I’m currently porting a Chrome Extension to Safari and integrating it with native messaging in a Safari Web Extension. As part of this, I’m building a proxy to forward messages between the web extension and a socket in another application, both ways. Additionally, the socket occasionally broadcasts messages that also need to be sent to the web extension. The issue I’m facing is that the app extension terminates whenever I call context.completeRequest(returningItems: nil), which prevents me from listening for incoming messages from the socket (I'm using the Network Framework). To work around this, I’ve tried not calling context.completeRequest(returningItems: nil), which keeps the app extension running. However, I’m unsure if this is the right approach—currently, I’m simply ignoring the response and relying entirely on SFSafariApplication.dispatchMessage. According to the documentation, the app extension lifecycle ends when the system terminates it, but I need to keep the socket listener active. Has anyone encountered a similar issue, or does anyone have suggestions for maintaining the socket connection while adhering to the app extension lifecycle? Any insights would be greatly appreciated!

I have an XPC server running on macOS and want to perform comprehensive performance and load testing to evaluate its efficiency, responsiveness, and scalability. Specifically, I need to measure factors such as request latency, throughput, and how well it handles concurrent connections under different load conditions. What are the best tools, frameworks, or methodologies for testing an XPC service? Additionally, are there any best practices for simulating real-world usage scenarios and identifying potential bottlenecks?

Hi, We are running into issues with iOS app prewarming, where the system launches our app before the user has entered their passcode. In our case, the app stores flags, counters, and session data in UserDefaults and the Keychain. During prewarm launches: UserDefaults only returns default values (nil, 0, false). We have no way of knowing whether this information is valid or just a placeholder caused by prewarming. Keychain items with kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlockThisDeviceOnly are inaccessible, which can lead to broken business logic (the app can assume no session exists). No special launch options or environment variables appear to be set. We can reproduce this 100% of the time by starting a Live Activity in the app before reboot. Here’s an example of the workaround we tried, following older recommendations: __attribute__((constructor)) static void ModuleInitializer(void) { char* isPrewarm = getenv("ActivePrewarm"); if (isPrewarm != NULL && isPrewarm[0] == '1') { exit(0); // prevent prewarm launch from proceeding } } On iOS 16+, the ActivePrewarm environment variable doesn’t seem to exist anymore (though older docs and SDKs such as Sentry reference it). We also tried listening for UIApplication.protectedDataDidBecomeAvailableNotification, but this is not specific to prewarming (it also fires when the device gets unlocked) and can cause watchdog termination if we delay work too long. Questions: Is there a supported way to opt out of app prewarming? What is the correct way to detect when an app is being prewarmed? Is the ActivePrewarm environment variable still supported in iOS 16+? Ideally, the UserDefaults API itself should indicate whether it is returning valid stored values or defaults due to the app being launched in a prewarm session. We understand opting out may impact performance, but data security and integrity are our priority. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.

