Discuss how to secure user data, respect user data preferences, support iCloud Private Relay and Mail Privacy Protection, replace CAPTCHAs with Private Access Tokens, and more. Ask about Privacy nutrition labels, Privacy manifests, and more.

Posts under Privacy tag

198 Posts

Post

Replies

Boosts

Views

Activity

Handling ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest
An ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest rejection email looks as follows: ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest- Your app includes "<path/to/SDK>", which includes , an SDK that was identified in the documentation as a privacy-impacting third-party SDK. Starting February 12, 2025, if a new app includes a privacy-impacting SDK, or an app update adds a new privacy-impacting SDK, the SDK must include a privacy manifest file. Please contact the provider of the SDK that includes this file to get an updated SDK version with a privacy manifest. For more details about this policy, including a list of SDKs that are required to include signatures and manifests, visit: https://developer.apple.com/support/third-party-SDK-requirements. Glossary ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest: An email that includes the name and path of privacy-impacting SDK(s) with no privacy manifest files in your app bundle. For more information, see https://developer.apple.com/support/third-party-SDK-requirements. : The specified privacy-impacting SDK that doesn't include a privacy manifest file. If you are the developer of the rejected app, gather the name of the SDK from the email you received from Apple, then contact the SDK's provider for an updated version that includes a valid privacy manifest. After receiving an updated version of the SDK, verify the SDK includes a valid privacy manifest file at the expected location. For more information, see Adding a privacy manifest to your app or third-party SDK. If your app includes a privacy manifest file, make sure the file only describes the privacy practices of your app. Do not add the privacy practices of the SDK to your app's privacy manifest. If the email lists multiple SDKs, repeat the above process for all of them. If you are the developer of an SDK listed in the email, publish an updated version of your SDK that includes a privacy manifest file with valid keys and values. Every privacy-impacting SDK must contain a privacy manifest file that only describes its privacy practices. To learn how to add a valid privacy manifest to your SDK, see the Additional resources section below. Additional resources Privacy manifest files Describing data use in privacy manifests Describing use of required reason API Adding a privacy manifest to your app or third-party SDK TN3182: Adding privacy tracking keys to your privacy manifest TN3183: Adding required reason API entries to your privacy manifest TN3184: Adding data collection details to your privacy manifest TN3181: Debugging an invalid privacy manifest
0
0
5.8k
Mar ’25
Privacy Resources
General: Forums topic: Privacy & Security Forums tag: Privacy Developer > Security — This also covers privacy topics. App privacy details on the App Store UIKit > Protecting the User’s Privacy documentation Bundle Resources > Privacy manifest files documentation TN3181 Debugging an invalid privacy manifest technote TN3182 Adding privacy tracking keys to your privacy manifest technote TN3183 Adding required reason API entries to your privacy manifest technote TN3184 Adding data collection details to your privacy manifest technote TN3179 Understanding local network privacy technote Handling ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest forums post Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com"
0
0
134
Jul ’25
Does Image Playground is On-device + Private Cloud ?
Apple's Image Playground primarily performs image generation on-device, but can use secure Private Cloud Compute for more complex requests that require larger models. Private Cloud Compute (PCC) For more complex tasks that require greater computational power than the device can provide, Image Playground leverages Apple's Private Cloud Compute. This system extends the privacy and security of the device to the cloud: Secure Environment: PCC runs on Apple silicon servers and uses a secure enclave to protect data, ensuring requests are processed in a verified, secure environment. No Data Storage: Data is never stored or made accessible to Apple when using PCC; it is used only to fulfill the specific request. Independent Verification: Independent experts are able to inspect the code running on these servers to verify Apple's privacy promises.
