Common identifier between AMAPI & Require for setup app for validation
We are enrolling devices using AMAPI by generating a QR code with an assigned policy either for work profile or fully managed enrollment. During enrollment, the device prompts for a require for setup app, which, after configuration, returns RESULT_OK, marking the setup as complete and finalizing the device enrollment. Before returning RESULT_OK, To identify the enrolling device, the backend gets the device ID and enterprise ID from the Pub/Sub provisioning notification. The device ID (which matches the GSF ID) is then sent by the require for setup app to the backend for validation. This identifier is also used to enforce enrollment limits based on the enterprise license count. The Issue: Up to Android 14, retrieving the GSF ID was possible. However, in Android 15, it now returns null. Question: Is there an alternative identifier that can be used to identify the enrolling device—one that the backend can retrieve and that the setup app can also access during enrollment? Below is the information we receive from Pub/Sub when a device is enrolled: { "name": [*Hidden for privacy reasons] "managementMode": "PROFILE_OWNER", "state": "PROVISIONING", "enrollmentTime": "2025-04-04T06:17:02.751Z", "lastPolicySyncTime": "2025-04-04T06:17:02.817Z", "softwareInfo": { "androidVersion": "15", "androidDevicePolicyVersionCode": 10323580, "androidDevicePolicyVersionName": "128.32.3 (10323580)", "androidBuildNumber": "AP3A.240905.015.A2", "deviceKernelVersion": "5.15.149-android13-8-00010-gc2e0ba41ba85-ab12040008", "bootloaderVersion": "unknown", "androidBuildTime": "2025-03-11T13:26:50Z", "securityPatchLevel": "2025-03-01", "primaryLanguageCode": "en-IN", "deviceBuildSignature": "c9009d01ebf9f5d0302bc71b2fe9aa9a47a432bba17308a3111b75d7b2143456", "systemUpdateInfo": { "updateStatus": "UP_TO_DATE" } }, "hardwareInfo": { "brand": "Redmi", "hardware": "mt6835", "deviceBasebandVersion": "MOLY.NR17.R1.TC8.PR2.SP.V1.P51,MOLY.NR17.R1.TC8.PR2.SP.V1.P51", "manufacturer": "Xiaomi", "serialNumber": [*Hidden for privacy reasons] "model": "23124RN87I", "enterpriseSpecificId": [*Hidden for privacy reasons] }, "policyName": [*Hidden for privacy reasons] "memoryInfo": { "totalRam": "5865836544", "totalInternalStorage": "806965248" }, "userName": [*Hidden for privacy reasons] "enrollmentTokenName": [*Hidden for privacy reasons] "securityPosture": { }, "ownership": "PERSONALLY_OWNED" } *Updated by Community admin - removed due to privacy reasons 4 April
GSF ID not generated after device enrollment on Android 15
Hi everyone, We’re facing an issue with devices running Android 15 — after successfully enrolling them in our Android Enterprise setup (Device Owner / Fully Managed mode), the Google Services Framework (GSF) ID is not being generated. This issue did not occur on Android 13 or 14; the GSF ID was available immediately after enrollment. However, on Android 15, the GSF ID remains empty even after waiting and rebooting. We’ve already tried: Factory reset and re-enrollment Checking Google Play Services version Ensuring the device is connected to the internet Waiting for Play Store sync Despite that, the GSF ID is still missing. Could anyone confirm if there’s a known change in Android 15 related to GSF ID generation, or if additional permissions/configuration are required for enterprise-enrolled devices to obtain it? Any guidance or workaround would be greatly appreciated.
Workprofile creation failure using CUSTOM DPC
We use a custom DPC to create work profiles. On certain devices, profile creation fails with errors like STORAGE_UNAVAILABLE or work profile already exists. From bug reports, we can confirm the failure cause, but is there a way to detect these conditions directly in our app and handle them gracefully?”Default browser app not resettable
Hey! We are currently testing a few apps in Work Profile, for which we need 2FA. The second factor is a FIDO2 token that can be used via NFC or USB. If you have a FIDO2 token with USB-C, everything is fine. But we also have some with USB-A. If you don't have an adapter, you're more likely to resort to NFC. Chrome supports FIDO2/NFC directly, which makes logging in quite easy. However, most web views cannot do this, and a passcode must be entered manually. The pure FIDO2 NFC tag basically contains a URL with the passcode. You open the webpage via NFC, copy the passcode, and enter it when logging in. So far, so good. However, we encountered a problem that prevents us from using the FIDO2 token via NFC in the Work Profile properly. There are default apps for different categories such as browser, wallet, caller ID, etc. If you need to launch one of the app categories and there are several apps available, you will be asked which app you want to use and just for once or always. The app preferences can be reset via the settings so that the query will reappear the next time. This works without any problems with “Home app,” for example. But the Default Browser? No. The Browser app default remains after the reset. Even if a browser was set as the default and was deleted, it will just switch to another app and won't ask. The problem with a permanently set default browser is that links from NFC tags are immediately opened in the personal space. If there is a copy & paste lock on the work profile, you cannot use the code. (Unless you type >40 characters) If you are asked for an app to open the URL, you can also select the browser in Work Profile. Can anyone reproduce this behavior? Or does anyone know if something has changed for the Browser-Default in Android 15/16? On a device running Android 13, resetting the app defaults works reliably. It doesn't seem right that the browser default cannot be reset properly with Android 15/16.
Bug? G-board removes additional languages post BYOD Enrollment?
We noticed a strange behaviour, If G-board has additional languages added apart from English like Polish or German, post enrolling into a work profile, the additional languages disappear from the keyboard. I was able to reproduce with Intune, WorkspaceOne and even TestDPC app. This is true even if no Device Restrictions are applied. It seems like a bug. Has anyone else seen this issue?Intune - Cannot change screen lock timeout
Hello community, I'm writing this post 'cause I'm facing a strange issue with the lock screen setting on our AE devices managed from Intune. The configuration policy was created by my predecessor years ago, and was configured for lock teh screen after one minute. Everything working and all happy. Then I got the request for create an exception group for that, and everything I tried failed. I tried to change the global policy to 5 mins, but it did not worked, and the maximum lock screen time is still one minute. Also remove the setting at all and left it Not Configured didn't had any effect. Then I tried to disable One Lock. With this I was able to change the system lock screen settings but on Settings - Security and Privacy - More Security Settings - Work Profile Security - Use one lock I cannot set anything longer than one minute. Pretty sure this is coming from somewhere in Intune, but also involving Microsoft and sending them the verbose logs wasn't enough. Did any of you ever encountered a similar issue and found a solution? Many thanks in advance for everyone that will try to help.Tech Newbie interested in mobile cyber security, after multiple hacking events, seeking suggestions, tips, advice etc, to get involved.
Hello All, I am looking for advice, tips, suggestions, or helpful info, to begin a career/ journey into the world of Mobile Cyber Security and Tech. My interest was sparked after multiple hacking events that were very damaging to my life, my digital life, my work life, my relationships, my mental, physical, and emotional health, my data, information, and intellectual property of my business, and more. Now I am being pulled to learn how to protect myself first, and second so that I may be able to help others. I guess Ethical Hacking is the term. Any info helps. Thank you, Androidc3po
Question to Enterprise Factory Reset Protection
Hello, we have a question to EFRP: If you specify a google account which can unlock FRP on this device in the future, does this google account have any other special permissions on that device or is it just like any other google account if logged in? Our Security Office wants to know that to be sure there is no other security concerns with configuring central EFRP accounts. If you have any technical references or KB articles to this topic, it would be highly appreciated. :) Thank you in advance