Hello, I'm running into an issue with a complex macOS application (non-AppStore) structure involving an unsandboxed system daemon and a sandboxed SSO Extension attempting to communicate via XPC Mach service. The macOS app is composed of three main components: Main App: unsandboxed, standard macOS application. System Daemon: unsandboxed executable installed with a .plist to /Library/LaunchDaemons/ and loaded by launchd. It exposes an XPC Mach Service. SSO Extension: a sandboxed Authentication Services Extension (ASAuthorizationProviderExtension). Main App to System Daemon communication works perfectly. The unsandboxed main app can successfully create and use an XPC connection to the System Daemon's Mach service. But SSO Extension cannot establish an XPC connection to the System Daemon's Mach service, despite using the recommended temporary exception entitlement. I have added the following entitlement to the SSO Extension's entitlements file: <key>com.apple.security.temporary-exception.mach-lookup.global-name</key> <array> <string>my.xpc.service.system.daemon</string> </array> (The name my.xpc.service.system.daemon is the exact name registered by the System Daemon in its Launch Daemon plist's MachServices dictionary.) When the SSO Extension attempts to create the connection, the following log output is generated: default 08:11:58.531567-0700 SSOExtension [0x13f19b090] activating connection: mach=true listener=false peer=false name=my.xpc.service.system.daemon default 08:11:58.532150-0700 smd [0xb100d8140] activating connection: mach=false listener=false peer=true name=com.apple.xpc.smd.peer[1575].0xb100d8140 error 08:11:58.532613-0700 smd Item real path failed. Maybe the item has been deleted? error 08:11:58.532711-0700 SSOExtension Unable to find service status () error: 22 The error Unable to find service status () error: 22. Error code 22 typically translates to EINVAL (Invalid argument), but in this context, it seems related to the system's ability to find and activate the service for the sandboxed process. Questions: Is the com.apple.security.temporary-exception.mach-lookup.global-name entitlement sufficient for a sandboxed SSO Extension to look up a system-wide Launch Daemon Mach service, or are there additional restrictions or required entitlements for extensions? The smd log output Item real path failed. Maybe the item has been deleted? seems concerning. Since the unsandboxed main app can connect, this suggests the service is running and registered. Could this error indicate a sandbox permission issue preventing smd from verifying the path for the sandboxed process? Are there specific sandboxing requirements for Mach service names when communicating from an Extension versus a main application? Any guidance on how a sandboxed SSO Extension can reliably connect to an unsandboxed, non-app-group-related system daemon via XPC Mach service would be greatly appreciated!

What’s the recommended way to recursively walk through a directory tree using File Coordination? From what I understand, coordinating a read of a directory only performs a “shallow” lock; this would mean that I’d need to implement the recursive walk myself rather than use FileManager.enumerator(at:includingPropertiesForKeys:options:errorHandler:) plus a single NSFileCoordinator.coordinate(with:queue:byAccessor:) call. I’m trying to extract information from all files of a particular type, so I think using NSFileCoordinator.ReadingOptions.immediatelyAvailableMetadataOnly on each file before acquiring a full read lock on it (if it’s the right file type) would make sense. Am I on the right track?

I am currently developing a macOS app that can show system HUDs in the Notch Till Sequoia I used to kill the OSDUIHelper process (which displays the default macOS Volume and Brightness control HUDs) - and replaced it with my app's HUDs But, it is not working on macOS Tahoe anymore as the OSDUIHelper process is no longer there due to the UI changes Has the process been renamed - or is there any other way to kill the process?

Hi All, I'm working on an app that needs to connect to BLE device and on defined schedules download data from the device. the amount of data is segnificant and might take around a minute to download. we tought about utilizing both state restoration and preservation for app waking and scheduling (triggered by the ble peripheral) and BGTaskScheduler to schedule a task that will handle a long running task to manage the full data download. now, will this solution in general valid? isnt it a "hack" that goes around the 10s limit that state restoration enforces? i know there are limitations for BGTask (like when it runs, it might be terminated by the system etc) but considering that, can we proceed with this approach without breaching apple guidelines? thank you in advance!

I have an app for macOS that is built using Mac Catalyst. I need to perform some background processing. I'm using BGProcessingTaskRequest to schedule the request. I have also integrated CKSyncEngine so I need that to be able to perform its normal background processing. On iOS, when the user leaves the app, I can see a log message that the request was scheduled and a bit later I see log messages coming from the actual background task code. On macOS I ran the app from Xcode. I then quit the app (Cmd-q). I can see the log message that the request was scheduled. But the actual task is never run. In my test, I ran my app on a MacBook Pro running macOS 26.0. When I quit the app, I checked the log file in the app sandbox and saw the message that the task was scheduled. About 20 minutes later I closed the lid on the MacBook Pro for the night. I did not power down, it just went to sleep. Roughly 10 hours later I opened the lid on the MacBook Pro, logged in, and checked the log file. It had not been updated since quitting the app. I should also mention that the laptop was not plugged in at all during this period. My question is, does a Mac Catalyst app support background processing after the user quits the app? If so, how is it enabled? The documentation for BGProcessingTaskRequest and BGProcessingTask show they are supported under Mac Catalyst, but I couldn't find any documentation in the Background Tasks section that mentioned anything specific to setup for Mac Catalyst. Running the Settings app and going to General -> Login Items & Extension, I do not see my app under the App Background Activity section. Does it need to be listed there? If so, what steps are needed to get it there? If this is all documented somewhere, I'd appreciate a link since I was not able to find anything specific to making this work under Mac Catalyst.