2
0
417
2d
Local Network permission on macOS 15 macOS 26: multicast behaves inconsistently and regularly drops
Problem description Since macOS Sequoia, our users have experienced issues with multicast traffic in our macOS app. Regularly, the app starts but cannot receive multicast, or multicast eventually stops mid-execution. The app sometimes asks again for Local Network permission, while it was already allowed so. Several versions of our app on a single machine are sometimes (but not always) shown as different instances in the System Settings > Privacy & Security > Local Network list. And when several instances are shown in that list, disabling one disables all of them, but it does not actually forbids the app from receiving multicast traffic. All of those issues are experienced by an increasing number of users after they update their system from macOS 14 to macOS 15 or 26, and many of them have reported networking issues during production-critical moments. We haven't been able to find the root cause of those issues, so we built a simple test app, called "FM Mac App Test", that can reproduce multicast issues. This app creates a GCDAsyncUdpSocket socket to receive multicast packets from a piece of hardware we also develop, and displays a simple UI showing if such packets are received. The app is entitled with "Custom Network Protocol", is built against x86_64 and arm64, and is archived (signed and notarized). We can share the source code if requested. Out of the many issues our main app exhibits, the test app showcases some: The app asks several times for Local Network permission, even after being allowed so previously. After allowing the app's Local Network and rebooting the machine, the System Settings > Privacy & Security > Local Network does not show the app, and the app asks again for Local Network access. The app shows a different Local Network Usage Description than in the project's plist. Several versions of the app appear as different instances in the Privacy list, and behave strangely. Toggling on or off one instance toggles the others. Only one version of the app seems affected by the setting, the other versions always seem to have access to Local Network even when the toggle is set to off. We even did see messages from different app versions in different user accounts. This seems to contradicts Apple's documentation that states user accounts have independent Privacy settings. Can you help us understand what we are missing (in terms of build settings, entitlements, proper archiving...) so our app conforms to what macOS expects for proper Local Network behavior? Related material Local Network Privacy breaks Application: this issue seemed related to ours, but the fix was to ensure different versions of the app have different UUIDs. We ensured that ourselves, to no improvement. Local Network FAQ Technote TN3179 Steps to Reproduce Test App is developed on Xcode 15.4 (15F31d) on macOS 14.5 (23F79), and runs on macOS 26.0.1 (25A362). We can share the source code if requested. On a clean install of macOS Tahoe (our test setup used macOS 26.0.1 on a Mac mini M2 8GB), we upload the app (version 5.1). We run the app, make sure the selected NIC is the proper one, and open the multicast socket. The app asks us to allow Local Network, we allow it. The alert shows a different Local Network Usage Description than the one we set in our project's plist. The app properly shows packets are received from the console on our LAN. We check the list in System Settings > Privacy & Security > Local Network, it includes our app properly allowed. We then reboot the machine. After reboot, the same list does not show the app anymore. We run the app, it asks again about Local Network access (still with incorrect Usage Description). We allow it again, but no console packet is received yet. Only after closing and reopening the socket are the console packets received. After a 2nd reboot, the System Settings > Privacy & Security > Local Network list shows correctly the app. The app seems to now run fine. We then upload an updated version of the same app (5.2), also built and notarized. The 2nd version is simulating when we send different versions of our main app to our users. The updated version has a different UUID than the 1st version. The updated version also asks for Local Network access, this time with proper Usage Description. A 3rd updated version of the app (5.3, also with unique UUID) behaves the same. The System Settings > Privacy & Security > Local Network list shows three instances of the app. We toggle off one of the app, all of them toggle off. The 1st version of the app (5.1) does not have local network access anymore, but both 2nd and 3rd versions do, while their toggle button seems off. We toggle on one of the app, all of them toggle on. All 3 versions have local network access.
0
0
29
3d
Local Network Discovery Works in Debug but Not in TestFlight (Wi-Fi Speaker Connection Issue)
Hi team, I’m having an issue with my iOS app related to local network communication and connecting to a Wi-Fi speaker. My app works similar to the “4Stream” application. The speaker and the mobile device must be on the same Wi-Fi network so the app can discover and connect to the speaker. What’s happening: When I run the app directly from Xcode in debug mode, everything works perfectly. The speaker gets discovered. The speaker gets connected successfully. The connection flow completes without any problem. But when I upload the same build to TestFlight, the behaviour changes completely. The app gets stuck on the “Connecting…” screen. The speaker is not discovered. But the same code is working fine on Android It never moves forward from that state. So basically: Debug Mode: Speaker is detected and connected properly TestFlight: Stuck at “Connecting…”, speaker does NOT get connected This makes me believe something related to local network access, multicast, Wi-Fi info permissions, or Bonjour discovery is not being applied correctly in the release/TestFlight environment. Below is my current Info.plist and Entitlements file, which already include Local Network Usage, Bonjour services, Location usage for SSID, multicast entitlements, wifi-info, etc. My Info.plist <key>CADisableMinimumFrameDurationOnPhone</key> <true/> <key>CFBundleDevelopmentRegion</key> <string>en</string> <key>CFBundleDisplayName</key> <string>Wanwun</string> <key>CFBundleExecutable</key> <string>$(EXECUTABLE_NAME)</string> <key>CFBundleIdentifier</key> <string>$(PRODUCT_BUNDLE_IDENTIFIER)</string> <key>CFBundleInfoDictionaryVersion</key> <string>6.0</string> <key>CFBundleName</key> <string>$(PRODUCT_NAME)</string> <key>CFBundlePackageType</key> <string>APPL</string> <key>CFBundleShortVersionString</key> <string>$(MARKETING_VERSION)</string> <key>CFBundleSignature</key> <string>????