Overview

Calling dlopen then dlclose causes an increase in the amount of memory used by the program. If I create a loop that calls dlopen / dlclose repeatedly on the same dynamic library, memory usage increases continuously. Is this a bug, or am I using dlopen / dlclose incorrectly? I can reproduce this by modifying the sample code in the Apple Developer docs Creating Dynamic Libraries. If I modify Runtime.c, changing the line void *lib_handle = dlopen(lib_name, RTLD_NOW); to add the infinite loop, as below: void *lib_handle = dlopen(lib_name, RTLD_NOW); for (int ii = 0; ; ++ii) { printf("loop %i\n", ii); int close_err = dlclose(lib_handle); printf("close error: %i\n", close_err); printf("dlopen(%s, RTLD_NOW)\n", lib_name); lib_handle = dlopen(lib_name, RTLD_NOW); } then opening and closing the dynamic library will succeed, but memory usage (as reported by top) will rapidly increase. I'm running on x86_64 macOS 13.6.6. Full code for the modified Runtime.c is attached, the rest of the code is available in the Apple Developer docs. Any suggestions? Many thanks, Chris Runtime.c

Hello everyone, My app has been in “Waiting for Review” status since February 4, 2026, and there has been no progress or update since then. Normally, my previous submissions were reviewed within a few days, but this time it has been significantly delayed. There are no messages in the Resolution Center, and I have not received any communication from the App Review team. Has anyone else experienced similar delays recently? Is there anything I can do to follow up or escalate this review? Any guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Hello, After upgrading to macOS 26.2, I’ve noticed a significant performance regression when calling evaluateJavaScript in an iOS App running on Mac (WKWebView, Swift project). Observed behavior On macOS 26.2, the callback of evaluateJavaScript takes around 3 seconds to return. This happens not only for: evaluateJavaScript("navigator.userAgent") but also for simple or even empty scripts, for example: evaluateJavaScript("") On previous macOS versions, the same calls typically returned in ~200 ms. Additional testing I created a new, empty Objective-C project with a WKWebView and tested the same evaluateJavaScript calls. In the Objective-C project, the callback still returns in ~200 ms, even on macOS 26.2. Question Is this a known issue or regression related to: iOS Apps on Mac, Swift + WKWebView, or behavioral changes in evaluateJavaScript on macOS 26.2? Any information about known issues, internal changes, or recommended workarounds would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Test Code Swift class ViewController: UIViewController { private var tmpWebView: WKWebView? override func viewDidLoad() { super.viewDidLoad() // Do any additional setup after loading the view. setupUserAgent() } func setupUserAgent() { let t1 = CACurrentMediaTime() tmpWebView = WKWebView(frame: .zero) tmpWebView?.isInspectable = true tmpWebView?.evaluateJavaScript("navigator.userAgent") { [weak self] result, error in let t2 = CACurrentMediaTime() print("[getUserAgent] \(t2 - t1)s") self?.tmpWebView = nil } } } Test Code Objective-C - (void)scene:(UIScene *)scene willConnectToSession:(UISceneSession *)session options:(UISceneConnectionOptions *)connectionOptions { NSTimeInterval startTime = [[NSDate date] timeIntervalSince1970]; WKWebView *webView = [[WKWebView alloc] init]; dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{ [webView evaluateJavaScript:@"navigator.userAgent" completionHandler:^(id result, NSError *error) { NSTimeInterval endTime = [[NSDate date] timeIntervalSince1970]; NSLog(@"[getUserAgent]: %.2f s", (endTime - startTime)); }]; }); }

I am looking for some insight into current App Store review times. The Situation: I submitted my new app for its first review on February 3rd. It has been sitting in the "Waiting for Review" state for 11 days now and has not moved to "In Review." The Impact: We had a major launch event planned for today (Feb 14). We have marketing campaigns live and users waiting, but we have officially missed our launch window because the app is still sitting in the queue. My Questions: Is anyone else experiencing wait times this long (10+ days) just to enter the review stage? How much time does it typically take for a first-time submission to go live once it finally enters review? Is there any way to flag this delay if it has exceeded the standard 48-hour window? We are losing marketing budget every hour this is delayed. Any advice on how to get this moving would be appreciated. Thanks.