When I run my app with XCode on my iPhone, and then moved into the background, I'm getting a EXC_BREAKPOINT exception after a few minutes, seemingly when iOS attempts to call my app with a BGAppRefreshTask: Thread 23 Queue: com.apple.BGTaskScheduler (com.mycompany.MyApp.RefreshTask) (serial) 0 _dispatch_assert_queue_fail 12 _pthread_wqthread Enqueued from com.apple.duet.activityscheduler.client.xpcqueue (Thread 23) 0 dispatch_async 20 start_wqthread I can't quite understand the reason from this crash. In the background task, I'm attempting to update live activities. In the process, it might encounter code that calls MainActor and manipulate @Observable objects. Might that be the reason?

As far as I understand, the main thread has a run loop. When an iOS app launches, the process must keep the run loop running to stay alive. Does that mean the main thread is the very first thread created when the process starts?

In the header for workloop.h there is this note: A dispatch workloop is a "subclass" of dispatch_queue_t which can be passed to all APIs accepting a dispatch queue, except for functions from the dispatch_sync() family. dispatch_async_and_wait() must be used for workloop objects. Functions from the dispatch_sync() family on queues targeting a workloop are still permitted but discouraged for performance reasons. I have a couple questions related to this. First, I'd like to better understand what the alluded-to 'performance reasons' are that cause this pattern to be discouraged in the 'queues targeting a workloop' scenario. From further interrogation of the headers, I've found these explicit callouts regarding differences in the dispatch_sync and dispatch_async_and_wait API: dispatch_sync: Work items submitted to a queue with dispatch_sync() do not observe certain queue attributes of that queue when invoked (such as autorelease frequency and QOS class). dispatch_async_and_wait: Work items submitted to a queue with dispatch_async_and_wait() observe all queue attributes of that queue when invoked (inluding [sic] autorelease frequency or QOS class). Additionally, dispatch_async_and_wait has a section of the headers devoted to 'Differences with dispatch_sync()', though I can't say I entirely follow the distinctions it attempts to draw. Based on that, my best guess is that the 'performance reasons' are something about either QoS not being properly respected/observed or some thread context switching differences that can degrade performance, but I would appreciate insight from someone with more domain knowledge. My second question is a bit more general – taking a step back, why exactly do these two API exist? It's not clear to me from the existing documentation I've found why I would/should prefer dispatch_sync over dispatch_async_and_wait (other than the aforementioned callout noting the former is unsupported on workloops). What is the motivation for preserving both these API vs deprecating dispatch_sync in favor of dispatch_async_and_wait (or functionally subsuming one with the other)? Credit to Luna for originally posing/inspiring these questions.