</string> <key>CFBundleVersion</key> <string>$(CURRENT_PROJECT_VERSION)</string> <key>LSRequiresIPhoneOS</key> <true/> <!-- Allow HTTP to devices on LAN --> <key>NSAppTransportSecurity</key> <dict> <key>NSAllowsArbitraryLoads</key> <true/> <key>NSExceptionDomains</key> <dict> <key>local</key> <dict> <key>NSExceptionAllowsInsecureHTTPLoads</key> <true/> <key>NSIncludesSubdomains</key> <true/> </dict> <key>localhost</key> <dict> <key>NSExceptionAllowsInsecureHTTPLoads</key> <true/> <key>NSIncludesSubdomains</key> <true/> </dict> </dict> </dict> <!-- Local Network Usage --> <key>NSLocalNetworkUsageDescription</key> <string>This app needs local network access to discover and control your sound system device over Wi-Fi.</string> <!-- Bonjour services for discovery --> <key>NSBonjourServices</key> <array> <string>_http._tcp.</string> <string>_wrtn._tcp.</string> <string>_services._dns-sd._udp.</string> </array> <!-- Location for SSID Permission --> <key>NSLocationWhenInUseUsageDescription</key> <string>This app requires location access to read the connected Wi-Fi information.</string> <!-- Camera / Photos --> <key>NSCameraUsageDescription</key> <string>This app needs camera access to capture attendance photos.</string> <key>NSPhotoLibraryAddUsageDescription</key> <string>This app saves captured photos to your gallery.</string> <key>NSPhotoLibraryUsageDescription</key> <string>This app needs access to your gallery to upload existing images.</string> <!-- Bluetooth --> <key>NSBluetoothAlwaysUsageDescription</key> <string>This app uses Bluetooth to discover nearby sound system devices.</string> <key>NSBluetoothPeripheralUsageDescription</key> <string>This app uses Bluetooth to connect with your sound system.</string> <!-- Launch screen --> <key>UILaunchStoryboardName</key> <string>LaunchScreen</string> <!-- Device Capabilities --> <key>UIRequiredDeviceCapabilities</key> <array> <string>arm64</string> </array> <!-- Orientation --> <key>UISupportedInterfaceOrientations</key> <array> <string>UIInterfaceOrientationPortrait</string> <string>UIInterfaceOrientationLandscapeLeft</string> <string>UIInterfaceOrientationLandscapeRight</string> </array> <key>UIViewControllerBasedStatusBarAppearance</key> <false/> My Entitlements What I need help with: I want to understand why the app behaves correctly in debug mode (where the speaker connects without issues), but the same functionality fails in TestFlight. Is there something additional required for: Local network discovery on TestFlight? Multicast networking? Reading the Wi-Fi SSID? Bonjour, service scanning? Release build / TestFlight network permissions? If any extra entitlement approval, configuration, or specific service type is needed for TestFlight builds, please guide me. Thank you for your help.
1
0
125
3d
Binary executable requires Accessibility Permissions in Tahoe
I have a binary executable which needs to be given Accessibility Permissions so it can inject keypresses and mouse moves. This was always possible up to macOS 15 - when the first keypress arrived the Accessibility Permissions window would open and allow me to add the executable. However this no longer works in macOS 26: the window still opens, I navigate to the executable file and select it but it doesn't appear in the list. No error message appears. I'm guessing that this may be due to some tightening of security in Tahoe but I need to figure out what to change with my executable to allow it to work.
4
1
652
4d
Feedbacks for DeclaredAgeRange - missing platform support
I've been writing about the DeclaredAgeRange a bit on LinkedIn and now it is time to take to the developer forums. In my efforts to prepare my apps for new local requirements, I've run across some rough edges. The DeclaredAgeRange API is missing on several platforms, and extension types. First and foremost, watchOS. An Apple Watch is a clear single user platform and for standalone apps, the DeclaredAgeRange being absent is felt by developers. FB20954931 - DeclaredAgeRange: Framework not available on watchOS making compliance a challenge for watchOS standalone apps In the same vein of thinking, while users on Apple Vision Pro are far fewer numbers than Apple Watch, it is also a miss. The tricky part would be testing on the simulator. So far I haven't gotten the simulator and sandbox testing to work and give real values across any platform. I don't think an Apple Store will let me try my app out via TestFlight on their devices and they're still too expensive to reasonably buy for most developers. Too bad Feedbacks are not a currency that developers can trade in for gear. FB20955020 - DeclaredAgeRange: Framework not available on visionOS making compliance a challenge for visionOS apps I'll recognize that the user model is different on tvOS, and that as a user while I have family group setup, I don't have any children on the account. I have to imagine that child accounts on an Apple TV exist and would be able to account for the sharing of age ranges to apps. Yes, the user could just switch profiles, but, app developers could still integrate the age range into their apps. Maybe it needs more robust system level support but here is the feedback just the same. FB20955029 - DeclaredAgeRange: Framework not available on tvOS making compliance a challenge on tvOS apps And finally, let's not forget about App Clips. While the App Clips might not be 'downloaded' from App Store itself, it is powered by App Store technologies to an extent. I'd rather not bifurcate my code more than it already is for the shared code between my apps and app clips. Rounding out platform support to App Clips, since it is iOS, would close the loop. FB20954846 - DeclaredAgeRange / App Clips: Add support for DeclaredAgeRange framework for App Clip targets - capability exist, Xcode cannot generate entitlement for it Oh wait, actually, not quite. To fully close the loop, make the DeclaredAgeRange work fully on macCatalyst. The documentation says it is compatible, but from my experiments trying to get it to even compile when targeting macCatalyst apps simply doesn't build. FB21117325 - DeclaredAgeRange: API documentation states available on mac catalyst - but fails to compile in Xcode 26.2
1
0
160
4d
sshd-keygen-wrapper permissions problem
On macOS 26.1 (25B78) I can't give Full Disk Access to sshd-keygen-wrapper. Now my Jenkins jobs do not work because they do not have the permission to execute the necessary scripts. Until macOS 26.1 everything worked fine. I restarted the machine several times and tried to give access from Settings -> Privacy & Security -> Full Disk Access but it just does not work. I tried logging with ssh on the machine and executing a script but again nothing happened.
15
2
2.5k
6d
Issue: Plain Executables Do Not Appear Under “Screen & System Audio Recording” on macOS 26.1 (Tahoe)
Summary I am investigating a change in macOS 26.1 (Tahoe) where plain (non-bundled) executables that request screen recording access no longer appear under: System Settings → Privacy & Security → Screen & System Audio Recording This behavior differs from macOS Sequoia, where these executables did appear in the list and could be managed through the UI. Tahoe still prompts for permission and still allows the executable to capture the screen once permission is granted, but the executable never shows up in the UI list. This breaks user expectations and removes UI-based permission management. To confirm the behavior, I created a small reproduction project with both: a plain executable, and an identical executable packaged inside an .app bundle. Only the bundled version appears in System Settings. Observed Behaviour 1. Plain Executable (from my reproduction project) When running a plain executable that captures the screen: macOS displays the normal screen-recording permission prompt. Before granting permission: screenshots show only the desktop background. After granting permission: screenshots capture the full display. The executable does not appear under “Screen & System Audio Recording”. Even when permission is granted manually (e.g., dragging the executable into the pane), the executable still does not appear, which prevents the user from modifying or revoking the permission through the UI. If the executable is launched from inside another app (e.g., VS Code, Terminal), the parent app appears in the list instead, not the executable itself. 2. Bundled App Version (from the reproduction project) I packaged the same code into a simple .app bundle (ScreenCaptureApp.app). When running the app: The same permission prompt appears. Pre-permission screenshots show the desktop background. Post-permission screenshots capture the full display. The app does appear under “Screen & System Audio Recording”. This bundle uses the same underlying executable — the only difference is packaging. Hypothesis macOS 26.1 (Tahoe) appears to require app bundles for an item to be shown in the Screen Recording privacy UI. Plain executables: still request and receive permission, still function correctly after permission is granted, but do not appear in the System Settings list. This may be an intentional change, undocumented behavior, or a regression. Reproduction Project The reproduction project includes: screen_capture.go A simple Go program that captures screenshots in a loop. screen_capture_executable Plain executable built from the Go source. ScreenCaptureApp.app/ App bundle containing the same executable. build.sh Builds both the plain executable and the app bundle. Permission reset and TCC testing scripts. The project demonstrates the behavior consistently. Steps to Reproduce Plain Executable Build: ./build.sh Reset screen capture permissions: sudo tccutil reset ScreenCapture Run: ./screen_capture_executable Before granting: screenshots show desktop only. Grant permission when prompted. After granting: full screenshots. Executable does not appear in “Screen & System Audio Recording”. Bundled App Build (if not already built): ./build.sh Reset permissions (optional): sudo tccutil reset ScreenCapture Run: open ScreenCaptureApp.app Before granting: screenshots show desktop. After granting: full screenshots. App bundle appears in the System Settings list. Additional Check I also tested launching the plain executable as a child process of another executable, similar to how some software architectures work. Result: Permission prompt appears Permission can be granted Executable still does not appear in the UI, even though TCC tracks it internally → consistent with the plain-executable behaviour. This reinforces that only app bundles are listed. Questions for Apple Is the removal of plain executables from “Screen & System Audio Recording” an intentional change in macOS Tahoe? If so, does Apple now require all screen-recording capable binaries to be packaged as .app bundles for the UI to display them? Is there a supported method for making a plain executable (launched by a parent process) appear in the list? If this is not intentional, what is the recommended path for reporting this as a regression? Files Unfortunately, I have discovered the zip file that contains my reproduction project can't be directly uploaded here. Here is a Google Drive link instead: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sXsr3Q0g6_UzlOIL54P5wbS7yBkpMJ7A/view?usp=sharing Thank you for taking the time to review this. Any insight into whether this change is intentional or a regression would be very helpful.
