Quantcast
Channel: xda-developers - Android Software and Hacking General [Developers Only]
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 3614

[Q] how to determine the way a zip is signed, so strange

$
0
0
Hi Guys,
I got a In-Car android big screen audio system from FlyAudio from China (FlyAudio dot cn)
It cannot be rooted, so I try to add superuser in it's rom.
There's a baseqcom.flb upgrade file which has files structure just like general andorid roms: META-INF/recovery/system/boot.img etc.
But after I modified it, tried serveral sign tools, all them are failed to create a usable rom.

I compared the META-INF folder from the original zip & the modified one, found these differences:

MANIFEST.MF is same.
CERT.RSA is totally different.
1st line "SHA1-Digest-Manifest" in CERT.SF is totally different in value.
for example, the original is :

Code:

Signature-Version: 1.0
Created-By: 1.0 (Android SignApk)
SHA1-Digest-Manifest: D08XgebM4gH/Yeq3GEzqMM4OFJU=

Name: system/bin/xtwifi-client
SHA1-Digest-Manifest: 9s23YlJJUFK7zz0UySQqyrMiYJs=

but the one I signed is :

Code:

Signature-Version: 1.0
 Created-By: 1.0 (Android SignApk)
 SHA1-Digest-Manifest: 7rRdl81XQFMd4OohK7bJ2naBHlQ=

 Name: system/bin/xtwifi-client
 SHA1-Digest: 9s23YlJJUFK7zz0UySQqyrMiYJs=


The values for system/bin/xtwifi-client are SAME, and all other parts EXCEPT the global one.
Headers are DIFFERENT also: SHA1-Digest / SHA1-Digest-Manifest


Here's the link for downloading the ORIGINAL rom, promised no virus or anything harmful: pan.baidu.com/s/1i3Cc36P
It's actually a ZIP file, with the baseqcom.flp (zip too) contained in.

THANKS VERYMUCH FOR ANYONE REPLIES ME !!!

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 3614

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>