Computers & Electronics

LG G Pad III Owners Thread

  • Last Updated:
  • Aug 31st, 2018 3:57 pm
Newbie
May 15, 2017
51 posts
12 upvotes
bylo wrote:
May 18th, 2017 9:48 am
Perhaps that's an indication of the relative number of these tablets that need warranty service in the first place ;)


That seems to be a bit high. Perhaps they'd take $150 if you explained your concern about getting warranty service as a subsequent owner. I see a couple of LG G Pads listed locally on kijiji for $150 so maybe you could even go lower. BNIB for $150 tax free seems quite reasonable compared to new for ~$275 with HST.
Well the case itself is about $20 shipped from amazon, so I was t too bothered by the $185 price when it's included
Newbie
May 15, 2017
51 posts
12 upvotes
aasoror wrote:
May 18th, 2017 9:50 am
Is he providing you with a receipt ? if not then LG is less likely to honor warranty.
Says he has a PDF receipt he can email me for it
[OP]
Moderator
User avatar
Dec 27, 2007
16230 posts
7303 upvotes
Kitchener
Hemi558 wrote:
May 18th, 2017 9:59 am
Says he has a PDF receipt he can email me for it
Ask him if that receipt has his name on it (if not then you are good to go), also when was it dated (as warranty is just 12 months from the date on the receipt).
Newbie
May 15, 2017
51 posts
12 upvotes
He said it was purchased in march, but I will ask about his name. Thanks
Deal Addict
May 5, 2008
1390 posts
361 upvotes
aasoror wrote:
May 17th, 2017 8:29 pm
But this is not unix/linux :) it's Android running on your 8 yrs old child tablet :) Root (su) is a support nightmare for any company trying to go from niche to mainstream.
With that said, companies should be more flexible when it comes rooting, exchanging bootloader unlock for warranty rights (Motorola /Huawei model) should be the way to go.
will888 wrote:
May 17th, 2017 9:11 pm
I agree. Companies should allow me to install custom rom, etc. knowing all the risk associated with going that route. This is why I like buying phones with easy to unlock bootloader. Sadly, I think those who rely on oem software updates are more vulnerable for two reasons, 1. sparse updates, 2. those who tinker with the os are a little more savvy with handling software issues.

While we are still hovering around the security discussion, try installing this vulnerability test suite to see how secure the 2 year old rom is.

https://www.nowsecure.com/blog/2015/11/ ... -now-what/
For children, there are restricted users, "kids modes" etc. , all kinds of sandboxes for that are already available in all operating systems ...

It is , on the other hand, completely preposterous what's happening now in Android, when the apps refuse to function based merely on the fact that the superuser is available in the system.

Apriory, there is no additional security threats from having superuser available, it is just corporate stupidity and greed, which I hope will both fail in the end result.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 12, 2009
16580 posts
5138 upvotes
Toronto
Tichi wrote:
May 18th, 2017 6:47 pm
For children, there are restricted users, "kids modes" etc. , all kinds of sandboxes for that are already available in all operating systems ...

It is , on the other hand, completely preposterous what's happening now in Android, when the apps refuse to function based merely on the fact that the superuser is available in the system.

Apriory, there is no additional security threats from having superuser available, it is just corporate stupidity and greed, which I hope will both fail in the end result.
The ultimate lock down comes via bootloader. That prevents anything that does not have the correct digital signature from being installed. It can be a major security hole having the bootloader unlocked. The key phrase is can be. The one thing that the oems and google fail to understand is that in the real world, having a locked bootloader is not nearly sufficient for proper security. Most manufacturers dole out a couple of updates during year one and move on to next years hardware 12 months later. Without having the newly identified security holes patched, who cares if the rom which delivered the security flaws are signed. In my opinion, the open source roms we get via the xda community is way safer. The code is open to full inspection and modification by anyone. Bugs are fixed almost in real time. Google issues security patches are baked into the updates as fast as Google issues them. I dare say that those who are savvy enough to use these third party roms have a better handle on device security than those who rely exclusively on eoms to keep them safe. BTW, did you run the vulnerability test suite on all your devices? Are you safe and secure?
Deal Addict
May 5, 2008
1390 posts
361 upvotes
will888 wrote:
May 18th, 2017 7:58 pm
The ultimate lock down comes via bootloader. That prevents anything that does not have the correct digital signature from being installed. It can be a major security hole having the bootloader unlocked. The key phrase is can be. The one thing that the oems and google fail to understand is that in the real world, having a locked bootloader is not nearly sufficient for proper security. Most manufacturers dole out a couple of updates during year one and move on to next years hardware 12 months later. Without having the newly identified security holes patched, who cares if the rom which delivered the security flaws are signed. In my opinion, the open source roms we get via the xda community is way safer. The code is open to full inspection and modification by anyone. Bugs are fixed almost in real time. Google issues security patches are baked into the updates as fast as Google issues them. I dare say that those who are savvy enough to use these third party roms have a better handle on device security than those who rely exclusively on eoms to keep them safe. BTW, did you run the vulnerability test suite on all your devices? Are you safe and secure?
Thank you Will888, for an insightful, and professional info, as always. I was very curious and tried to get the vulnerabilty test you quoted earlier, from google play, but it was missing there for some reason. I'll try to get the apk from another site, is there a particular one?
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 12, 2009
16580 posts
5138 upvotes
Toronto
Tichi wrote:
May 18th, 2017 9:38 pm
Thank you Will888, for an insightful, and professional info, as always. I was very curious and tried to get the vulnerabilty test you quoted earlier, from google play, but it was missing there for some reason. I'll try to get the apk from another site, is there a particular one?
There was a link in the article to github where the apk is available for download. Since you missed it, here is the github link.