2
0
313
1w
Unable to change App Tracking configuration
I have reached out to support and they simply tell me they are unable to help me, first redirecting me to generic Apple support, after following up they provided the explanation that they only handle administrative tasks and to post on the forums. I am unable to change my App Tracking Transparency it provides no real error, though network traffic shows a 409 HTTP response from the backend API when trying to save. Here is a screenshot of the result when trying to save. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to get this resolved? I've commented back to the reviewers and they simply provided help documentation. I have a technical issue and am unable to get anyone to help resolve this.
2
0
275
1w
Local Wi-Fi UDP discovery works in Debug but stops working in TestFlight (React Native app)
Hi everyone, I am building a React Native iOS app that discovers audio devices on the local Wi-Fi network using UDP broadcast + mDNS/Bonjour lookup (similar to the “4Stream” app). The app works 100% perfectly in Debug mode when installed directly from Xcode. But once I upload it to TestFlight, the local-network features stop working completely: UDP packets never arrive Device discovery does not work Bonjour/mDNS lookup returns nothing Same phone, same Wi-Fi, same code → only Debug works, TestFlight fails react-native-udp for UDP broadcast react-native-dns-lookup for resolving hostnames react-native-xml2js for parsing device responses
1
0
58
2w
Private Relay emails bounced as 'Unauthorized Sender'
Private relay emails are not being delivered, even though we've followed the guidance here, https://developer.apple.com/help/account/capabilities/configure-private-email-relay-service/ iCloud, gmail etc. get delivered fine but as soon as its a private relay email address they get bounced as unauthorized sender. We've tried a couple of domains but here I'll document test.x.domain.com We have registered domains (test.x.domain.com), also the sender communication emails just to be safe (noreply at test.x.domain.com). Passed SPF Authentication, DKIM Authentication. ESP account shows as all green checks in mailgun. Is there any way to track down what the actual rejection reason is? { "@timestamp": "2025-08-20T14:30:59.801Z", "account": { "id": "6425b45fb2fd1e28f4e0110a" }, "delivery-status": { "attempt-no": 1, "bounce-type": "soft", "certificate-verified": true, "code": 550, "enhanced-code": "5.1.1", "first-delivery-attempt-seconds": 0.014, "message": "5.1.1 <bounce+b53c9e.27949-6qj4xaisn4k=privaterelay.appleid.com@test.x.domain.com>: unauthorized sender", "mx-host": "smtp3.privaterelay.appleid.com", "session-seconds": 1.7229999999999999, "tls": true }, "domain": { "name": "test.x.domain.com" }, "envelope": { "sender": "noreply@test.x.domain.com", "sending-ip": "111.22.101.215", "targets": "6qj4xaisn4k@privaterelay.appleid.com", "transport": "smtp" }, "event": "failed", "flags": { "is-authenticated": true, "is-delayed-bounce": false, "is-routed": false, "is-system-test": false, "is-test-mode": false }, "id": "1gtVBeZYQ0yO1SzipVP99Q", "log-level": "error", "message": { "headers": { "from": "\"Test Mail\" <noreply@test.x.domain.com>", "message-id": "20250820143058.7cac292cf03993f2@test.x.domain.com", "subject": "Test Mail", "to": "6qj4xaisn4k@privaterelay.appleid.com" }, "size": 22854 }, "primary-dkim": "s1._domainkey.test.x.domain.com", "reason": "generic", "recipient": "6qj4xaisn4k@privaterelay.appleid.com", "recipient-domain": "privaterelay.appleid.com", "recipient-provider": "Apple", "severity": "permanent", "storage": { "env": "production", "key": "BAABAgFDX5nmZ7fqxxxxxxZNzEVxPmZ8_YQ", "region": "europe-west1", "url": [ "https://storage-europe-west1.api.mailgun.net/v3/domains/test.x.domain.com/messages/BAABAgFDXxxxxxxxxxxxxxNzEVxPmZ8_YQ" ] }, "user-variables": {} }
2
0
692
2w
Local Network permission appears to be ignored after reboot, even though it was granted
We have a Java application built for macOS. On the first launch, the application prompts the user to allow local network access. We've correctly added the NSLocalNetworkUsageDescription key to the Info.plist, and the provided description appears in the system prompt. After the user grants permission, the application can successfully connect to a local server using its hostname. However, the issue arises after the system is rebooted. When the application is launched again, macOS does not prompt for local network access a second time—which is expected, as the permission was already granted. Despite this, the application is unable to connect to the local server. It appears the previously granted permission is being ignored after a reboot. A temporary workaround is to manually toggle the Local Network permission off and back on via System Settings &gt; Privacy &amp; Security, which restores connectivity—until the next reboot. This behavior is highly disruptive, both for us and for a significant number of our users. We can reproduce this on multiple systems... The issues started from macOS Sequoia 15.0 By opening the application bundle using "Show Package Contents," we can launch the application via "JavaAppLauncher" without any issues. Once started, the application is able to connect to our server over the local network. This seems to bypass the granted permissions? "JavaAppLauncher" is also been used in our Info.plist file
13
0
250
3w
Apple Watch app closes when changing photo permissions in the iPhone app.