Hello, I'm experiencing an issue with my app where it's being terminated by the system with a watchdog violation during back-to-back messaging operations. I've analyzed the crash logs but would appreciate additional insights on optimizing my approach. I'd appreciate any insights on how to resolve this problem. Crash Details: Exception Type: EXC_CRASH (SIGKILL) Termination Reason: FRONTBOARD with code 0x8BADF00D Error: "scene-update watchdog transgression: app exhausted real time allowance of 10.00 seconds" Reproduction Steps: User A initiates back-to-back messages to other User User A's UI becomes unresponsive and eventually the app crashes. Stack Trace Analysis: The crash occurs on the main thread, which appears to be blocked waiting for a condition in the keyboard handling system. The thread is stuck in [UIKeyboardTaskQueue _lockWhenReadyForMainThread] and related methods, suggesting an issue with keyboard-related operations during the messaging process. Crash Tag Exception Type: EXC_CRASH (SIGKILL) Exception Codes: 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000 Termination Reason: FRONTBOARD 2343432205 <RBSTerminateContext| domain:10 code:0x8BADF00D explanation:scene-update watchdog transgression: app<com.msikodiak.eptt(AD934F8A-DF57-4B75-BE73-8CF1A9A8F856)>:301 exhausted real (wall clock) time allowance of 10.00 seconds ProcessVisibility: Foreground ProcessState: Running WatchdogEvent: scene-update WatchdogVisibility: Background WatchdogCPUStatistics: ( "Elapsed total CPU time (seconds): 6.390 (user 3.640, system 2.750), 11% CPU", "Elapsed application CPU time (seconds): 0.020, 0% CPU" ) ThermalInfo: ( "Thermal Level: 0", "Thermal State: nominal" ) reportType:CrashLog maxTerminationResistance:Interactive> Triggered by Thread: 0 Thread 0 name: Dispatch queue: com.apple.main-thread Thread 0 Crashed: 0 libsystem_kernel.dylib 0x1e773d438 __psynch_cvwait + 8 1 libsystem_pthread.dylib 0x2210bc328 _pthread_cond_wait + 1028 2 Foundation 0x1957d8a64 -[NSCondition waitUntilDate:] + 132 3 Foundation 0x1957d8888 -[NSConditionLock lockWhenCondition:beforeDate:] + 80 4 UIKitCore 0x1998f1238 -[UIKeyboardTaskQueue _lockWhenReadyForMainThread] + 456 5 UIKitCore 0x19a3d775c __59-[UIKeyboardImpl updateAutocorrectPrompt:executionContext:]_block_invoke_9 + 28 6 UIKitCore 0x19986b084 -[UIKeyboardTaskQueue lockWhenReadyForMainThread] + 168 7 UIKitCore 0x19a3f2994 -[UIKeyboardTaskQueue waitUntilTaskIsFinished:] + 148 8 UIKitCore 0x19a3f2ac4 -[UIKeyboardTaskQueue performSingleTask:breadcrumb:] + 132 9 UIKitCore 0x199e2f7e4 -[_UIKeyboardStateManager updateForChangedSelection] + 144 10 UIKitCore 0x199e24200 -[_UIKeyboardStateManager invalidateTextEntryContextForTextInput:] + 92 11 WebKit 0x1ad52fa54 WebKit::PageClientImpl::didProgrammaticallyClearFocusedElement(WebCore::ElementContext&&) + 40 12 WebKit 0x1ad55adcc WebKit::WebPageProxy::didProgrammaticallyClearFocusedElement(WebCore::ElementContext&&) + 136 13 WebKit 0x1acec74e8 WebKit::WebPageProxy::didReceiveMessage(IPC::Connection&, IPC::Decoder&) + 18604 14 WebKit 0x1acd21184 IPC::MessageReceiverMap::dispatchMessage(IPC::Connection&, IPC::Decoder&) + 236 15 WebKit 0x1ace449b8 WebKit::WebProcessProxy::dispatchMessage(IPC::Connection&, IPC::Decoder&) + 40 16 WebKit 0x1ace44228 WebKit::WebProcessProxy::didReceiveMessage(IPC::Connection&, IPC::Decoder&) + 1764 17 WebKit 0x1acd1e904 IPC::Connection::dispatchMessage(WTF::UniqueRef<IPC::Decoder>) + 268 18 WebKit 0x1acd1e478 IPC::Connection::dispatchIncomingMessages() + 576 19 JavaScriptCore 0x1ae386b8c WTF::RunLoop::performWork() + 524 20 JavaScriptCore 0x1ae386960 WTF::RunLoop::performWork(void*) + 36 21 CoreFoundation 0x196badce4 __CFRUNLOOP_IS_CALLING_OUT_TO_A_SOURCE0_PERFORM_FUNCTION__ + 28 22 CoreFoundation 0x196badc78 __CFRunLoopDoSource0 + 172 23 CoreFoundation 0x196bac9fc __CFRunLoopDoSources0 + 232 24 CoreFoundation 0x196babc3c __CFRunLoopRun + 840 25 CoreFoundation 0x196bd0700 CFRunLoopRunSpecific + 572 26 GraphicsServices 0x1e3711190 GSEventRunModal + 168 27 UIKitCore 0x1997ee240 -[UIApplication _run] + 816 28 UIKitCore 0x1997ec470 UIApplicationMain + 336 29 Telstra PTT 0x1004d30c8 main + 56 30 dyld 0x1bd5d3ad8 start + 5964

DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM Logs and data from our application indicate various errors that strongly suggest that our application is being launched in a state in which the device is likely locked. We are looking for guidance on how to identify, debug, reproduce, and fix these cases. Our application does not use any of the common mechanisms for background activity, such as Background App Refresh, Navigation, Audio, etc. Errors we get in our logs such as "authorization denied (code: 23)" when trying to access a file in our app's container on disk (a simple disk cache for data our application uses) strongly suggest that the device is operating in a state, such as being locked, where our application lacks the requisite permissions it would normally have during operation. Furthermore, attempts to access authentication information stored in the keychain also fails. We use kSecAttrAccessibleWhenUnlocked when accessing items we store in the keychain. We have investigated "Prewarming", as well as our notification extension that helps process incoming push notifications, but cannot find any way to recreate this behavior. Are there any steps Apple engineers can recommend to triage and debug this? Some additional questions that would help us: What are all of the symptoms that we can look for if prewarming escapes the intended execution context? What are all of the circumstances in which we would be unauthorized to access the app’s documents/file directories even if it works correctly in normal operation? STEPS TO REPRODUCE Unfortunately, we are unable to forcibly reproduce this behavior in our application, so we're looking for guidance on how we might simulate this behavior in Xcode / Instruments. Are there tools that Apple provides that would allow us to simulate certain behaviors like prewarming to verify our application's functionality? Are there other reasons our application might be launched while the device is locked? Are there other reasons we would receive security errors when accessing the keychain or disk that are unrelated to the device being locked?

I have implemented a XPC server using C APIs. I want to write unit tests for it. I came across the following links that use Swift APIs- Testing and Debugging XPC Code With an Anonymous Listener TN3113 I have tried to write anonymous listener code and the client code in the same file, using C APIs- #include <unistd.h> #include <syslog.h> #include <pthread.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <xpc/xpc.h> #include <xpc/connection.h> #include <CoreFoundation/CoreFoundation.h> static void Anon_Client_Connection_Handler(xpc_connection_t connection, xpc_object_t clientMessage) { const char *description = xpc_copy_description(clientMessage); printf("Event received - %s\n", description); free((void *)description); xpc_type_t type = xpc_get_type(clientMessage); if (type == XPC_TYPE_ERROR) { if (clientMessage == XPC_ERROR_CONNECTION_INVALID) printf("Client_Connection_Handler received invalid connection n"); else if (clientMessage == XPC_ERROR_TERMINATION_IMMINENT) printf("Client_Connection_Handler received termination notice n"); } else { const char *clientMsg = xpc_dictionary_get_string(clientMessage, "message"); printf("Received from client: %s ", clientMsg); } } static void Anon_Listener_Connection_Handler(xpc_connection_t connection) { printf("Anon_Listener_Connection_Handler called, setting up event handler \n"); xpc_connection_set_event_handler(connection, ^(xpc_object_t clientMessage) { printf("Processing the connection! \n"); Anon_Client_Connection_Handler(connection, clientMessage); }); xpc_connection_resume(connection); } int main(int argc, const char *argv[]) { xpc_connection_t anon_listener = xpc_connection_create(NULL, NULL); xpc_connection_set_event_handler(anon_listener, ^(xpc_object_t clientConnection) { printf("Client tried to connect \n"); Anon_Listener_Connection_Handler(clientConnection); }); xpc_connection_resume(anon_listener); printf("\nINFO Anonymous connection resumed"); xpc_object_t anon_endpoint = xpc_endpoint_create(anon_listener); xpc_connection_t clientConnection = xpc_connection_create_from_endpoint(anon_endpoint); xpc_object_t message = xpc_dictionary_create(NULL, NULL, 0); xpc_dictionary_set_string(message, "message", "client's message"); xpc_connection_send_message_with_reply(clientConnection, message, dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^(xpc_object_t event) { printf("\nINFO inside reply"); const char *description = xpc_copy_description(event); printf("\nINFO %s",description); free((void *)description); }); xpc_release(message); xpc_release(anon_listener); printf("\nINFO Releasing listener"); xpc_release(anon_endpoint); printf("\nINFO Releasing endpoint"); // dispatch_main(); return 0; } and this is the output I get INFO Anonymous connection resumed INFO Releasing listener INFO Releasing endpoint I am not able to connect to the client and exchange messages. Where am I going wrong?

