I tried to encrypt my tablet, which is not an official build.
I get is from here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/eosbuildsronnz98/files/SamsungSmartphones/
(What are the difference r/s/t at the builds?)
The build got selinux enforcing and secutrity patches from 02/05/2024.
For the flash I used TWRP version 3.6.2_9-0.
Before I did the flash I resized the data partition and made a “format data”.
When I tick the encryption button, I see the Android mechanics for a short while ann teh tablet restarts.
After the restart, it stays longer time in black screen, but later it boots up without encryption.
Does somebody have a hint whats wrong?
… but you notice it is a “two stage job” when used for the indicated reason.
But maybe no encryption is better than no IMEI in the thread linked above! – idk, but the internet suggests that the IMEI on a Samsung Wi-Fi only tablet is the device Serial number.
Ah, so I have Android 11.
And TWRP should be 3.6x.
About the encryption, I didn’t come from Samsung OS.
The tablet was running many years with Lineageos 16 and encryption.
While my last security patches was from feb 2022, I began searching for an alternative.
So mostly I had no problems with encryption. Maybe I had the corrrect TWRP to my Android version.
Encryption is important for me, because of had a lot private things on the tablet. Mail accounts, contacts, ssh keys, etc…
There was no red message. It only reboots and shows nothing.
Another handycap is, my USB plug is only charching. I can’ use it’s for data connections.
What size change did you make and why? I would see this as a potentially disruptive change on its own.
Were you sure to leave the partition as ext4?
I am not sure if this does confirm latest software revision. I found this Notify Update, but I don’t think that the notification actually tells us there was definitely a Software revision since the quoted Release Date 2019-08-04.
on Android, it’s not advisable to change partition characteristics, you have to respect the indicators in the original Rom partition gpt.bin to avoid unpleasant surprises when flashing. that said, i’m having the same problem on a motorola that doesn’t accept encryption under e/OS whereas it works under lineageOs so i’m following your post.
in T813XXS2BSG1 build name,
B is for second android version level for the device → Android 7 (Nougat)
S is for 2019
G is for July
On samfw.com, i found that Australia and Singapore received T813XXS2BTK3
where B is for A 7 (Nougat), T is for 2020 , and K is for November
Stangely Security Patch is done from 2018-04-01
.
BUT MORE IMPORTANT TO KNOW IS THE VERSION TARGETED BY THE CUSTOM ROM
viewable into the meta-data of the custom rom build .ZIP
(I don’t have access to my computer to check)
.
I also think that change partition size is not a good idea if they don’t match that the build is expecting.
Modifications have to be done in the sources before building
Are this the meta-data?
ota-property-files=metadata:69:323
ota-required-cache=0
ota-type=BLOCK
post-build=samsung/gts210vewifixx/gts210vewifi:7.0/NRD90M/T813XXS2BRC2:user/release-keys
post-build-incremental=eng.ronnz.20240722.185252
post-sdk-level=30
post-security-patch-level=2024-02-05
post-timestamp=1721667076
pre-device=gts210vewifi
Yes, it is what i meant, it is the version on witch custom OS sources are based…
but i don’t know exactly what to think about this reference, all instructions only says that we have to be on latest android version level available for our device.
Ok, thats what I have.
As I sad, I had never problems with encryption on Lineageos.
But never mind. I was a good deal over the 8 years I used this tablet.
I never need that in LOS. I read about in some treads were encryption failed to use TWRP to fix that, while rom version changed.
In TWRP is nothing zu to set, only tick data partition an resize.
I didn`t do something like this: Device encryption fails, gives no error and just restarts
But this discribes my effect.
A good way whould be to log the encryption task, but my usb plug only charging. No data.
Debugging only over wifi. And logcat is not helpful in this case.
