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

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"

Hi All, We are facing App Rejection from Apple due to this - Guidelines 5.1.1(i) - Legal - Privacy - Data Collection and 5.1.2(i) - Legal - Privacy - Data Use Issue Description The app appears to share the user’s personal data with a third-party AI service but the app does not clearly explain what data is sent and identify who the data is sent to before sharing the data. Apps may only use, transmit, or share personal data after they meet all of the following requirements: Disclose what data will be sent Specify who the data is sent to Obtain the user’s permission before sending data Identify in the privacy policy what data the app collects, how it collects that data, all uses of that data, and confirm any third party the app shares data with provides the same or equal protection Next Steps If the app sends user data to a third-party AI service, revise the app to explain what data is sent and identify who the data is sent to before sharing personal data with a third-party AI service. If it does not already, the app’s privacy policy must also identify what data the app collects, how it collects that data, and all uses of that data, including if it is shared with a third-party AI service. If the app does not send user data to a third-party AI service or does not include a third-party AI service, reply to this rejection to confirm and add this information to the App Review Information section of App Store Connect. We have updated on privacy policy and ATT as well as Nutrition Labels and we have added a consent screen for explicitly taking the user consent for AI Services. However we are still seeing the rejection. Has some else faced a similar issue and what are the steps they followed for this.

Hi! We are facing App Rejection from Apple due to this <> Guidelines 5.1.1(i) - Legal - Privacy - Data Collection and 5.1.2(i) - Legal - Privacy - Data Use Issue Description Issue Description The app appears to share the user’s personal data with a third-party AI service but the app does not clearly explain what data is sent, identify who the data is sent to, and ask the user’s permission before sharing the data. Apps may only use, transmit, or share personal data after they meet all of the following requirements: Obtain the user’s permission before sending data Next Steps If the app sends user data to a third-party AI service, revise the app to ask the user’s permission before sharing personal data with a third-party AI service. If it does not already, the app’s privacy policy must also identify what data the app collects, how it collects that data, and all uses of that data, including if it is shared with a third-party AI service. If the app does not send user data to a third-party AI service or does not include a third-party AI service, reply to this rejection to confirm and add this information to the App Review Information section of App Store Connect. <> We already updated our privacy policy. The ATT implementation was done. We even added a consent screen emphasizing that we need the user's consent to share some information with third-party AI services. And after all that, we are still seeing the rejection. Has someone else faced a similar issue? I saw someone here in the forum having almost the same problem, but there wasn't a solution. What are the next steps?

I'm using a Mac Studio in a homelab context and use Homebrew to manage the installed services. The services include things that access the local network, for example Prometheus which monitors some other servers, a reverse proxy which fronts other web services on the network, and a DNS server which can use another as upstream. Local Network Access permissions make it impossible to reliably perform unattended updates of services because an updated binary requires a GUI login to grant local network permissions (again). I use brew services to manage the services as launchd agents, i.e. they run in a non-root GUI context. I know that I can also use sudo brew services which instead installs the services as launchd daemons, but running services as root has negative security implication and generally doesn't look like a good idea to me. If only there was a way to disable local network access checks altogether…

Hi everyone, I’m building a messaging app because I’ve seen firsthand how much support and safety is overlooked for this generation online. My goal is to give teens a foundation of security, privacy, and mental health support, while still letting them connect freely. I want to leverage Apple’s platform to help this mission reach the right audience and have real impact. The app already includes: Community chat with message blurring for sensitive or harmful words. Anti-shoulder surfing tools to protect private conversations. Shake dashboard for quick access to emergency services. In-chat locks with ML detection for grooming patterns, offering resources while respecting privacy. Full user control: messages can be deleted anytime, blocking is permanent, and accounts can’t bypass restrictions on the same device. User consent-first design: every feature is opt-in and controlled by the user. At this point, I’m looking for guidance on how to position and prepare the app to reach Apple editorial or headline attention — what steps or best practices help mission-driven apps get noticed for features, WWDC spotlights, or App Store promotion? My focus isn’t just on improving the app, but on launch strategy and visibility in a way that amplifies the mission responsibly. If it’s helpful, I can share a TestFlight build or walkthrough to illustrate the app in action. Thank you for any insights or advice — I want to make sure this mission has the best chance to reach and support the generation it’s built for.

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.