(Xcode 26.2, iPhone 17 Pro) I can't seem to get hardware tag checks to work in an app launched without the special "Hardware Memory Tagging" diagnostics. In other words, I have been unable to reproduce the crash example at 6:40 in Apple's video "Secure your app with Memory Integrity Enforcement". When I write a heap overflow or a UAF, it is picked up perfectly provided I enable the "Hardware Memory Tagging" feature under Scheme Diagnostics. If I instead add the Enhanced Security capability with the memory-tagging related entitlements: I'm seeing distinct memory tags being assigned in pointers returned by malloc (without the capability, this is not the case) Tag mismatches are not being caught or enforced, regardless of soft mode The behaviour is the same whether I launch from Xcode without "Hardware Memory Tagging", or if I launch the app by tapping it on launchpad. In case it was related to debug builds, I also tried creating an ad hoc IPA and it didn't make any difference. I realise there's a wrinkle here that the debugger sets MallocTagAll=1, so possibly it will pick up a wider range of issues. However I would have expected that a straight UAF would be caught. For example, this test code demonstrates that tagging is active but it doesn't crash: #define PTR_TAG(p) ((unsigned)(((uintptr_t)(p) >> 56) & 0xF)) void *p1 = malloc(32); void *p2 = malloc(32); void *p3 = malloc(32); os_log(OS_LOG_DEFAULT, "p1 = %p (tag: %u)\n", p1, PTR_TAG(p1)); os_log(OS_LOG_DEFAULT, "p2 = %p (tag: %u)\n", p2, PTR_TAG(p2)); os_log(OS_LOG_DEFAULT, "p3 = %p (tag: %u)\n", p3, PTR_TAG(p3)); free(p2); void *p2_realloc = malloc(32); os_log(OS_LOG_DEFAULT, "p2 after free+malloc = %p (tag: %u)\n", p2_realloc, PTR_TAG(p2_realloc)); // Is p2_realloc the same address as p2 but different tag? os_log(OS_LOG_DEFAULT, "Same address? %s\n", ((uintptr_t)p2 & 0x00FFFFFFFFFFFFFF) == ((uintptr_t)p2_realloc & 0x00FFFFFFFFFFFFFF) ? "YES" : "NO"); // Now try to use the OLD pointer p2 os_log(OS_LOG_DEFAULT, "Attempting use-after-free via old pointer p2...\n"); volatile char c = *(volatile char *)p2; // Should this crash? os_log(OS_LOG_DEFAULT, "Read succeeded! Value: %d\n", c); Example output: p1 = 0xf00000b71019660 (tag: 15) p2 = 0x200000b711958c0 (tag: 2) p3 = 0x300000b711958e0 (tag: 3) p2 after free+malloc = 0x700000b71019680 (tag: 7) Same address? NO Attempting use-after-free via old pointer p2... Read succeeded! Value: -55 For reference, these are my entitlements. [Dict] [Key] application-identifier [Value] [String] … [Key] com.apple.developer.team-identifier [Value] [String] … [Key] com.apple.security.hardened-process [Value] [Bool] true [Key] com.apple.security.hardened-process.checked-allocations [Value] [Bool] true [Key] com.apple.security.hardened-process.checked-allocations.enable-pure-data [Value] [Bool] true [Key] com.apple.security.hardened-process.dyld-ro [Value] [Bool] true [Key] com.apple.security.hardened-process.enhanced-security-version [Value] [Int] 1 [Key] com.apple.security.hardened-process.hardened-heap [Value] [Bool] true [Key] com.apple.security.hardened-process.platform-restrictions [Value] [Int] 2 [Key] get-task-allow [Value] [Bool] true What do I need to do to make Memory Integrity Enforcement do something outside the debugger?