We are building a 'server' application that can either run as a daemon or can run in background without showing any GUI. Basically, the end user can either configure this to run as a daemon so that it can be tied to the user's session or will launch the process which user will start and quit as needed. I wanted to understand what is the recommended mechanism for such an application from Apple - Should this application be built as a macOS Bundle ? Apple documentation also says that we should not daemonize the process by calling fork. Hence if we create a unix-style executable, will I not need to fork to make it run in a detached state when I launch the executable via double-click ? [Reference Link] Is it fine to have an application on macOS which is a bundle but does not show any UI when launched by double click on the app-icon or via 'open'? While we have been able to achieve this by using NSApplicationMain and not showing the UI, was wondering if using CFRunLoop is best for this case as it is a non-gui application. If we can get the right documentation link or recommendations on how we should build such an application which can run in a non-gui mode and also in a daemonized manner, it will help us. Should the application be always built as a macos bundle or should it be a unix-style executable to support both the cases - by the same application/product and how should we look at the distribution of such applications.

To establish a privileged helper daemon from a command line app to handle actions requiring root privileges I still use the old way of SMJobBless. But this is deprecated since OSX 10.13 and I want to finally update it to the new way using SMAppService. As I'm concerned with securing it against malicious exploits, do you have a recommended up-to-date implementation in Objective-C establishing a privileged helper and verifying it is only used by my signed app? I've seen the suggestion in the documentation to use SMAppService, but couldn't find a good implementation covering security aspects. My old implementation in brief is as follows: bool runJobBless () { // check if already installed NSFileManager* filemgr = [NSFileManager defaultManager]; if ([filemgr fileExistsAtPath:@"/Library/PrivilegedHelperTools/com.company.Helper"] && [filemgr fileExistsAtPath:@"/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.company.Helper.plist"]) { // check helper version to match the client // ... return true; } // create authorization reference AuthorizationRef authRef; OSStatus status = AuthorizationCreate (NULL, kAuthorizationEmptyEnvironment, kAuthorizationFlagDefaults, &authRef); if (status != errAuthorizationSuccess) return false; // obtain rights to install privileged helper AuthorizationItem authItem = { kSMRightBlessPrivilegedHelper, 0, NULL, 0 }; AuthorizationRights authRights = { 1, &authItem }; AuthorizationFlags flags = kAuthorizationFlagDefaults | kAuthorizationFlagInteractionAllowed | kAuthorizationFlagPreAuthorize | kAuthorizationFlagExtendRights; status = AuthorizationCopyRights (authRef, &authRights, kAuthorizationEmptyEnvironment, flags, NULL); if (status != errAuthorizationSuccess) return false; // SMJobBless does it all: verify helper against app and vice-versa, place and load embedded launchd.plist in /Library/LaunchDaemons, place executable in /Library/PrivilegedHelperTools CFErrorRef cfError; if (!SMJobBless (kSMDomainSystemLaunchd, (CFStringRef)@"com.company.Helper", authRef, &cfError)) { // check helper version to match the client // ... return true; } else { CFBridgingRelease (cfError); return false; } } void connectToHelper () { // connect to helper via XPC NSXPCConnection* c = [[NSXPCConnection alloc] initWithMachServiceName:@"com.company.Helper.mach" options:NSXPCConnectionPrivileged]; c.remoteObjectInterface = [NSXPCInterface interfaceWithProtocol:@protocol (SilentInstallHelperProtocol)]; [c resume]; // call function on helper and wait for completion dispatch_semaphore_t semaphore = dispatch_semaphore_create (0); [[c remoteObjectProxy] callFunction:^() { dispatch_semaphore_signal (semaphore); }]; dispatch_semaphore_wait (semaphore, dispatch_time (DISPATCH_TIME_NOW, 10 * NSEC_PER_SEC)); dispatch_release (semaphore); [c invalidate]; [c release]; }