I've recently updated one of our CI mac mini's to Sequoia in preparation for the transition to Tahoe later this year. Most things seemed to work just fine, however I see this dialog whenever the UI Tests try to run. This application BoostBrowerUITest-Runner is auto-generated by Xcode to launch your application and then run your UI Tests. We do not have any control over it, which is why this is most surprising. I've checked the codesigning identity with codesign -d -vvvv as well as looked at it's Info.plist and indeed the usage descriptions for everything are present (again, this is autogenerated, so I'm not surprised, but just wanted to confirm the string from the dialog was coming from this app) &lt;?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?&gt; &lt;!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd"&gt; &lt;plist version="1.0"&gt; &lt;dict&gt; &lt;key&gt;BuildMachineOSBuild&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;22A380021&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundleAllowMixedLocalizations&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundleDevelopmentRegion&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;en&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundleExecutable&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;BoostBrowserUITests-Runner&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundleIdentifier&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;company.thebrowser.Browser2UITests.xctrunner&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundleInfoDictionaryVersion&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;6.0&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundleName&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;BoostBrowserUITests-Runner&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundlePackageType&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;APPL&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundleShortVersionString&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;1.0&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundleSignature&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;????&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundleSupportedPlatforms&lt;/key&gt; &lt;array&gt; &lt;string&gt;MacOSX&lt;/string&gt; &lt;/array&gt; &lt;key&gt;CFBundleVersion&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;1&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;DTCompiler&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;com.apple.compilers.llvm.clang.1_0&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;DTPlatformBuild&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;24A324&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;DTPlatformName&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;macosx&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;DTPlatformVersion&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;15.0&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;DTSDKBuild&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;24A324&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;DTSDKName&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;macosx15.0.internal&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;DTXcode&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;1620&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;DTXcodeBuild&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;16C5031c&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;LSBackgroundOnly&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;LSMinimumSystemVersion&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;13.0&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSAppTransportSecurity&lt;/key&gt; &lt;dict&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSAllowsArbitraryLoads&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;/dict&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSAppleEventsUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSBluetoothAlwaysUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSCalendarsUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSCameraUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSContactsUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSDesktopFolderUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSDocumentsFolderUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSDownloadsFolderUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSFileProviderDomainUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSFileProviderPresenceUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSLocalNetworkUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSLocationUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSMicrophoneUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSMotionUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSNetworkVolumesUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSPhotoLibraryUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSRemindersUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSRemovableVolumesUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSSpeechRecognitionUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSSystemAdministrationUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;NSSystemExtensionUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;key&gt;OSBundleUsageDescription&lt;/key&gt; &lt;string&gt;Access is necessary for automated testing.&lt;/string&gt; &lt;/dict&gt; &lt;/plist&gt; Additionally, spctl --assess --type execute BoostBrowserUITests-Runner.app return an exit code of 0 so I assume that means it can launch just fine, and applications are allowed to be run from "anywhere" in System Settings. I've found the XCUIProtectedResource.localNetwork value, but it seems to only be accessible on iOS for some reason (FB17829325). I'm trying to figure out why this is happening on this machine so I can either fix our code or fix the machine. I have an Apple script that will allow it, but it's fiddly and I'd prefer to fix this the correct way either with the machine or with fixing our testing code.

I'm building a macOS app that registers itself for HTTP(S) url handling and would like it to participate in the ASWebAuthenticationSession fow. I did: update the plist to register as a handler for URL shemes (http, https, file) use NSWorkspace setDefaultApplication API to set this app as a default handler for urls in question wrote custom ASWebAuthenticationSessionWebBrowserSessionHandling implementation and set it as SessionManager's sessionHandler I launched this app from Xcode, then I triggered authentication flow from a third-party app. When the sign in flow is initiated, I can see that my app is activeated (willBecomeActive and didBecomeActive callbacks are both called), but there is no call for sessionHandler's begin() method. With some additional debugging I see that my app receives an apple event when the flow is started: {sfri,auth target=SafariLaunchAgent {qntp=90/$627......},aapd=TRUE If I switch system default browser back to Safari and then start the login flow, it correctly displays a sign in web page. What do I miss? PS. I'm on Tahoe 26.2

How to legally and compliantly upload users' fitness and health data to our own server—while adhering to Apple's strict privacy policies—for analysis by our AI large model to provide personalized feedback and recommendations to users.