Apple is encouraging VPN apps on macOS to transition to Network Extension APIs, if they haven't done so yet, see: TN3165: Packet Filter is not API WWDC25: Filter and tunnel network traffic with NetworkExtension Using Network Extension is fine for VPN apps that are distributed via the Mac App Store. Users get one pop-up requesting permission to add VPN configurations and that's it. However, VPN apps that are distributed outside of the App Store (using Developer ID) cannot use Network Extension in the same way, such apps need to install a System Extension first (see TN3134: Network Extension provider deployment). Installing a System Extension is a very poor user experience. There is a pop-up informing about a system extension, which the user has to manually enable. The main button is "OK", which only dismisses the pop-up and in such case there is little chance that the user will be able to find the correct place to enable the extension. The other button in that pop-up navigates to the correct screen in System Settings, where the user has to enable a toggle. Then there is a password prompt. Then the user has to close the System Settings and return to the app. This whole dance is not necessary for VPN apps on the Mac App Store, because they work with "app extensions" rather than "system extensions". As a developer of a VPN app that is distributed outside of the App Store, my options are: Implement VPN functionality in an alternative way, without Network Extension. This is discouraged by Apple. Use a System Extension with Network Extension. This is going to discourage my users. I have submitted feedback to Apple: FB19631390. But I wonder, why did Apple create this difference in the first place? Is there a chance that they will either improve the System Extension installation process or even allow "app extensions" outside of the Mac App Store?

The process has been stuck "In Progress" for 8 days now. We had a scheduled New Year Offer for our software that would run based around this important new update, and obviously we missed it because of this crazy issue. Notarization used to take a few seconds. Now it does not work, neither on my newly set up Mac, nor in my old (completely unchanged) one. My company and finances are totally frozen at this point due to this issue. PLEASE help, look into my actual account and do what is needed!

Currently in our app, to identify a network switch in device we are doing NEHotspotHelper.register and then NEHotspotHelperHandler block. When the command type is evaluate and if the network.didJustJoin, we are identifying it as a network switch. As a part of moving our code base to iOS 26, if is found that NEHotspotHelper is deprecated. What is the proper replacement for this?

