New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Use opensource sepolicy-inject instead of closedsource supolicy #5
Comments
You can use the app/source any way you want, if you follow the license. setools looks good, but since the device needs to be rooted to use the app (=SuperSU), it won't make much of a difference. Could be useful for custom ROMs, which are already rooted, but may lack |
I hope that koush's Superuser (https://github.com/koush/Superuser) would be updated soon to support Android 5.0. According to some issues at GitHub page SELinux policies has been the problem. I have already written him about sepolicy-inject, but if it would take too long, I am ready to make needed changes myself and send him pull request (but I don't have time for this now, so it would have to wait till january). |
Would you consider this again? I am building and including There is already actively developed (and much more secure) opensource Superuser fork by Pierre-Hugues HUSSON which does include |
I am in fact using this su successfully, so there's that. No more "root=SuperSU" |
Hello,
you can get rid of dependency on Chainfire's closedsource supolicy by using sepolicy-inject instead of it.
I have fixed and extended Joshua Brindle's sepolicy-inject and made it buildable with Android NDK (by combining it with setools-android). You can find my repository here: https://github.com/xmikos/setools-android
Btw. I am working on Android device admin app which would monitor unlock attempts and after 3 failed attemts (or other number set by user) would reboot device. I want to include your app in it (with only some design changes) and ask user to change encryption password again if he changes unlock password/pin/gesture. It will be opensource and published on GitHub. Are you OK with it?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: