Hi, My app was recently rejected with the following message: The app references non-public symbols in App: _BIO_s_socket, _OPENSSL_cleanse The confusing part is that these symbols do not come from iOS system libraries. They are defined inside a third-party static library (gRPC/OpenSSL) that my app links. I am not calling any Apple private API, only linking against the third-party code where those symbols are defined. Questions: Why does App Review treat these symbols as “non-public” when they are provided by my own bundled third-party library, not by the system? What is Apple’s recommended approach in this situation — should I rebuild the third-party library with symbol renaming / hidden visibility, or is there another supported method? It would help to understand the official reasoning here, because it seems strange that a vendor-namespaced or self-built OpenSSL would cause a rejection even though I am not using Apple’s internal/private APIs. Thanks for any clarification.

We are facing an issue with Keychain sharing across our apps after our Team ID was updated. Below are the steps we have already tried and the current observations: Steps we have performed so far: After our Team ID changed, we opened and re-saved all the provisioning profiles. We created a Keychain Access Group: xxxx.net.soti.mobicontrol (net.soti.mobicontrol is one bundle id of one of the app) and added it to the entitlements of all related apps. We are saving and reading certificates using this access group only. Below is a sample code snippet we are using for the query: [genericPasswordQuery setObject:(id)kSecClassGenericPassword forKey:(id)kSecClass]; [genericPasswordQuery setObject:identifier forKey:(id)kSecAttrGeneric]; [genericPasswordQuery setObject:accessGroup forKey:(id)kSecAttrAccessGroup]; [genericPasswordQuery setObject:(id)kSecMatchLimitOne forKey:(id)kSecMatchLimit]; [genericPasswordQuery setObject:(id)kCFBooleanTrue forKey:(id)kSecReturnAttributes]; Issues we are facing: Keychain items are not being shared consistently across apps. We receive different errors at different times: Sometimes errSecDuplicateItem (-25299), even when there is no item in the Keychain. Sometimes it works in a debug build but fails in Ad Hoc / TestFlight builds. The behavior is inconsistent and unpredictable. Expectation / Clarification Needed from Apple: Are we missing any additional configuration steps after the Team ID update? Is there a known issue with Keychain Access Groups not working correctly in certain build types (Debug vs AdHoc/TestFlight)? Guidance on why we are intermittently getting -25299 and how to properly reset/re-add items in the Keychain. Any additional entitlement / provisioning profile configuration that we should double-check. Request you to please raise a support ticket with Apple Developer Technical Support including the above details, so that we can get guidance on the correct setup and resolve this issue.

Hi everyone, I'm encountering a behaviour related to Secure Event Input on macOS and wanted to understand if it's expected or if there's a recommended approach to handle it. Scenario: App A enables secure input using EnableSecureEventInput(). While secure input is active, App A launches App B using NSWorkspace or similar. App B launches successfully, but it does not receive foreground focus — it starts in the background. The system retains focus on App A, seemingly to preserve the secure input session. Observed Behavior: From what I understand, macOS prevents app switching during Secure Event Input to avoid accidental or malicious focus stealing (e.g., to prevent UI spoofing during password entry). So: Input focus remains locked to App A. App B runs but cannot become frontmost unless the secure input session ends or App B is brought to the frontmost by manual intervention or by running a terminal script. This is consistent with system security behaviour, but it presents a challenge when App A needs to launch and hand off control to another app. Questions: Is this behaviour officially documented anywhere? Is there a recommended pattern for safely transferring focus to another app while Secure Event Input is active? Would calling DisableSecureEventInput() just before launching App B be the appropriate (and safe) solution? Or is there a better way to defer the transition? Thanks in advance for any clarification or advice.

Note: in this post I discuss sceneDidEnterBackground/WillResignActive but I assume any guidance provided would also apply to the now deprecated applicationDidEnterBackground/applicationWillResignActive and SwiftUI's ScenePhase (please call out if that's not the case!). A common pattern for applications with sensitive user data (banking, health, private journals, etc.) is to obsurce content in the app switcher. Different apps appear to implement this in two common patterns. Either immediately upon becoming inactive (near immediately upon moving to task switcher) or only upon becoming backgrounded (not until you've gone to another app or back to the home screen). I’d like to make sure we’re aligned with Apple’s intended best practices and am wondering if an anti-pattern of using sceneWillResignActive(_:) may be becoming popularized and has minor user experience inconviences (jarring transitions to the App Switcher/Control Center/Notification Center and when the system presents alerts.) Our applications current implementation uses sceneDidEnterBackground(_:) to obscure sensitive elements instead of sceneWillResignActive(_:), based on the recomendations from tech note QA1838 and the documentation in sceneDidEnterBackground(_:) ... Shortly after this method [sceneWillEnterBackground] returns, UIKit takes a snapshot of your scene’s interface for display in the app switcher. Make sure your interface doesn’t contain sensitive user information. Both QA1838 and the sceneDidEnterBackground documentation seem to indicate backgrounding is the appropriate event to respond to for this pattern but I am wondering if "to display in the app switcher" may be causing confusion since your app can also display in the app switcher upon becoming inactive and if some guidance could be added to sceneWillResignActive that it is not nesscary to obsure content during this state (if that is true). In our testing, apps seems to continue to play any in-progress animations when entering the app switcher from the application (inactive state), suggesting no snapshot capture. We also discovered that it appears sceneWillResignActive not always be called (it usually is) but occasionally you can swipe into the app switcher without it being called but that sceneDidEnterBackground is triggered more consistently. It appears the Wallet app behaves as I'd expect with sceneDidEnterBackground on card details screens as well (ejecting you to the card preview if you switch apps) but will keep you on the card details screen upon becoming inactive. Questions: Is sceneDidEnterBackground(_:) still Apple’s recommended place to obscure sensitive content, or should apps handle this earlier (e.g. on inactive)? Would it actually be recommended against using sceneWillResignActive active given it seems to not be gauranteed to be called? Ask: Provide an updated version of QA1838 to solidfy the extrapolation of applicationDidEnterBackground -> sceneDidEnterBackground Consider adding explicit guidance to sceneWillResignActive documentation

To validate incoming XPC connections from other executables, we perform SecCode checks for the dynamic signature of the connection (kSecCSDynamicInformation). Reading the setCodeSigningRequirement(_:) function documentation it appears to perform only static signing checks, is that so? If we use setCodeSigningRequirement(:) function in our listener(:, shouldAcceptNewConnection:) do we still need to check the dynamic information to be properly secure?

Using the SDK, I've printed out some log messages when I enter the wrong password: 2025-08-20 15:58:14.086 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] invoke 2025-08-20 15:58:14.086 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] general: 2025-08-20 15:58:14.086 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] progname: 'SecurityAgentHelper-arm64' 2025-08-20 15:58:14.086 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] OS version: 'Version 15.5 (Build 24F74)' 2025-08-20 15:58:14.086 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] pid: '818' 2025-08-20 15:58:14.086 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] ppid: '1' 2025-08-20 15:58:14.086 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] euid: '92' 2025-08-20 15:58:14.086 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] uid: '92' 2025-08-20 15:58:14.087 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] session: 0x186e9 2025-08-20 15:58:14.087 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] attributes: 2025-08-20 15:58:14.087 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] is root: f 2025-08-20 15:58:14.087 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] has graphics: t 2025-08-20 15:58:14.087 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] has TTY: t 2025-08-20 15:58:14.087 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] is remote: f 2025-08-20 15:58:14.087 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] auth session: 0x0 2025-08-20 15:58:14.087 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] context: 2025-08-20 15:58:14.088 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] authentication-failure: --S -14090 2025-08-20 15:58:14.088 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] pam_result: X-S 9 2025-08-20 15:58:14.089 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] hints: 2025-08-20 15:58:14.089 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] authorize-right: "system.login.console" 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] client-path: "/System/Library/CoreServices/loginwindow.app" 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] client-pid: 807 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] client-type: 'LDNB' 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] client-uid: 0 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] creator-audit-token: 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] ff ff ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] 00 00 00 00 27 03 00 00 e9 86 01 00 68 08 00 00 ....'.......h... 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] creator-pid: 807 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] flags: 259 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] reason: 0 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] tries: 1 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] immutable hints: 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] client-apple-signed: true 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] client-firstparty-signed: true 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] creator-apple-signed: true 2025-08-20 15:58:14.090 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] creator-firstparty-signed: true 2025-08-20 15:58:14.091 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] arguments: 2025-08-20 15:58:14.091 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] none 2025-08-20 15:58:14.108 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] LAContext: LAContext[4:8:112] 2025-08-20 15:58:14.119 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] token identities: 0 2025-08-20 15:58:14.120 Db SecurityAgentHelper-arm64[818:1efd] [com.example.apple-samplecode.LoggingAuthPlugin:mechanism] token watcher: <TKTokenWatcher: 0x11410ee70> Specifically, is there a manual/link somewhere that can allow me to interpret: authentication-failure: --S -14090 and pam_result: X-S 9

I am trying to setup remote Java debugging between two machines running macOS (15.6 and 26). I am able to get the Java program to listen on a socket. However, I can connect to that socket only from the same machine, not from another machine on my local network. I use nc to test the connection. It reports Connection refused when trying to connect from the other machine. This issue sounds like it could be caused by the Java program lacking Local Network system permission. I am familiar with that issue arising when a program attempts to connect to a port on the local network. In that case, a dialog is displayed and System Settings can be used to grant Local Network permission to the client program. I don't know whether the same permission is required on the program that is receiving client requests. If it is, then I don't know how to grant that permission. There is no dialog, and System Settings does not provide any obvious way to grant permission to a program that I specify. Note that a Java application is a program run by the java command, not a bundled application. The java command contains a hard-wired Info.plist which, annoyingly, requests permission to use the microphone, but not Local Network access.

When we enable 3rd party authentication plugin using SFAuthorization window, then when user performs Lock Screen and then unlock the MAC. Now after unlock, if user tries to open Keychain Access, it is not getting opened. When trying to open Keychain Access, we are prompted for credentials but after providing the credentials Keychians are not getting opened. This is working on Sonoma 14.6.1 , but seeing this issue from macOS Sequoia onwards. Are there any suggested settings/actions to resolve this issue?

In Swift I'm using unzip by launching a Process to unzip a file. I added a launchRequirement to the process in order to make sure the executable is code signed by Apple and the identifier is com.apple.unzip. After testing out my code on another machines (both physical and virtual), I found out that in some the identifier is actually com.apple.zipinfo, which broke the SigningIdentifier requirement. It's safe to assume that /usr/bin/unzip can be trusted since it's in a System Integrity Protection (SIP) location, but I'm wondering why this executable has different identifiers?

In the LightweightCodeRequirements framework, there is a LaunchCodeRequirement object which can be used as a requirement object for a Process for example. What I don't understand (I admit my macOS low-level knowledge is limited) is that how can this be used in a secure way that doesn't fall victim of a Time-of-Check/Time-of-Use issue. e.g. I specify a LaunchCodeRequirement via Process.launchRequirement for my process, let's say /usr/local/bin/mycommandlinetool. The LaunchCodeRequirement specifies my development team and a developer ID certificate. The process must be started in some form, before a SecCode/SecTask object can be created, rather than a SecStaticCode object (which only guarantees its validity checks to be intact as long as the file is not modified). But if the process was started, then I have no tools in my set to prevent it from executing its initialization code or similar. Then, by the time I'm able to check via SecCode/SecTask functions the LaunchCodeRequirement, I might have already ran malicious code - if mycommandlinetool was maliciously replaced. Or does the operating system use a daemon to copy the executable specified for Process to a secure location, then creates the SecStaticCode object, assesses the LaunchCodeRequirement and if passed, launches the executable from that trusted location (which would make sure it is immutable for replacement by malicious actors)? I have a hard time understanding how this works under the hood - if I remember correctly these are private APIs.

By default, it seems 15.6 is shipped with git version 2.39.5 (Apple Git-154) I was wondering when Apple will ship a Git version above 2.43 to resolve this vulnerability. Git Carriage Return Line Feed (CRLF) Vulnerability (CVE-2025-48384) https://github.com/git/git/security/advisories/GHSA-vwqx-4fm8-6qc9 You can install Homebrew then install newer versions of git using Homebrew; however that installs in a new location so the vulnerability is still present as the native version is behind and updated by Apple during software updates Thanks

how can I prevent handshake when certificate is user installed for example if user is using Proxyman or Charles proxy and they install their own certificates now system is trusting those certificates I wanna prevent that, and exclude those certificates that are installed by user, and accept the handshake if CA certificate is in a real valid certificate defined in OS I know this can be done in android by setting something like <network-security-config> <base-config> <trust-anchors> <certificates src="system" /> </trust-anchors> </base-config> </network-security-config>

If I was to build an app that opened a web server at local host on a random port that resolved subdomains for local host at that port, but there was no certificate authority, signed certificate available to provide HTTPS security, would this be in violation of apples ATS policy

Hi, I run a PacketTunnelProvider embedded within a system extension. We have been having success using this; however we have problems with accessing certificates/private keys manually imported in the file-based keychain. As per this, we are explicitly targeting the file-based keychain. However when attempting to access the certificate and private key we get the following error: System error using certificate key from keychain: Error Domain=NSOSStatusErrorDomain Code=-25308 "CSSM Exception: -2147415840 CSSMERR_CSP_NO_USER_INTERACTION" (errKCInteractionNotAllowed / errSecInteractionNotAllowed: / Interaction is not allowed As per the online documentation, I would expect to be prompted for the access to the application: When an app attempts to access a keychain item for a particular purpose—like using a private key to sign a document—the system looks for an entry in the item’s ACL containing the operation. If there’s no entry that lists the operation, then the system denies access and it’s up to the calling app to try something else or to notify the user. If there is an entry that lists the operation, the system checks whether the calling app is among the entry’s trusted apps. If so, the system grants access. Otherwise, the system prompts the user for confirmation. The user may choose to Deny, Allow, or Always Allow the access. In the latter case, the system adds the app to the list of trusted apps for that entry, enabling the app to gain access in the future without prompting the user again But I do not see that prompt, and I only see the permission denied error in my program. I can work around this one of two ways Change the access control of the keychain item to Allow all applications to access this item. This is not preferable, as it essentially disables any ACLs for this item. Embed the certificate in a configuration profile that is pushed down to the device via MDM or something similar. This works at a larger scale, but if I'm trying to manually test out a certificate, I don't always want to have to set this up. Is there another way that I go about adding my application to the ACL of the keychain item? Thanks!

I am trying to create an app bundle with an xpc service. The main app creates a keychain item, and attempts to share (keychain access groups) with the xpc service it includes in its bundle. However, the xpc service always encounters a 'user interaction not allowed' error regardless of how I create the keychain item. kSecAttrAccessiblei is set to kSecAttrAccessibleWhenUnlockedThisDeviceOnly, the keychain access group is set for both the main app and the xpc service and in the provisioning profile. I've tried signing and notarizing. Is it ever possible for an xpc service to access the keychain? This all on macos 15.5.

Hi Team, How can we fetch the macOS password requirement(for setting a new password) that are inforce during login for users? Is there a way to get this info in swift programming?

Hi everyone, I’m working an Objective-C lib that performs Keychain operations, such as generating cryptographic keys and signing data. The lib will be used by my team in a Java program for macOS via JNI. When working with the traditional file-based Keychain (i.e., without access control flags), everything works smoothly, no issues at all. However, as soon as I try to generate a key using access control flags SecAccessControlCreateWithFlags, the Data Protection Keychain returns error -34018 (errSecMissingEntitlement) during SecKeyCreateRandomKey. This behavior is expected. To address this, I attempted to codesign my native dynamic library (.dylib) with an entitlement plist specifying various combinations of: keychain-access-groups com.apple.security.keychain etc. with: My Apple Development certificate Developer ID Application certificate Apple Distribution certificate None of these combinations made a difference, the error persists. I’d love to clarify: Is it supported to access Data Protection Keychain / Secure Enclave Keys in this type of use case? If so, what exact entitlements does macOS expect when calling SecKeyCreateRandomKey from a native library? I’d really appreciate any guidance or clarification. Thanks in advance! Best regards, Neil

Problem : Connection error occurs in iOS26 beta while connecting to the device's softap via commercial app (Socket exception errSSLfeerBadCert CFSreamErrorDomainSSL code -9825). iOS 18 release version does not occur. Why does it cause problems? Does the iOS 26 version not cause problems? Is there a way to set it up in the app so that the iOS 26 beta doesn't cause problems? error : "alias":"SOCKET_LOG", "additional":{"currentNetworkStatus":"socket e=errSSLPeerBadCert ns WifiStatus: Connected Error Domain kCFStreamErrorDomainSSL Code-9825 "(null)" UserInfo={NSLocalizedRecoverySuggestion=Error code definition can be found in Apple's SecureTransport.h} Description : It's an issue that happens when you connect our already mass-produced apps to our home appliances (using SoftAP), and it's currently only happening in iOS 26 beta. This particular issue didn't appear until iOS 18 version. Let me know to make sure that this issue will persist with the official release of iOS 26? If the issue continues to occur with the official version, would you share any suggestions on how to mitigate or avoid it. Also, it would be helpful to find out if there are known solutions or processes such as exemptions to fix this issue.

I am developing a macOS application (targeting macOS 13 and later) that is non-sandboxed and needs to install and trust a root certificate by adding it to the System keychain programmatically. I’m fine with prompting the user for admin privileges or password, if needed. So far, I have attempted to execute the following command programmatically from both: A user-level process A root-level process sudo security add-trusted-cert -d -r trustRoot -k /Library/Keychains/System.keychain /path/to/cert.pem While the certificate does get installed, it does not appear as trusted in the Keychain Access app. One more point: The app is not distributed via MDM. App will be distributed out side the app store. Questions: What is the correct way to programmatically install and trust a root certificate in the System keychain? Does this require additional entitlements, signing, or profile configurations? Is it possible outside of MDM management? Any guidance or working samples would be greatly appreciated.

Attempts to programmatically update or add numerous system-installed certificates (a common practice for organizations that rotate certificates regularly) are blocked, forcing manual, insecure, and error-prone workarounds. The root cause lies in the stricter security protocols implemented in macOS 15, specifically: System Integrity Protection (SIP) and Transparency, Consent, and Control (TCC) Command we are using : sudo security authorizationdb write com.apple.trust-settings.admin