We have developed an IOPCIFamily based custom KEXT to communicate with Thunderbolt interface storage device. This KEXT is working fine with Apple machines with Intel CPUs in all types of machines (iMac, iMac Pro and MacBooks). We tested this KEXT with Apple Silicon M1 machine where we are observing crash for the very first command we send to the Thunderbolt device. We observed that there is difference in number of bits in Physical Address we use for preparing command PRPs. In Intel machines we get 28-Bit Physical Address whereas in M1 we are getting 36-Bit address used for PRPs. We use inTaskWithPhysicalMask api to allocate memory buffer we use for preparing command PRPs. Below are the options we have used for this: options: kIOMemoryPhysicallyContiguous | kIODirectionInOut capacity: 16kb physicalMask: 0xFFFFF000UL (We want 4kb aligned memory) According to below documentation, we have to use inTaskWithPhysicalMask api to get memory below 4gb. https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Darwin/Conceptual/64bitPorting/KernelExtensionsandDrivers/KernelExtensionsandDrivers.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40001064-CH227-SW1 Some devices can only handle physical addresses that fit into 32 bits. To the extent that it is possible to use 64-bit addresses you should do so, but for these devices, you can either use IODMACommand or the initWithPhysicalMask method of IOBufferMemoryDescriptor to allocate a bounce buffer within the bottom 4 GB of physical memory. So just want to know what's the difference between Intel and ARM64 architecture with respect to physical memory access. Is there any difference between byte order for physical memory address..?? Crash log is given below: panic(cpu 0 caller 0xfffffe0016e08cd8): "apciec[0:pcic0-bridge]::handleInterrupt: Request address is greater than 32 bits linksts=0x99000001 pcielint=0x00020000 linkcdmsts=0x00000800 (ltssm 0x11=L0)\n" Debugger message: panic Memory ID: 0x6 OS release type: User OS version: 20C69 Kernel version: Darwin Kernel Version 20.2.0: Wed Dec 2 20:40:21 PST 2020; root:xnu-7195.60.75~1/RELEASEARM64T8101 Fileset Kernelcache UUID: 3E6AA74DF723BCB886499A5AAB34FA34 Kernel UUID: 48F71DB3-6C91-3E62-9576-3A1DCEF2B536 iBoot version: iBoot-6723.61.3 secure boot?: YES Paniclog version: 13 KernelCache slide: 0x000000000dbfc000 KernelCache base: 0xfffffe0014c00000 Kernel slide: 0x000000000e73c000 Kernel text base: 0xfffffe0015740000 Kernel text exec base: 0xfffffe0015808000 machabsolutetime: 0x12643a9c5 Epoch Time: sec usec Boot : 0x5fe06736 0x0009afbc Sleep : 0x00000000 0x00000000 Wake : 0x00000000 0x00000000 Calendar: 0x5fe067fd 0x0006569d CORE 0 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015971798 CORE 1 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c5c CORE 2 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c5c CORE 3 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c5c CORE 4 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c60 CORE 5 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c60 CORE 6 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c60 CORE 7 recently retired instr at 0xfffffe0015972c60 Panicked task 0xfffffe166ce9e550: 75145 pages, 462 threads: pid 0: kernel_task Panicked thread: 0xfffffe166d053918, backtrace: 0xfffffe306cb4b6d0, tid: 141 lr: 0xfffffe0015855f8c fp: 0xfffffe306cb4b740 lr: 0xfffffe0015855d58 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4b7b0 lr: 0xfffffe0015977f5c fp: 0xfffffe306cb4b7d0 lr: 0xfffffe0015969914 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4b880 lr: 0xfffffe001580f7e8 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4b890 lr: 0xfffffe00158559e8 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bc20 lr: 0xfffffe00158559e8 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bc90 lr: 0xfffffe0015ff03f8 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bcb0 lr: 0xfffffe0016e08cd8 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bd60 lr: 0xfffffe00166bc778 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4be30 lr: 0xfffffe0015f2226c fp: 0xfffffe306cb4be80 lr: 0xfffffe0015f1e2f4 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bec0 lr: 0xfffffe0015f1f050 fp: 0xfffffe306cb4bf00 lr: 0xfffffe0015818c14 fp: 0x0000000000000000 Kernel Extensions in backtrace: com.apple.driver.AppleEmbeddedPCIE(1.0)[4F37F34B-EE1B-3282-BD8B-00009B954483]@0xfffffe00166b4000->0xfffffe00166c7fff dependency: com.apple.driver.AppleARMPlatform(1.0.2)[5CBA9CD0-E248-38E3-94E5-4CC5EAB96DE1]@0xfffffe0016148000->0xfffffe0016193fff dependency: com.apple.driver.IODARTFamily(1)[88B19766-4B19-3106-8ACE-EC29201F00A3]@0xfffffe0017890000->0xfffffe00178a3fff dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOPCIFamily(2.9)[5187699D-1DDC-3763-934C-1C4896310225]@0xfffffe0017c48000->0xfffffe0017c63fff dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOReportFamily(47)[93EC9828-1413-3458-A6B2-DBB3E24540AE]@0xfffffe0017c64000->0xfffffe0017c67fff com.apple.driver.AppleT8103PCIeC(1.0)[35AEB73B-D51E-3339-AB5B-50AC78740FB8]@0xfffffe0016e04000->0xfffffe0016e13fff dependency: com.apple.driver.AppleARMPlatform(1.0.2)[5CBA9CD0-E248-38E3-94E5-4CC5EAB96DE1]@0xfffffe0016148000->0xfffffe0016193fff dependency: com.apple.driver.AppleEmbeddedPCIE(1)[4F37F34B-EE1B-3282-BD8B-00009B954483]@0xfffffe00166b4000->0xfffffe00166c7fff dependency: com.apple.driver.ApplePIODMA(1)[A8EFA5BD-B11D-3A84-ACBD-6DB25DBCD817]@0xfffffe0016b0c000->0xfffffe0016b13fff dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOPCIFamily(2.9)[5187699D-1DDC-3763-934C-1C4896310225]@0xfffffe0017c48000->0xfffffe0017c63fff dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOReportFamily(47)[93EC9828-1413-3458-A6B2-DBB3E24540AE]@0xfffffe0017c64000->0xfffffe0017c67fff dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOThunderboltFamily(9.3.2)[11617399-2987-322D-85B6-EF2F1AD4A794]@0xfffffe0017d80000->0xfffffe0017e93fff Stackshot Succeeded Bytes Traced 277390 (Uncompressed 703968) ** System Information: Apple Silicon M1 BigSur 11.1 Model: Macmini9,1 Any help or suggestion is really appreciated. Thanks