Apple Watch app closes when changing photo permissions in the iPhone app. App A is installed simultaneously on both the paired iPhone and Apple Watch. I'm running App A on both my iPhone and Apple Watch. When I change the photo permissions on App A installed on my iPhone, App A running on my Apple Watch automatically closes. At first, I assumed App A on my iPhone was abnormally closing, causing App A on my Apple Watch to also close. However, I've determined that changing the photo permissions is the cause of the app closing. I don't think this behavior existed before WatchOS/iOS 26. Is this behavior a natural addition to WatchOS/iOS 26? If I go to the home screen while running app A on my iPhone and change its photo permissions in the Settings app, app A running on my Apple Watch automatically closes.
1
0
173
3w
App review - privacy
Hi Community, I'm a developer considering building a health & wellness iOS app and want to verify compliance with Apple's guidelines before investing development time. BACKGROUND: I want to create an app that helps users understand their health patterns by analyzing various data inputs including screen time and health metrics from HealthKit. PLANNED APPROACH: The app would use a hybrid ML strategy: NEW USERS: Get insights from a generalized ML model trained on anonymized data from existing users (solves cold-start problem) AFTER ~30 DAYS: Transition to personalized on-device model trained on the user's own data for better accuracy DATA HANDLING: Users grant DeviceActivity & HealthKit permissions explicitly Users select which app categories they want to include Optional opt-in to share anonymized data for improving the generalized model Transition to fully on-device analysis after sufficient data QUESTIONS: Are there specific restrictions on using DeviceActivity data and sending them to a backend for ML training ? Are there specific restrictions on using HealthKit data and sending them to a backend for ML training ? Any guidance would be greatly appreciated before I proceed! Thanks!
1
0
178
3w
Creating machine identifier to be used by daemon based app
I am developing a daemon-based product that needs a cryptographic, non-spoofable proof of machine identity so a remote management server can grant permissions based on the physical machine. I was thinking to create a signing key in the Secure Enclave and use a certificate signed by that key as the machine identity. The problem is that the Secure Enclave key I can create is only accessible from user context, while my product runs as a system daemon and must not rely on user processes or launchAgents. Could you please advise on the recommended Apple-supported approaches for this use case ? Specifically, Is there a supported way for a system daemon to generate and use an unremovable Secure Enclave key during phases like the pre-logon, that doesn't have non user context (only the my application which created this key/certificate will have permission to use/delete it) If Secure Enclave access from a daemon is not supported, what Apple-recommended alternatives exist for providing a hardware-backed machine identity for system daemons? I'd rather avoid using system keychain, as its contents may be removed or used by root privileged users. The ideal solution would be that each Apple product, would come out with a non removable signing certificate, that represent the machine itself (lets say that the cetificate name use to represent the machine ID), and can be validated by verify that the root signer is "Apple Root CA"
3
0
557
3w
Full disk access for CLI app
It seems it is not possible to give a CLI app (non .app bundle) full disk access in macOS 26.1. This seems like a bug and if not that is a breaking change. Anybody seeing the same problem? Our application needs full disk access for a service running as a LaunchDaemon. The binary is located in a /Library subfolder.
