What path to put executable to run on Android 29? - android

My Android app includes a set of executables that are extracted to app directory (/data/data/%package%/) on the first run. It worked just fine if targeted to Android 28 (targetSdkVersion). Since November 2, 2020 it not allowed in Google Play and all the apps must target to 29. So it stopped working with permission exception.
What directory should executables be put to now?
PS. Some similar apps have the same issue.

https://developer.android.com/about/versions/10/behavior-changes-10#execute-permission
When targeting API 29 (Android 10 / Q) or above, it is not possible anymore to have execute permission for files stored within the app's home directory (data), which is exactly what you are describing (/data/data/%package%/).
This Android 10 modification was introduced in commit: https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/platform/system/sepolicy/+/804149 and was then confirmed officially by Google here: https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/128554619
This significant change is being discussed by various projects, in termux/termux-app#1072 for instance. One recommended and (hopefully) future-proof way is to extract program binaries into the application's native lib directory (with android:extractNativeLibs=true), where files can still be executed but are stored read-only for improved security.
Here are examples showing how to handle this change, in Termux with commit f6c3b6f in the android-10 branch or in this other project showing how to run the Erlang runtime on Android by exctrating all the files from a .zip archive into the jniLibs/"abi" subdirectory ("abi" being arm64-v8a for 64-bit ARM, armeabi-v7a for 32-bit ARM, etc.) with the imposed lib___.so filename format expected by the Android platform. Executable files can simply be moved in the right project folder manually, the important part is to use the lib___.so format for the filenames.
In the Android Manifest file, setting the attribute android:extractNativeLibs="true" will get these lib___.so files extracted at installation time in the right native lib directory, with support for execute permission. Symlinks can finally be created if needed in the usual app directory to use the regular executable names, instead of the harder-to-manipulate lib___.so versions.
Thanks, Jérôme

Related

Sdk location in AOSP

Note - I am relatively new to Android and AOSP...
Where can I find the Android SDK in the AOSP? As we know, we build apk files in the android studio using the separately installed SDK. But for some reason, I wish to use the SDK in the AOSP if it is available. I see the source code of SDK in the AOSP; do we need to build it?
Why/How I have arrived at the above question:
I had created an .apk in the AOSP which had JNI files and dependency on some existing Broadcom libs (so). It is a system app. What I noticed is the .apk package does not contain the JNI libs but rather is copied to /system/lib folder separately. Hence I had a doubt how the .apk upgrade will work? Is it possible?
I assumed the .apk upgrade won't work that way and the .apk should be packaged including the JNI libs. Hence I planned to build the .apk in the studio and use the .apk as prebuilt and just sign it in the AOSP (we have the keys). Then I also wanted to allow the developers to build the .apk in AOSP itself by running the Gradle in the command line. I did so by adding the command to the Android.mk. But the point here is, it is still using the SDK installed in /home//Android/Sdk. But there may be build machines which may not have the SDK installed. So I am putting this question - Do we (where?) have the SDK in AOSP? Can I use that instead?
I tried to explain the problem.. in case it's not clear please let me know... Will try to give more details...
OTA update will work. Update with Package Manager - won't. This is normal for system apps with native libraries.
In AOSP applications are built differently depending on their location in build tree. Apps placed in ~/packages/apps and ~/device/some_vendor are system apps and they are handled differently by the system. One of differences is that during build process they are stripped of their native libraries and those libraries are simply copied to the /system/ partition.
Including pre-built apk is a good solution.
Yes you can build sdk yourself from sources. Yes, it's there. But I don't understand why you need that. Are there any changes to the API?
There are other options. For example, you can mangle your build scripts. Say, you can add a global FLAG that would disable lib stripping for system apps.

Replacing android.jar provided with Terminal-IDE for newer SDK levels?

Background: I have been using the Terminal-IDE program to learn about doing Android development (I like vim, for starters...).
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.spartacusrex.spartacuside
As shipped, it supports SDK level 9. I want to support level 14 (Android 4.0+), so that I can use GridLayout instead of the more complex TableLayout.
I emailed the author, who responded in less than a day (kudos!), but, when I look for a replacement android.jar under /system on my tablet (Nexus 7 model 2), that particular jar does not exist, only many other jars with longer names that are just wrappers around dex files.
Anybody ran into this problem and solved it?
Upon further emails with the author of the environment, I found an easy solution:
Go to the system/classes directory of the T-IDE install
Rename the existing jar (e.g. - android.jar.t-ide)
Copy the android.jar from the SDK (or sdk directory within Android Studio) with an alternate name (e.g. - android.jar.studio.sdk)
Make a symbolic link from the updated SDK jar to android.jar
Now I can use GridLayout from Android 4.0 - compiles (on the tablet) and runs just fine. I did not need to update any other environment variables or configurations, as I replaced the original android.jar with a sym-link to the updated jar (and an "ls -l" will show which one is being used as "android.jar").
Note: if you get the updated android.jar from Android Studio, be sure to get the one in the sdk directory, not the one in the "plugins" directory, which won't work.