https://github.com/AndroidVTS/android-vts/releases

Here is the lame reason why it got removed from the play store. The app is open source. If there is anything mischievous, it would be outed. I think there is a commercial concern that Google is looking after. Imagine someone running this on their 18 month old galaxy device that they sacrificed nutritious family meals to buy fails vulnerability tests. This will undermine the oems, android... I am not trying to be a conspiracy theorist here. Most people want to put their heads in the sand to possible bad news. How much press does this app get in the popular app review sites?

https://www.nowsecure.com/blog/2015/12/ ... droid-app/
[OP]
Moderator
User avatar
Dec 27, 2007
16230 posts
7303 upvotes
Kitchener
Tichi wrote:
May 18th, 2017 6:47 pm
For children, there are restricted users, "kids modes" etc. , all kinds of sandboxes for that are already available in all operating systems ...
From the support end, children and "creative/curious" adults are equally dangerous. Keeping users out of system will dramatically reduce warranty call backs due to user errors. Last thing a support dept wants is to spend labor on an RMA just to find a modded startup script or a third party ROM on a semi-bricked device.
It's only fair that users who want to get creative with their appliances beyond how it was intended to be used would give up warranty rights.
Deal Addict
May 5, 2008
1390 posts
361 upvotes
will888 wrote:
May 18th, 2017 9:54 pm
There was a link in the article to github where the apk is available for download. Since you missed it, here is the github link.

https://github.com/AndroidVTS/android-vts/releases

Here is the lame reason why it got removed from the play store. The app is open source. If there is anything mischievous, it would be outed. I think there is a commercial concern that Google is looking after. Imagine someone running this on their 18 month old galaxy device that they sacrificed nutritious family meals to buy fails vulnerability tests. This will undermine the oems, android... I am not trying to be a conspiracy theorist here. Most people want to put their heads in the sand to possible bad news. How much press does this app get in the popular app review sites?

https://www.nowsecure.com/blog/2015/12/ ... droid-app/
Thanks! To begin with, tried it on an old android 4.x device. It turns out to have more security holes, than a collander... :)
Will see how newer devices stand ...
Deal Addict
May 5, 2008
1390 posts
361 upvotes
aasoror wrote:
May 18th, 2017 10:53 pm
From the support end, children and "creative/curious" adults are equally dangerous. Keeping users out of system will dramatically reduce warranty call backs due to user errors. Last thing a support dept wants is to spend labor on an RMA just to find a modded startup script or a third party ROM on a semi-bricked device.
It's only fair that users who want to get creative with their appliances beyond how it was intended to be used would give up warranty rights.

Heh.. exactly what i'm saying - corporate greed, is not it? :)

Well, seriosly I'm fine giving up warranty for root. But it was like this all the time - if you root, you lose warranty.

Now, additionally, apps cease to function...
Deal Guru
Jan 7, 2002
13648 posts
6081 upvotes
Waterloo, ON
Tichi wrote:
May 19th, 2017 9:09 am
Now, additionally, apps cease to function...
What sometimes appears to be "corporate greed" may sometimes be more altrusitic. For instance apps like Android Pay and banking apps block rooted devices so as to protect the app developer from potential fraudulent use of their app. Imagine if someone managed to hack a rooted phone so that they could bypass Android Pay's security and make credit card purchases on resold, lost, stolen, etc. phones. As the app developer I wouldn't want the hassle, let alone the financial liability, of dealing with that.
veni, vidi, Visa [!Brim]
Deal Addict
May 5, 2008
1390 posts
361 upvotes
bylo wrote:
May 19th, 2017 9:16 am
What sometimes appears to be "corporate greed" may sometimes be more altrusitic. For instance apps like Android Pay and banking apps block rooted devices so as to protect the app developer from potential fraudulent use of their app. Imagine if someone managed to hack a rooted phone so that they could bypass Android Pay's security and make credit card purchases on resold, lost, stolen, etc. phones. As the app developer I wouldn't want the hassle, let alone the financial liability, of dealing with that.
One of my banking apps tells me something to this effect, that if Iontinue on a rooted device, they do not have liability anymore. Isn't that sufficient?

Secondly, apps should be user-centered, not developer-centered :)
Deal Addict
May 5, 2008
1390 posts
361 upvotes
Tichi wrote:
May 19th, 2017 9:03 am
Thanks! To begin with, tried it on an old android 4.x device. It turns out to have more security holes, than a collander... :)
Will see how newer devices stand ...
On the other hand, happy to report here, that this tabby stands holy and strong. Rejoice!

(The said app is from 2015, though, so some new nasty things might have come)
Deal Guru
Jan 7, 2002
13648 posts
6081 upvotes
Waterloo, ON
Tichi wrote:
May 19th, 2017 9:20 am
One of my banking apps tells me something to this effect, that if Iontinue on a rooted device, they do not have liability anymore. Isn't that sufficient?
Evidently that's sufficient for that bank's lawyers. It may not be sufficient for other banks' lawyers.

One bank's discount brokerage website accepts only 6 character passwords. (AFAIK that's BMOIL.) Evidently that's sufficient for their lawyers. But obviously it's not sufficient for the vast majority of others. Should we nevertheless be guided by that one bank's example?
Secondly, apps should be user-centered, not developer-centered :)
Absolutely. The vast majority of users of banking systems aren't computer or security savvy. They don't need a rooted phone. They wouldn't know if their phone was rooted. They don't understand the potential security implications of using a rooted phone. So for their protection (and the mutual protection of their bank) the blocking of rooted phones is indeed "user-centered." Or to put it another way, I don't consider the needs of people like you and me and many others on this thread to be representative of the sorts of users that your comment about "user-centered" is generally applied to with respect to consumer devices.
veni, vidi, Visa [!Brim]

Top