Hi, Our app (Tenkobo) received a rejection notice after review due to the fact that we use Gemini AI since 3 builds ago. Since then, we have been improving the disclosure of the data we collect, explicitly stating all the data, introducing a new feature that checks granular consent and syncs consent state for the user to the backend, and controls for whether to send to the Gemini API service for that feature depending on consent state for the user. Moreover, this feature is a premium add-on to a module that already does most things locally on the device and sends to our cloud infrastructure to allow storage and sync when users use multiple devices. It is a multi-platform app. However, despite every improvement, we keep getting the same Rejection reason that "The issues we identified still need your attention. I have asked for help or even that the rejection reason be more specific, but nothing. I have send pictures, and in this last rejection about 8 hours ago, I had to reply with a video showing that what they are asking for is already there. Why does the system work like this? It is frustrating, especially if a development team needs to be guessing how much is too much. We feel we are now close to removing the feature completely out of frustration, and it is very useful feature for our users based on the feedback we received from the android users (the android app has been live since about 6 weeks ago.) Please, what else can we do? We have requested a review meeting with App Review, the entire product plans are now on the verge of being irredeemably disrupted, and the company could go bankrupt just because our reviewer does not deem it fit to tell us exactly what they are expecting to see. Anyone with experience in this area should kindly provide some advise on what to do now. Thank you.

I have a desktop application developed in SwiftUI that shows property locations on the map. That's NOT the main feature. IF you give the application permission to access your location, the blue dot will appear on the map. If you don't, the blue user dot won't appear. That's the only difference with location services. In other words, the application has no use of user's current position beyond showing it on the map. Since it's just the matter of showing or not showing the blue dot on the map, the application doesn't really need to use the location service. Anyway, the reviewer is talking about something else by rejecting the application in two aspects. Guideline 5.1.1 - Legal - Privacy - Data Collection and Storage Guideline 5.1.5 - Legal - Privacy - Location Services As I said earlier, the application only wants to show the blue dot on the map so that you can see your property locations relative to your current location. In code, it's something like the following. Map(position: $propertyViewModel.mapPosition) { ForEach(propertyViewModel.properties) { property in Annotation("", coordinate: CLLocationCoordinate2D(latitude: property.lat, longitude: property.lon)) { ... } } UserAnnotation() } So I'm hit with two rejection reasons with this one line. UserAnnotation() And the reviewer is talking about something like the app is not functional when Location Services are disabled. To resolve this issue, please revise the app so that the app is fully functional without requiring the user to enable Location Services. Well, I can remove the UserAnnotation() line if I want to put this application through the review process. Nothing will become dysfunctional, though, if you decide to reject permission request. So would you remove it or would you play along with this reviewer if you were me? It's been three or four days since rejection. As you can imagine, the reviewer doesn't bother to answer as to What are the exact coordinates that the application has allegedly collected What won't work as a result of location permission request refusal. This isn't the first time I get my app rejected. I've probably had 150 to 200 of them rejected in the past 15 years. And just because a reviewer rejects your app for a bizarre reason, would you give in? Remove this feature and that feature because the reviewer is incompetent such that he or she makes his or her decision based on imagination? What do you think?

Our app (Tenkobo) received a rejection notice after review due to the fact that we use Gemini AI since 3 builds ago. Since then, we have been improving the disclosure of the data we collect, explicitly stating all the data, introducing a new feature that checks granular consent and syncs consent state for the user to the backend, and controls for whether to send to the Gemini API service for that feature depending on consent state for the user. Moreover, this feature is a premium add-on to a module that already does most things locally on the device and sends to our cloud infrastructure to allow storage and sync when users use multiple devices. It is a multi-platform app. However, despite every improvement, we keep getting the same Rejection reason that " ... Review Device: iPad Air 11-inch (M3) ... The issues we previously identified still need your attention. Guidelines 5.1.1(i) - Legal - Privacy - Data Collection and 5.1.2(i) - Legal - Privacy - Data Use The app appears to share the user’s personal data with a third-party AI service but the app does not clearly explain what data is sent, identify who the data is sent to, and ask the user’s permission before sharing the data. Apps may only use, transmit, or share personal data after they meet all of the following requirements: Disclose what data will be sent Specify who the data is sent to Obtain the user’s permission before sending data Identify in the privacy policy what data the app collects, how it collects that data, all uses of that data, and confirm any third party the app shares data with provides the same or equal protection Next Steps Revise the app to explain what data is sent, identify who the data is sent to, and ask the user’s permission before sharing personal data with a third-party AI service. If it does not already, the app’s privacy policy must also identify what data the app collects, how it collects that data, and all uses of that data, including if it is shared with a third-party AI service. " I have asked for help or even that the rejection reason be more specific, but nothing. I have send pictures, and in this last rejection about 8 hours ago, I had to reply with a video showing that what they are asking for is already there. Please, what else can we do? We have requested a review meeting with App Review, the entire product plans are now on the verge of being irredeemably disrupted, and the company could go bankrupt just because our reviewer does not deem it fit to tell us exactly what they are expecting to see. Anyone with experience in this area should kindly provide some advise on what to do now. Thank you.