Issue including executable with Android application when using Jelly Bean

I have ported a few useful free/open source tools to Android. One is Octave and the other is gnuplot. They work together in unison to provide Matlab like capability for free (as in speech) and free (as in beer). I have packed them inside apps in an interesting way. Specifically,
1) I include the executable and shared libraries inside the libs/armeabi directory. Have to give them funny name because of android naming conventions.
2) I create directories bin/ and mylib/. I give them full permissions.
3) I create links from bin/ to the executable in the unpacked lib/ directory. I give them the correct names and full permissions.
4) I create links from mylib/ to the shared libaries in the unpacked lib/ directory. I give them the correct names and full permissions.
5) I then use ld-linux.so.3 which is one of the libraries now in the mylib/ directory and the--library-path option to point at the mylib/ directory to launch the executable from the Android Terminal Emulator.
Octave works perfectly in all version of Android doing this, but gnuplot gives this error when I attempt to launch it when running Jelly Bean only:
error while loading shared libraries: gnuplot: failed to map segment
from shared object: Operation not permitted.
So, why would I have this error for one of these two executables made the same way? Why only in Jelly Bean? Also, on JB, if I make myself the super user, it all works again.
Any thoughts on how to debug? I have confirmed that all files are there and have the permissions that I intended they have.
Please help. You would be helping a free, open source, educational and useful app if you do.
The issue was with how the executables were compiled. They needed to be compiled with a cross compiler that properly supported newer arm devices. The compiler I used generated executables that would only work on a subset of arm devices. The issue was not with the different versions of android.

What are possible causes of "failed to map segment from shared object: operation not permitted", and how to debug?

I have two executables, both cross compiled to run in Android. I have put both on the device in the same directory. I have put all the shared libraries that they are dependent on in the same directory, including ld-linux.so.3. I run the executables by using:
ld-linux.so.3 --library-path /path/to/libraries executable_name
both work on older versions of Android when running as any user. The both work on the latest version of Android if running as root. Only one works on the latest version of android when running as any user. Instead it gives:
failed to map segment from shared object: executable_name operation not permitted
How can I find out what is different with the executable that won't run?
I read a lot online and most people that get this error, either:
A) don't have execute permissions for one of the libraries they are dependent on or the executable itself.
or
B) are trying to run from a directory that is mounted as NOEXEC.
both of these don't appear to be the case. It can find all libraries and I can load any library by itself and see what other things it is dependent on being resolved. Also, I can run basic scripts from the directories of interest.
The newer version of Android, Jelly Bean, is a different linux kernel version and I wonder if that is related.
What give? How do I debug?
Permission issue. Need to remount /tmp. The following command works for me (Centos 7):
sudo mount /tmp -o remount,exec
I had this error in a different context. For some reason it causes an error when trying to use the /tmp folder.
To solve this I simply:
mkdir tmp
export TMPDIR=`pwd`/tmp
The TMPDIR is a constant that tells where the temporary folder of the system is.
This solutions resolves by creating a directory where we are allowed to and settings this directory into the system. Therefore we can now write to the new system default temporary folder.
The issue was with how the executables were compiled. They needed to be compiled with a cross compiler that properly supported newer arm devices. The compiler I used generated executables that would only work on a subset of arm devices. The issue was not with the different versions of android.
SELinux is enabled by default on Android 4.3, however it is supposed to be "permissive" [0]. Maybe your phone vendor added more restrictive rules.
[0] https://source.android.com/devices/tech/security/se-linux.html

Package Android apk with additional executables

As a follow up to an earlier question (Android ioctl - root permissions and usage), is it possible to create a separate native executable and package it in an APK?
The app needs root access and isn't going into the Android marketplace, but I'd like to be able to install it without using a script that pushes an extra executable onto the device.
There is an easy way to package an executable into an APK, and let the system installer take care of unpacking this executable, see How to package native commandline application in apk?.
The trick (tested up to Jelly Bean 4.3) is to name the file "libmyexecutable.so" and put it into libs/armeabi of your Android project (I assume an ADT or ant build). The Package Manager will unpack the file to /data/data/your.package.full.name/lib (it's a symbolic link, for backwards compatibility reasons, so maybe in some future version of Android this will not work anymore) on the device, with executable permissions.
Note that the file has all read-and-execute permissions, so you can use Runtime.getRuntime().exec() or system() from other apps, too.
Update:
These days, you should use libs/armeabi-v7a for 32 -bit ARM executables, and you probably need to prepare 64-bit ARM version of the same executables, too.
You can put it into assets and copy it to the app's private directory on first run. After you set the executable bit, you should be able to run it.

Categories

Resources