Choosing a Zygisk Implementation: A Detailed Comparison

1. Injection and module loading#

Notes:

• NyaZygisk and NeoZygisk share essentially the same injection flow (they are a fork pair). The differences are the hyos_spawner target and the ZN loader added in Nya.
• ReZygisk takes a different approach: it does not use the system linker, to defeat linker-based detection (for example inspecting solist). That is a different philosophy from Neo / Nya, which load through the system linker and clean up afterwards. Neither is strictly better.
• ZygiskNextNext has the most varied ways of discovering targets and the lowest kernel requirements, which is part of why it can support Android 5.0 and riscv64.
• NyaZygisk’s ZN injection scope is a real functional gap: the daemon does parse path=, but the process monitor only intercepts Zygote and hyos_spawner, so ZN modules that target other system daemons will not take effect.

2. Hiding and trace handling#

This table only compares implementations I could confirm in the source. ”—” means I did not find a corresponding implementation.

Notes:

• Nya’s hiding is layered on top of Neo’s. Rows marked ✅ for both are inherited from upstream; what Nya adds itself is anonymous memory, CFI shadow, TracerPid, property spoofing, and per-app exclusion.
• TracerPid sanitization has a limited scope: it only hooks the PLT of libandroid_runtime, libart, libjavacore, libopenjdk, and libbase. It intercepts reads of /proc/*/status going through those libraries, and does not cover syscalls issued directly from an app’s own native code.
• Anonymous memory is off by default, because it changes the mappings; users have to enable it in the WebUI.
• Property spoofing changes the values returned for system properties. The default spoof.prop covers bootloader state, build type, debuggable flags, and MIUI, Realme, and OPlus specific properties; ro.boot.vbmeta.digest is randomly generated on every load. Delete the lines you don’t need.
• ReZygisk chose the “never touch the system linker” route, so it has no solist cleanup. I did not find corresponding implementations for TracerPid, property spoofing, or maps spoofing.
• Zygisk Next cannot be verified. ZygiskNextNext’s hiding focuses on the injector’s own behavior, a different scope from the Zygisk implementations above, so it is not compared item by item here.
• None of these projects can guarantee passing every check, and I have not tested them device by device or app by app.

3. Platform and environment support#

4. Management UI#

Zygisk Next#

• Strengths: supports both APIs, and ZN modules can inject into any init-spawned process; the HyperOS Runtime API was introduced by it; new ZN modules are usually tested against it first; actively maintained, with v1.5.2 released on 2026-10-15.
• Limitations: closed source, so it cannot be audited, modified, or forked.

NyaZygisk#

• Strengths:
  • Open source, and a single module loads Magisk Zygisk modules (v5), ZN modules (v4), and HyperOS Runtime modules (v1);
  • Adds TracerPid, property spoofing, anonymous memory, CFI shadow, and per-app exclusion on top of NeoZygisk’s DenyList;
  • Supports KernelSU LKM late-load and emulated soft reboot;
  • Supports Android 7.1 and above, lower than upstream NeoZygisk’s 8.0;
  • Has a WebUI that distinguishes [Zygisk] / [Next] modules and offers per-app exclusion.
• Limitations:
  • ZN modules are only injected into Zygote and hyos_spawner;
  • No riscv64 support, and the minimum Android version is higher than ZygiskNextNext’s 5.0;
  • A smaller user base and less community experience than NeoZygisk and ReZygisk (286 stars versus 2.5k and 4.1k);
  • A larger codebase and maintenance surface than upstream (see below);
  • Property spoofing changes the values returned for system properties; if you don’t need it, it is extra behavior.

NeoZygisk#

• Strengths: the upstream of NyaZygisk; focuses on doing the Magisk Zygisk API well with a restrained feature scope, and has more community experience (2.5k stars); the DenyList design of direct Zygote unmounting with a setns fallback lives here; keeps up with Android 17 and BTI devices.
• Limitations: no ZN API support, so ZN modules cannot be used; no WebUI; minimum Android 8.0; no TracerPid sanitization or property spoofing.

ReZygisk#

• Strengths:
  • The whole codebase is rewritten in C, with smaller binaries;
  • A custom linker (CSOLoader) that bypasses the system linker to defeat linker-based detection, a design direction unique among the five;
  • A large user base (4.1k stars), with WebUI translations and well-established community channels;
  • Supports Android 7.1 and above;
• Limitations: no ZN API support; I did not find implementations for TracerPid, property spoofing, or maps spoofing; the latest stable release is v1.0.0 (2026-05-10).

ZygiskNextNext#

• Strengths: complete ZN API implementation that can inject into any init-spawned process; the lowest kernel requirements, supporting Android 5.0 and up and riscv64; the most active development (216 commits in the last three months, v2.0.0 released on 2026-10-19).
• Limitations: it is not a Zygisk implementation. Magisk Zygisk modules (such as LSPosed) are not loaded by it, so it must be paired with another Zygisk implementation, meaning two modules to install.