I have a desktop application that shows some real estate properties chosen by the user. The application shows those GPP locations on the map. The SwiftUI code is something like the following. import SwiftUI import MapKit struct ContentView: View { var body: some View ZStack { mapView } } private var mapView: some View { Map(position: $propertyViewModel.mapPosition) { ForEach(propertyViewModel.properties) { property in Annotation("", coordinate: CLLocationCoordinate2D(latitude: property.lat, longitude: property.lon)) { Button { } label: { VStack { Image(systemName: "house.circle.fill") .resizable() .scaledToFit() .frame(width: 48) .foregroundStyle(colorScheme == .light ? .white : .black) ... } } .buttonStyle(.borderless) } } UserAnnotation() } .mapControls { MapUserLocationButton() } .mapControlVisibility(.visible) .onAppear { CLLocationManager().requestWhenInUseAuthorization() } } } The application only wants to use the CLLocationManager class so that it can show those locations on the map relative to your current GPS position. And I'm hit with two review rejections. Guideline 5.1.1 - Legal - Privacy - Data Collection and Storage Issue Description One or more purpose strings in the app do not sufficiently explain the use of protected resources. Purpose strings must clearly and completely describe the app's use of data and, in most cases, provide an example of how the data will be used. Guideline 5.1.5 - Legal - Privacy - Location Services The app uses location data for features that are not relevant to a user's location. Specifically, the app is not functional when Location Services are disabled. So I wonder if the application is even required to have 'NSLocationWhenInUseUsageDescription' and/or 'NSLocationUsageDescription'? just in order to show user's current location so that they can see property locations relative to it? The exact location privacy statement is the following. The application needs your permission in accessing your current location so that it will appear on the map

We are having an issue with the Local Network permission pop-up not getting triggered for our apps that need to communicate with devices via local network interfaces/addresses. As we understand, apps using UDP should trigger this, causing macOS to prompt for access, or, if denied, fail to connect. However, we are facing issues with macOS not prompting this popup at all. Here are important and related points: Our application is packaged as a .app package and distributed independently (not on the App Store). The application controls hardware that we manufacture. In order to find the hardware on the network, we send a UDP broadcast with a message for our hardware on the local network, and the hardware responds with a message back. However, the popup (to ask for permission) never shows up. The application is not able to find the hardware device. It is interesting to note that data is still sent out to the network (without the popup) but we receive back the wrong data. The behaviour is consistent macOS Sequoia (and above) with both Apple And Intel silicon. Workarounds that have been tried: Manual Authorization: One solution suggested in various blogs was to go to "Settings → Privacy and Security-> Local network", find your application and grant access. However, the application never shows up in the list here. Firewall: No difference is seen in behaviour with firewall being ON OR OFF. Setting NSLocalNetworkUsageDescription: We have also tried setting the Info.plist adding the NSLocalNetworkUsageDescription with a meaningful string and updating the NSBonjourServices. Running Via terminal (WORKS): Running the application via terminal sees no issues. The application runs correctly and is able to send UDP and receive correct data (and find the devices on the network). But this is not an appropriate solution. How can we get this bug/issue fixed in macOS Sequoia (and above)? Are there any other solutions/workarounds that we can try on our end?

We're trying to implement Cross-domain session check for SSO by making CORS request. is Intelligent Tracking Prevention blocks all cookies in CORS requests? I saw all cookies are blocked in CORS requests. We are not able to check the auth session in source domain. Are there anyway to bypass this without user interaction? benefitier.com -> source.com

I just spend the morning debugging LocationButton and the associated CLLocationManagerDelegate only to realise that it works perfectly in iOS 18.5 but no longer works for me in iOS 26.0, 26.2 or 26.2.1 (the latter on-device). It does work when I run my app on macOS 26.2 (Designed for iPad). Is there a change in behaviour or requirements on iOS I am missing? On iOS 18.5 I observe that the authorisation status changes from .notDetermined to .authorizedWhenInUse after the LocationButton has been tapped and my delegate is able to obtain the location through locationManager(_ , didUpdateLocations:). On iOS 26.x the authorisation status remains .notDetermined and my delegate receives locationManager(_:didFailWithError:) with error code .denied. Setting NSLocationWhenInUseUsageDescription in my Info.plistdid not help. Just in case ;) FB21798098 (SwiftUI LocationButton fails to acquire authorization on iOS 26)

