u/jflip0x1x0

I just bought a OnePlus 11. Trying to update the OS mainly for security updates. I'm coming from a stock "CPH2451_15.0.0.861(EX01)" and a new update notification is for

"CPH2451_16.0.3.500(EX01)"

The error occurs because the incremental update jumps from 15.0.0.861 to 16.03.500 instead of the correct incremental update of "CPH2451_16.0.1.300(EX01)"

Without getting the 16.0.1.300 out of the bug 16.03.500, it will not work and give installation errors. I'm currently stuck on this bug. I'm trying to figure out how to bypass this on a OnePlus 11. As I'm behind on security updates and OOS 15 instead of OOS 16.

I have tried searching for the "local install" option in the "system update" corner. And obviously for the North American version of OnePlus 11, this has been removed indefinitely. So another thing I tried was to download the "OTA-V-localUpdate-Oplus_key.apk" which I do not know what it does since all it did for me was update the APK and that was it. It did not allow me to "local install" anything. I also tried to clear cache/data from "apps-show system files-update". I have restarted my phone. And OnePlus is still pushing me to update to CPH2R51_16.03.500 instead of the correct incremental update of "CPH2451_16.0.1.300(EX01).

I think the only way to fix this is to have OnePlus officially send me the incremental update of CPH2451_16.0.1.300.

Has anyone gone through this have a solution? 🙏

I have also contacted OnePlus American support. They did not solve anything instead they asked me to send my phone to them so they could evaluate the issue and fix it. Of course there is a price they will send me (a quote). How can they not resolve this and instead make me have no phone so they can look at it and then charge me?

I don't need the basics of the two cryptographic platforms. Though I'm not an expert either but I did a bit of research. I'm still confused or need further elaboration on this: (recap of my research + questions)

I read that veracrypt gets the win on choosing encryption. Because of it being open-sourced. And the fact that it doesn't use TPM (which I'll get into later). Bitlocker being closed sourced, uses TPM and backs up master-keys to your Microsoft (MS) accounts cloud. Which technically, a privacy concern. May be tied to that being the "backdoor" rather than it being a secret method for anyone (hacker, spying, NSA etc). To me privacy should be that solid definition: privacy. No prying eyes or backdoors.

From my understanding, if I use bitlocker over veracrypt, to protect my privacy, I should choose to save my MS backup masterkey on USB rather than Microsoft account cloud. This should be then, secure? I'm guessing those that had their bitlocker data compromised because the masterkey was obtained through the connected MS account rather than it being a "secret backdoor". It was more of the user being ignorant or stupid. However, if saving the masterkey on a USB and all is fine and dandy now that no one has access to the masterkey. It brings to question the next security flaw.

Bitlocker uses TPM. According to Google, "TPM securely stores encryption keys and verifies system integrity during boot-up, ensuring the drive cannot be accessed if moved to another" The point in how TPM works is that it's storing master-keys when requested/working. As far as I got into this, it seems though TPM sounds like a privacy backdoor for bitlocker. It seems the issue is that an attack can only occur if the computer is on whilst the master-keys requested from the TPM are temporarily stored in the system's RAM. I'm not sure if the master keys of the bitlocker are stored elsewhere like the drive itself? Reading further it does not imply keys are in the drive itself for example external hard disk drives. And that the master-keys are only in the TPM chip itself. So technically, should bitlocker be safe? It seems if the claims are true, then yes?

As far as veracrypt the fact that it doesn't use TPM and is open sourced seems to be a tad more trustworthy. I tried both and bitlocker seems to be easier to use. Whilst veracrypt you have to manually open the drive/s. Any thoughts on this and my research/ understanding? Anything I misunderstood and in 2026 is bitlocker ok to use to protect data without actual backdoors?

Edit: Seems the only way people get backdoored on bitlocker is by ignorance. Giving your key away in the cloud and possibly leaving a computer on to your encrypted data because it's either unlocked or locked but TPM may have the key in RAM. Not sure if that key in ram stays for long. Shutting down would be safer. But then again, cold boots would require both the PC and the drive to start the attack. It would be harder and useless to only have the bitlocker drive alone.

Veracrypt seems solid as I haven't read any way people backdoored it(?)...