We added the com.apple.developer.background-tasks.continued-processing.gpu key to the entitlement file and set it to true, but BGTaskScheduler.supportedResources does not include gpu. How can we configure it to obtain permission for GPU access in the background? Test device: iPhone 16 Pro Max, iOS 26 release version.

Started a new X-Code Project after updating to 26.0.1 and realized that I get an error when trying to mark a class as ObservableObject => "Class XYZ does not conform to Protocol 'ObservableObject'. Strange behaviour, because at old projects the code is working even though the build options are the same and other settings like iOS version in Target are the same. There must be something chaged under the hood of XCode? I have to import Combine now, before I could write my class, e.g. CoreData Datamanager: ObservableObject only using CoreData.

Hi everyone, I’m trying to register fonts system-wide using CTFontManagerRegisterFontURLs with the .persistent scope. The fonts are delivered through Apple-Hosted Background Assets (since On-Demand Resources are deprecated). Process-level registration works perfectly, but persistent registration triggers a system “Install Fonts” prompt, and tapping Install causes the app to crash immediately. I’m wondering if anyone has successfully used Apple-Hosted Background Assets to provide persistent, system-wide installable fonts, or if this is a current OS limitation/bug. What I Expect Fonts delivered through Apple-Hosted Background Assets should be eligible for system-wide installation Tap “Install” should install fonts into Settings → Fonts just like app-bundled or ODR fonts App should not crash Why This Matters According to: WWDC 2019: Font Management and Text Scaling Developers can build font provider apps that install fonts system-wide, using bundled or On-Demand Resources. WWDC 2025: Discover Apple-Hosted Background Assets On-Demand Resources are deprecated, and AHBAs are the modern replacement. Therefore, persistent font installation via Apple-Hosted Background Assets appears to be the intended path moving forward. Question Is this a known limitation or bug in iOS? Should .persistent font installation work with Apple-Hosted Background Assets? Do we need additional entitlement, manifest configuration, or packaging rules? Any guidance or confirmation from Apple engineers would be greatly appreciated. Additional Info I submitted a Feedback including a minimal reproducible sample project: FB21109320

Hi, I'll explain my question through how whatsapp does it. When the phone is locked then whatsapp routes call through apple's native callkit When unlocked, pressing accept essentially redirects to whatsapp and then whatsapp handles the call from there. However, this component of unlock detection is what I'm not able to find any info about. Essentially, how i do it is: let isPhoneLocked = !UIApplication.shared.isProtectedDataAvailable isProtectedDataAvailable == true → device is unlocked isProtectedDataAvailable == false → device is locked The problem is that if the phone has been recently unlocked, then protected data is still available on the phone even after the lock for the next 10-40 seconds. So theres a false positive. I want there to be a foolproof and robust way to do this. And I'm not entirely sure how