Hello App Review Team, I am writing to seek clarification regarding repeated review feedback received via App Store Connect (Resolution Center) for my app: App Name: Animal Sounds & Insects 90+ App ID: 6741077718 Team ID: 24MTF8NJ6Q Over the past two weeks, this app update has remained in review with multiple rejections referencing similar concerns, despite detailed responses and clarifications already provided in the Resolution Center. Unfortunately, I have not received follow-up responses or specific guidance there, which has prevented me from releasing even a minor update. To ensure clarity and avoid further delays, I am summarizing the key points below. Parental Gate (Guideline 1.3 – Kids Category) The review feedback indicates that the app may include links, commerce, or ad interactions without parental permission. I would like to clarify that the app implements a mandatory, non-dismissible parental gate, which is required before: Opening any external links Engaging in any form of commerce, including in-app purchases Interacting with any advertisements This parental gate cannot be bypassed or disabled and is triggered consistently across all applicable user flows. No child user can access links, purchases, or ad interactions without successfully completing the parental gate. If there is a specific screen, flow, or scenario where this behavior was interpreted differently during review, I would greatly appreciate precise details so I can verify and address it immediately. Advertising Experience (Guideline 4.0 – Design) The review also notes that users are required to view advertisements prior to using the app. I would like to clarify that the app does not require users to view advertisements before accessing its core functionality. Specifically: There are no forced ads No launch or entry interstitials No ads that block or gate access to the app’s main features Advertising within the app is passive and non-intrusive. This setup has been live for over one year, and no recent changes were introduced that would alter this behavior. Request for Guidance I fully respect and support the App Review Guidelines and am committed to complying with them. Given the repeated rejections and lack of actionable feedback so far, I kindly request: Clear and specific guidance on the exact screen, flow, or behavior being flagged Confirmation on whether the current parental gate implementation is being detected correctly during review My goal is to resolve any remaining concerns as quickly and accurately as possible so the review process can move forward. Thank you very much for your time and support. I appreciate the work of the App Review team and look forward to your guidance. Kind regards, Jiyan Aslan Developer, Animal Sounds & Insects 90+

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

My application needs local network access. When it is started for the first time, the user gets a prompt to enable local network access (as expected). The application is then shown as enabled in Privacy & Security / Local Network and local network access is working. If macOS is then shutdown and restarted, local network access is blocked for the application even though it is still shown as enabled in Privacy & Security / Local Network. Local network access can be restored either by toggling permission off and on in Privacy & Security / Local Network or by disabling and enabling Wi-Fi. This behaviour is consistent on Sequoia 15.1. It happens sometimes on 15.0 and 15.0.1 but not every time. Is my application doing something wrong or is this a Sequoia issue? If it is a Sequoia issue, is there some change I can make to my application to work around it?

https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=j9zukcr6 starting from Jan 2026 there is change in requirements for account notifications for Sign in with Apple. Does this apply only to developers based in South Korea or all apps which are avai via the korean App Store?

We have a very strange issue that I am trying to solve or find the best practice for. We have a SwiftUI View that uses the Camera to preview. So as suggested in Apples Docs we check authorisation status and then if it's not determined we request authorisation. We also have the privacy entry in the info.plist case .notDetermined: AVCaptureDevice.requestAccess(for: .video) { accessStatusAuthorised in if !accessStatusAuthorised { self.cameraStatus = .notAuthorised } else { self.isAuthorized = true self.cameraStatus = .authorised self.startCameraSession(cameraPosition: cameraPosition) } } case .restricted: cameraStatus = .notAuthorised isAuthorized = false case .denied: cameraStatus = .notAuthorised isAuthorized = false case .authorized: cameraStatus = .authorised isAuthorized = true startCameraSession(cameraPosition: cameraPosition) break @unknown default: isAuthorized = true cameraStatus = .notAuthorised } However when we call this code it freezes the Camera feed, even when allow has been tapped. However and this is the confusing part. If we do not call the code above, we still get the permission for camera access pop up and the camera works fine after allowing. What im concerned about is changing the code to do this and its a possible apple bug that gets fixed and hey then none of the Apps allow the camera function. I cannot see any where that the process has changed for iOS 26 / Xcode 26. Can anyone shed any light on this or had similar experience ?