Hi, I'm investigating what looks like possibly nondeterministic behavior when linking large iOS app binaries. I do not have a concise reproduction of the issue yet, but am trying to hunt down possible leads. In particular, the problem appears to surface when invoking clang to link a binary and the resulting order of the 'branch island' instructions appears to be random each time the binary is linked (as shown by the link map output). I was wondering if anyone with insight into the linker's current implementation could shed light on whether that is expected, and if there is anything that can be done to prevent it. FWIW, it seems like it might be size-dependent as smaller app binaries don't appear to exhibit the same behavior. I'd be glad to share more specifics and hopefully a reproduction if I can ever find one eventually. Some environment info (Xcode 16.4 toolchain): clang -v: Apple clang version 17.0.0 (clang-1700.0.13.5) Target: arm64-apple-darwin24.6.0 Thread model: posix InstalledDir: /Applications/Xcode-16.4.0.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin ld -v: @(#)PROGRAM:ld PROJECT:ld-1167.5 BUILD 01:45:05 Apr 30 2025 configured to support archs: armv6 armv7 armv7s arm64 arm64e arm64_32 i386 x86_64 x86_64h armv6m armv7k armv7m armv7em will use ld-classic for: armv6 armv7 armv7s i386 armv6m armv7k armv7m armv7em LTO support using: LLVM version 17.0.0 (static support for 29, runtime is 29) TAPI support using: Apple TAPI version 17.0.0 (tapi-1700.0.3.5)

Hi guys, I am new to the Apple Developer Program (enrolled a few days ago) and this is my first app notarization attempt. I've been experiencing significant delays - all submissions have been stuck at "In Progress" for over 24 hours. Details: macOS app signed with Developer ID Application certificate Using xcrun notarytool with app-specific password Hardened runtime enabled codesign --verify --deep --strict passes Team ID: QVHM976XC5 Submission IDs (all stuck "In Progress"): 5f494a89-0db0-4cc6-944f-ca2fe399e870 (latest - 8+ hours) 938f6b8d-0d00-45f5-861d-68fe470df6c2 d0edcbfe-8464-455f-b077-bebaa5b9aab7 I understand new developers may experience longer initial processing, but 24+ hours seems excessive. Is there anything I should check or any additional steps required for new accounts? Any guidance appreciated.

I enrolled in the Apple Developer Program on February 3, 2026. The payment was completed successfully at the time of enrollment, but my membership status has remained “Pending” since then. So far: No request for additional documents or identity verification No phone call from Apple No follow-up email other than the payment confirmation Apple Developer Support has been contacted, but no response yet I understand that verification can take some time, but the complete lack of communication is concerning, especially since this is blocking active development and release planning. If this is a known backlog or system-wide delay, some transparency from Apple would help. I’d also appreciate hearing whether others who enrolled in early February are seeing the same prolonged “Pending” state. Thanks in advance to anyone who can share recent experiences or escalation paths.

Based on https://developer.apple.com/documentation/networkextension/nednssettings/searchdomains , we expect the values mentioned in searchDomains to be appended to a single label DNS query. However, we are not seeing this behavior. We have a packetTunnelProvider VPN, where we set searchDomains to a dns suffix (for ex: test.com) and we set matchDomains to applications and suffix (for ex: abc.com and test.com) . When a user tries to access https://myapp , we expect to see a DNS query packet for myapp.test.com . However, this is not happening when matchDomainsNoSearch is set to true. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/networkextension/nednssettings/matchdomainsnosearch When matchDomainsNoSearch is set to false, we see dns queries for myapp.test.com and myapp.abc.com. What is the expected behavior of searchDomains?

Also submitted as feedback (ID: FB20612561). Tensorflow-metal fails on tensorflow versions above 2.18.1, but works fine on tensorflow 2.18.1 In a new python 3.12 virtual environment: pip install tensorflow pip install tensor flow-metal python -c "import tensorflow as tf" Prints error: Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in File "/Users//pt/venv/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tensorflow/init.py", line 438, in _ll.load_library(_plugin_dir) File "/Users//pt/venv/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tensorflow/python/framework/load_library.py", line 151, in load_library py_tf.TF_LoadLibrary(lib) tensorflow.python.framework.errors_impl.NotFoundError: dlopen(/Users//pt/venv/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tensorflow-plugins/libmetal_plugin.dylib, 0x0006): Library not loaded: @rpath/_pywrap_tensorflow_internal.so Referenced from: <8B62586B-B082-3113-93AB-FD766A9960AE> /Users//pt/venv/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tensorflow-plugins/libmetal_plugin.dylib Reason: tried: '/Users//pt/venv/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tensorflow-plugins/../_solib_darwin_arm64/_U@local_Uconfig_Utf_S_S_C_Upywrap_Utensorflow_Uinternal___Uexternal_Slocal_Uconfig_Utf/_pywrap_tensorflow_internal.so' (no such file), '/Users//pt/venv/lib/python3.12/site-packages/tensorflow-plugins/../_solib_darwin_arm64/_U@local_Uconfig_Utf_S_S_C_Upywrap_Utensorflow_Uinternal___Uexternal_Slocal_Uconfig_Utf/_pywrap_tensorflow_internal.so' (no such file), '/opt/homebrew/lib/_pywrap_tensorflow_internal.so' (no such file), '/System/Volumes/Preboot/Cryptexes/OS/opt/homebrew/lib/_pywrap_tensorflow_internal.so' (no such file)