2
1
481
Nov ’25
On File System Permissions
Modern versions of macOS use a file system permission model that’s far more complex than the traditional BSD rwx model, and this post is my attempt at explaining that model. If you have a question about this, post it here on DevForums. Put your thread in the App & System Services > Core OS topic area and tag it with Files and Storage. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" On File System Permissions Modern versions of macOS have five different file system permission mechanisms: Traditional BSD permissions Access control lists (ACLs) App Sandbox Mandatory access control (MAC) Endpoint Security (ES) The first two were introduced a long time ago and rarely trip folks up. The second two are newer, more complex, and specific to macOS, and thus are the source of some confusion. Finally, Endpoint Security allows third-party developers to deny file system operations based on their own criteria. This post offers explanations and advice about all of these mechanisms. Error Codes App Sandbox and the mandatory access control system are both implemented using macOS’s sandboxing infrastructure. When a file system operation fails, check the error to see whether it was blocked by this sandboxing infrastructure. If an operation was blocked by BSD permissions or ACLs, it fails with EACCES (Permission denied, 13). If it was blocked by something else, it’ll fail with EPERM (Operation not permitted, 1). If you’re using Foundation’s FileManager, these error are both reported as Foundation errors, for example, the NSFileReadNoPermissionError error. To recover the underlying error, get the NSUnderlyingErrorKey property from the info dictionary. App Sandbox File system access within the App Sandbox is controlled by two factors. The first is the entitlements on the main executable. There are three relevant groups of entitlements: The com.apple.security.app-sandbox entitlement enables the App Sandbox. This denies access to all file system locations except those on a built-in allowlist (things like /System) or within the app’s containers. The various “standard location” entitlements extend the sandbox to include their corresponding locations. The various “file access temporary exceptions” entitlements extend the sandbox to include the items listed in the entitlement. Collectively this is known as your static sandbox. The second factor is dynamic sandbox extensions. The system issues these extensions to your sandbox based on user behaviour. For example, if the user selects a file in the open panel, the system issues a sandbox extension to your process so that it can access that file. The type of extension is determined by the main executable’s entitlements: com.apple.security.files.user-selected.read-only results in an extension that grants read-only access. com.apple.security.files.user-selected.read-write results in an extension that grants read/write access. Note There’s currently no way to get a dynamic sandbox extension that grants executable access. For all the gory details, see this post. These dynamic sandbox extensions are tied to your process; they go away when your process terminates. To maintain persistent access to an item, use a security-scoped bookmark. See Accessing files from the macOS App Sandbox. To pass access between processes, use an implicit security scoped bookmark, that is, a bookmark that was created without an explicit security scope (no .withSecurityScope flag) and without disabling the implicit security scope (no .withoutImplicitSecurityScope flag)). If you have access to a directory — regardless of whether that’s via an entitlement or a dynamic sandbox extension — then, in general, you have access to all items in the hierarchy rooted at that directory. This does not overrule the MAC protection discussed below. For example, if the user grants you access to ~/Library, that does not give you access to ~/Library/Mail because the latter is protected by MAC. Finally, the discussion above is focused on a new sandbox, the thing you get when you launch a sandboxed app from the Finder. If a sandboxed process starts a child process, that child process inherits its sandbox from its parent. For information on what happens in that case, see the Note box in Enabling App Sandbox Inheritance. IMPORTANT The child process inherits its parent process’s sandbox regardless of whether it has the com.apple.security.inherit entitlement. That entitlement exists primarily to act as a marker for App Review. App Review requires that all main executables have the com.apple.security.app-sandbox entitlement, and that entitlements starts a new sandbox by default. Thus, any helper tool inside your app needs the com.apple.security.inherit entitlement to trigger inheritance. However, if you’re not shipping on the Mac App Store you can leave off both of these entitlement and the helper process will inherit its parent’s sandbox just fine. The same applies if you run a built-in executable, like /bin/sh, as a child process. When the App Sandbox blocks something, it might generates a sandbox violation report. For information on how to view these reports, see Discovering and diagnosing App Sandbox violations. To learn more about the App Sandbox, see the various links in App Sandbox Resources. For information about how to embed a helper tool in a sandboxed app, see Embedding a Command-Line Tool in a Sandboxed App. Mandatory Access Control Mandatory access control (MAC) has been a feature of macOS for many releases, but it’s become a lot more prominent since macOS 10.14. There are many flavours of MAC but the ones you’re most likely to encounter are: Full Disk Access (macOS 10.14 and later) Files and Folders (macOS 10.15 and later) App bundle protection (macOS 13 and later) App container protection (macOS 14 and later) App group container protection (macOS 15 and later) Data Vaults (see below) and other internal techniques used by various macOS subsystems Mandatory access control, as the name suggests, is mandatory; it’s not an opt-in like the App Sandbox. Rather, all processes on the system, including those running as root, as subject to MAC. Data Vaults are not a third-party developer opportunity. See this post if you’re curious. In the Full Disk Access and Files and Folders cases, users grant a program a MAC privilege using System Settings > Privacy & Security. Some MAC privileges are per user (Files and Folders) and some are system wide (Full Disk Access). If you’re not sure, run