So after running IodéOS for a while I wanted to return to the stock ROM.
I Installed it per official install script, so far so good.
Now I wanted to relock the bootloader and read about the bricked phones after relocking.
I prevented (manually) the phone from rebooting after flashing so fastboot flashing get_unlock_ability returned 1.
I proceeded with fastboot flashing lock_critical and it locked the critical partitions.
Now fastboot flashing get_unlock_ability returns 0 and the bootloader is still unlocked.
Now |fastboot flashing get_unlock_ability| returns 0 and the
bootloader is still unlocked.
As far as I know it the result is 0 then you can’t lock the bootloader.
Because there are reports on the forum that it will brick your phone.
I am sorry, but that’s all I know.
I see here that rooting the phone and manually changing the toggle of OEM unlocking could be a possibility to, at least, unlock the ciritcal partitions again. But I would rather not go down that route if there are more convenient options available. However I have found none.
You are mixing a lot words here, so be careful and do some reading before flashing although I doubt GrapheneOS will ever be available for FP4 or 5 (however that is not the topic here).
So once bootet into the system thats normal…to avoid issues def re-flash-dont boot-check get unlock ability is still 1. if so you should be safe to lock, if still 0 dont lock and wait for next OTA
Okay thank you for your reply! I will wait for the OTA update then.
I guess because the bootloader is still unlocked I need to sideload it? Do you know if that is possible with the critical partitions locked?
And after the OTA is installed I should be able to lock my bootloader again without risk of bricking, right?
Sorry for all the questions, and thanks for helping out.
I have never done it on my own on FP4 or 5 and always kept my bootloader unlocked on thr FP3. From reading especially about the FP4 it seems easiest would be to re-flash using fastboot now, check-lock when there is a way from keeping the phone booting into system after locking critical… In the past with the FP2 this was possible, just by using the button combination durectky after stating reboot from the terminal.
@hirnsushi I know you dont have a FP5 do you still have some tipps probably?
As Iode is not that fast in providing security patches I assume the security patch level you had is not higher, latest FPOS is on, so overall probably quite safw to not brick, however no one can ever give you a 100% guarantee
Yeah I’m quite hesitant, as IodéOS 4.10 was just released which included security patches from LineageOS 21 (I think), which are newer than the current FP5 release. Thanks for your thoughts though.
I’m not sure where exactly iodé keeps their different FP5 branches, there’s only staging and according to that the last security bump was in November, which doesn’t seem right
But then again the FP4 4.10 branch also seems to only have the November update (C.79), quite outdated if that’s the case …
My advice, ask in the iodéOS channels what security patch level they ship in 4.10 for the FP5 and compare it to the patch level shown in the FPOS release notes for the latest factory images available, which is the latest release anyway at the moment.
it’s not safe, unless you are really careful and know, what you do. this is a just a heads up to everyone from someone, who bricked his phone following the official rollback tutorial from fairphone because a warning there is missing, that you should boot into fairphone os first and lock the bootloader from the developer options. i was not on a 3rd party os anymore, so the other warnings in this tutorial should not apply to me and boom - i locked myself out with fastboot locking. sending the phone in, paying the fee all around a planned vacation where i needed this phone.
i do not want tot complain too much, one needs to be careful. but this phenomenon would be totally avoidable imho by a better warning on the page - maybe fairphone team can improve this? even the official android documentation (did read it later, after the incident) explains it better.
