Fairphone team, please don’t block the bootloader…
6 Likes
Yesterday I spent some time learning about this. Afaict, no smartphone manufacturer needs to lock down the bootloader for good, per se.
But consumers will have many disadvantages if they choose to unlock. There will be no warranty, no manufacturer support, certain kind of apps will get blocked, because the devs need to do so in order to comply with these new laws. Affected are apps of essential services like banking and healthcare, ect. However, webapps/websites are not affected really. It’s like a backdoor 
That’s how I understand it. Let me know if I got anything wrong.
I think this will cause a massive amount of e-waste, because whenever the manufacturer support of a device ends, many apps won’t work anymore as soon as one uses a custom ROM or has outdated firmware. I hate this law passionately!
I also wonder if this will encourage hackers to find exploits in order to spoof a “manufacturer supported device” to make things work again. I feel like this could cause even more malware floating around the internet. But not sure, just some thoughts. Maybe I got it all wrong
4 Likes
Maybe it’s a defensive lie by Xiaomi, because it’s too much trouble for support with opening bootloader. I mean there are always people bricking their devices when they open the bootloader for e.g. installing custom rom, rooting … This means a lot support work to handle these issues.
Also they want to reduce the amount of work for providing support, documentation, firmware.
I mean, my decision for a FP6 a few weeks ago was driven by the open politics regarding bootloader unlocking, the substantial documentation from the company itself. Never seen this with my older brands (Samsung, Sony, Nokia HMD, Asus).
This was really the main reason besides sustainabilty and the possibility for repairing it on your own.
In my opinion this is the next big step towards surveillance, because you won’t be able to modify your device in a way to reduce or eliminate tracking and so on.
If this really will be mandatory, I need to think about getting one step back to a dumb feature phone.
2 Likes
My two cents: EU rule is about radio frequencies and Fairphone has a partnership with Murena; so if a FP (4, 5 or next generations) is sell with eOS preinstalled, this system respect the rule.
5 Likes
You’re right, this case would be possible. But no longer buying a FP with stock OS and flashing it yourself to /e/os. This will be banned then. That’s how I understand the issue.
3 Likes
I used an LLM to “analyse” the law & red a few articles now. Everything confirms my suspicion, manufacturers can allow unlocks and therefore you can still install custom ROMs. However, it seems like that commercial software is either not allowed or must adhere to the same laws (5 years of security updates and all that), I am not entirely sure about that one.
If someone has an article or a specific § or something that says it will be forbidden, please share this, because I can’t find any serious source that says so.
There is some discussion going on in this reddit thread, if you’re interested. e.g.:
So I am starting to feel like all this is a nothing-burger.
3 Likes
I’m afraid that it’s great opportunity and excuse to lock hardware, silently kill older devices and just blame UE law. Devices from last few years are just great, good enough for daily needs and cheap, and there is only one missing piece - a latest software, security updates, etc.
For me unlocked bootloader is a big deal, every single purchase is just a blind guess, you never know what exactly next software update will bring with it. I already had bad experience with locked bootloader on my first Android phone from Motorola, never ever again. Even if I will never use bootloader unlock option, I want it in all my devices.
2 Likes
Fortunately, we are safe, at least this time.
2 Likes
Hello,
EU Enforces Android Bootloader Restrictions from August 1, 2025.
As of August 2025, every device sold in the EU must:
-
Block unauthorized software installation
-
Implement Secure Boot or equivalent protections
-
Allow only digitally signed and verified firmware
As a consequence, Samsung, Xiaomi, and Google phone makers are removing bootloader unlock feature from their mobile phones for at least EU market.
The RED Directive doesn’t explicit require to remove the bootloader unlock feature but mobile phones makers consider to take less risk by doing so and to be able to continue selling mobile phones in EU.
What is the official position from Fairphone company ?
Will Fairphone also consider to remove the bootloader unlock feature ?
If so, it would mean the end of alternative ROMs such as LineageOS, /e/OS, iodéOS, Ubuntu Touch, …
This also would mean the end of Privacy in EU.
Hi and welcome to the forum 
I’ve moved your post to join a discussion on the subject, please see above.
5 Likes
My own take on this.
It’s really important to check sources before spreading news.
That’s nothing new of course. I guess humans have been spreading unverified news ever since they learned to talk. I’m reminded of the ridiculous things that used to get spread in the early days of e-mail.
To my mind, social media – in particular the way they are used and, in many cases, the way they work, tend to make it easy to muddy the waters. I’m sure we were relieved to see alfredo’s post above. That points (via a Mastodon feed) to a Xiaomitime article which takes back their original article, but which cites a Telegram channel for the source of the reassurance (and criticism). That information is only available to people who use T, so not me.
However, the general gist of the reassuring Xiaomitime article is borne out if you go and read what Directive 2014/53/EU, as amended four times in 2018, 2022, 2023 and 2024 actually says.
2 Likes
Any nonsense claim anywhere in the internet = facts,
because anywhere in the internet = credible source,
and everything logically and rationally established on any matter until now = nonexistent, or fake news.
Just accept it, this all is developing into a total utopia.
1 Like