones should cost the same as licensed os's, such as winmo7. Other than pure profit greed, which is ok, they are out to make money after all. I really don't see this stipulation that would only affect the vast minority of people who root anyway to be a big concern for carriers.

Tapatalk. Samsung Moment. Yep.

 

[Pryomancer]

:S I'm on TMobile (in the UK, is that why?) and I've got pdanet, and used it on one occassion, too.

I think root access is a good idea, but like you've said, normal users wouldn't care/use it.

 

[mrqs]

...

thing is, most (all?) of the phone models end up rooted anyway, so why would the carrier care if it's a little easier?
the average joe still wouldn't even know the meaning of the word and it's not like google or anyone else should advertise this backdoor as a feature of android, so the average joe wouldn't have even heard the word (well, apart from in the context of its other definitions...)
the people who would use this to root their phones are the same people who root their phones anyway, it just takes a little longer now

btw, afaik buying unlocked phones is common practice in pretty much everywhere apart from the states and uk (?)

 

[bluenova]

I am going to disagree with root access and state it from the position of the carrier.

To the carrier, you don't actually own the phone unless you buy the phone without contract. Whether you agree w/ me or not is irrelevant.

Perhaps true in America where you are forced to go through a Carrier but that is not true for the majority because in the rest of the world you can actually buy the phone without a contract.

 

[ivanzorkic]

Perhaps true in America where you are forced to go through a Carrier but that is not true for the majority because in the rest of the world you can actually buy the phone without a contract.

I second that. I payed my HTC Desire the full price of 500 euros (around $600). No contract, not branded, not locked. I own it. I have full IM access, if there is tethering in 2.2 I will have it, etc.

In Europe (minus UK) - most of the phones can be bought this way. In the long run, it comes out cheaper than going with a 1 or 2 year contract. And I think operators limit your abilities too much.

 

[mpw]

...I have full IM access, if there is tethering in 2.2 I will have it, etc...

Probably a dumb question; but what's IM?

My Hero is like your Desire, totally carrier independent, as the most you'll get subsidized for any handset is ~