Why there is a working animation with ScrollView + ForEach of items removal, but there is none with List? ScrollView + ForEach: struct ContentView: View { @State var items: [String] = Array(1...5).map(\.description) var body: some View { ScrollView(.vertical) { ForEach(items, id: \.self) { item in Text(String(item)) .frame(maxWidth: .infinity, minHeight: 50) .background(.gray) .onTapGesture { withAnimation(.linear(duration: 0.1)) { items = items.filter { $0 != item } } } } } } } List: struct ContentView: View { @State var items: [String] = Array(1...5).map(\.description) var body: some View { List(items, id: \.self) { item in Text(String(item)) .frame(maxWidth: .infinity, minHeight: 50) .background(.gray) .onTapGesture { withAnimation(.linear(duration: 0.1)) { items = items.filter { $0 != item } } } } } }```

I am trying to migrate an app to use Network framework for p2p connection. I came across this great article for migrating to Network framework however this doesnt use the new structured concurrency. This being introduced with iOS 26, there doesnt seem to be any sample code available on how to use the new classes. I am particularly interested in code samples showing how to add TLS with PSK encryption support and handling of switching between Wifi and peer to peer interface with the new structured concurrency supported classes. Are there any good resources I can refer on this other than the WWDC video?

I'm building an app which runs around the Foundation model framework. My expected output is generated when testing on a real device or in preview in Xcode but it throws Foundation Model error when I try running it on the simulator. I'm using a Macbook M1 air and have apple intelligence turned on and my simulator run destination is also an iPad Pro M5 (26.0). Any solution for this as this is my submission for the SSC so I need to make it work on the simulator iPad. Thank you👾

Hi there, We've discovered a problem with our iOS app. We've been attempting to add a Driverkit driver to it, but any time we run the app through Testflight, the driver installs fine, but when we go to enable the driver toggle in the app's settings, the toggle stays on, but in the device logs I can see: could not insert bundle at <private> into manager: <private> As you would expect - this means the driver is not actually enabled and does not respond to a device being connected to the iPad. This does not happen when building & running the app locally, nor does it happen when installing an Ad Hoc build. We also have a different app, not yet shipped. We are able to add the driver to that app without issue. It works after going through Testflight. What we have discovered now is that everything works fine even if we just create an entirely new app with it's own bundle IDs. I should point out that in all cases, we're keeping the capabilities the same for each of these apps/IDs - including the managed capabilities. The bundle IDs that have this problem are older (5 years old or more). It seems like any newer ID will work, but trying to add the driver (and the associated managed capabilities) to an older app/ID results in this vague error message, with no further details. If we inspect the resulting dexts, we can also see that the "Internal requirements code size" is different on the ones that fail. The failing ones have a size of 204 bytes, whereas the working ones all have a size of 220 bytes. Not sure if that's related but it's strikingly consistent. Does this mean there is an issue with older app IDs, and we need Apple to manually refresh them in some way before the driverkit capabilities will work after going through Testflight? We have two apps in this state, both are of the same vintage (~5 years+). We've been battling this issue for months on and off, so would appreciate some help.

Has anyone else experienced extremely long wait times for app review or know what I can do to help expedite this process? I am waiting 22 days currently I have done everything I have seen to do both sending an email and calling Apple support for help to have nothing changed or even a confirmation email of my call sent. Does anyone have any advice?

Hello, I have already paid developer account fees with my this id. But Still I can see this https://gyazo.com/db985d124b85d0759a1662cf05b9d82a with my developer account. Can any one help me what's the issue with my account? How can I get solution for this account?Thanks