this simple test: On a Mac with two users, log in as user A and enable the MAC privilege for a program. Now log in as user B. Does the program have the privilege? If a process tries to access an item restricted by MAC, the system may prompt the user to grant it access there and then. For example, if an app tries to access the desktop, you’ll see an alert like this: “AAA” would like to access files in your Desktop folder. [Don’t Allow] [OK] To customise this message, set Files and Folders properties in your Info.plist. This system only displays this alert once. It remembers the user’s initial choice and returns the same result thereafter. This relies on your code having a stable code signing identity. If your code is unsigned, or signed ad hoc (Signed to Run Locally in Xcode parlance), the system can’t tell that version N+1 of your code is the same as version N, and thus you’ll encounter excessive prompts. Note For information about how that works, see TN3127 Inside Code Signing: Requirements. The Files and Folders prompts only show up if the process is running in a GUI login session. If not, the operation is allowed or denied based on existing information. If there’s no existing information, the operation is denied by default. For more information about app and app group container protection, see the links in Trusted Execution Resources. For more information about app groups in general, see App Groups: macOS vs iOS: Working Towards Harmony On managed systems the site admin can use the com.apple.TCC.configuration-profile-policy payload to assign MAC privileges. For testing purposes you can reset parts of TCC using the tccutil command-line tool. For general information about that tool, see its man page. For a list of TCC service names, see the posts on this thread. Note TCC stands for transparency, consent, and control. It’s the subsystem within macOS that manages most of the privileges visible in System Settings > Privacy & Security. TCC has no API surface, but you see its name in various places, including the above-mentioned configuration profile payload and command-line tool, and the name of its accompanying daemon, tccd. While tccutil is an easy way to do basic TCC testing, the most reliable way to test TCC is in a VM, restoring to a fresh snapshot between each test. If you want to try this out, crib ideas from Testing a Notarised Product. The MAC privilege mechanism is heavily dependent on the concept of responsible code. For example, if an app contains a helper tool and the helper tool triggers a MAC prompt, we want: The app’s name and usage description to appear in the alert. The user’s decision to be recorded for the whole app, not that specific helper tool. That decision to show up in System Settings under the app’s name. For this to work the system must be able to tell that the app is the responsible code for the helper tool. The system has various heuristics to determine this and it works reasonably well in most cases. However, it’s possible to break this link. I haven’t fully research this but my experience is that this most often breaks when the child process does something ‘odd’ to break the link, such as trying to daemonise itself. If you’re building a launchd daemon or agent and you find that it’s not correctly attributed to your app, add the AssociatedBundleIdentifiers property to your launchd property list. See the launchd.plist man page for the details. Scripting MAC presents some serious challenges for scripting because scripts are run by interpreters and the system can’t distinguish file system operations done by the interpreter from those done by the script. For example, if you have a script that needs to manipulate files on your desktop, you wouldn’t want to give the interpreter that privilege because then any script could do that. The easiest solution to this problem is to package your script as a standalone program that MAC can use for its tracking. This may be easy or hard depending on the specific scripting environment. For example, AppleScript makes it easy to export a script as a signed app, but that’s not true for shell scripts. TCC and Main Executables TCC expects its bundled clients — apps, app extensions, and so on — to use a native main executable. That is, it expects the CFBundleExecutable property to be the name of a Mach-O executable. If your product uses a script as its main executable, you’re likely to encounter TCC problems. To resolve these, switch to using a Mach-O executable. For an example of how you might do that, see this post. Endpoint Security Endpoint Security (ES) is a general mechanism for third-party products to enforce custom security policies on the Mac. An ES client asks ES to send it events when specific security-relevant operations occur. These events can be notifications or authorisations. In the case of authorisation events, the ES client must either allow or deny the operation. As you might imagine, the set of security-relevant operations includes file system operations. For example, when you open a file using the open system call, ES delivers the ES_EVENT_TYPE_AUTH_OPEN event to any interested ES clients. If one of those ES client denies the operation, the open system call fails with EPERM. For more information about ES, see the Endpoint Security framework documentation. Revision History 2025-11-04 Added a discussion of Endpoint Security. Made numerous minor editorial changes. 2024-11-08 Added info about app group container protection. Clarified that Data Vaults are just one example of the techniques used internally by macOS. Made other editorial changes. 2023-06-13 Replaced two obsolete links with links to shiny new official documentation: Accessing files from the macOS App Sandbox and Discovering and diagnosing App Sandbox violations. Added a short discussion of app container protection and a link to WWDC 2023 Session 10053 What’s new in privacy. 2023-04-07 Added a link to my post about executable permissions. Fixed a broken link. 2023-02-10 In TCC and Main Executables, added a link to my native trampoline code. Introduced the concept of an implicit security scoped bookmark. Introduced AssociatedBundleIdentifiers. Made other minor editorial changes. 2022-04-26 Added an explanation of the TCC initialism. Added a link to Viewing Sandbox Violation Reports.  Added the TCC and Main Executables section. Made significant editorial changes. 2022-01-10 Added a discussion of the file system hierarchy. 2021-04-26 First posted.
0
0
11k
Nov ’25