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]; }

I have several combine pipelines in my watch and iPhone app. While background tasks on the iPhone work correctly (the combine pipelines all activate), on the watch the pipelines do not get activated. I have an internal log reporting that data is being fed to the sources but is not propagating to the sinks. Thoughts?

Hello! We are in the progress of migrating a large Swift 5.10 legacy code base over to use Swift 6.0 with Strict Concurrency checking. We have already stumbled across a few weird edge cases where the "guaranteed" @MainActor isolation is violated (such as with @objc #selector methods used with NotificationCenter). However, we recently found a new scenario where our app crashes accessing main actor isolated state on a background thread, and it was surprising that the compiler couldn't warn us. Minimal reproducible example: class ViewController: UIViewController { var isolatedStateString = "Some main actor isolated state" override func viewDidLoad() { exampleMethod() } /// Note: A `@MainActor` isolated method in a `@MainActor` isolated class. func exampleMethod() { testAsyncMethod() { [weak self] in // !!! Crash !!! MainActor.assertIsolated() // This callback inherits @MainActor from the class definition, but it is called on a background thread. // It is an error to mutate main actor isolated state off the main thread... self?.isolatedStateString = "Let me mutate my isolated state" } } func testAsyncMethod(completionHandler: (@escaping () -> Void)) { let group = DispatchGroup() let queue = DispatchQueue.global() // The compiler is totally fine with calling this on a background thread. group.notify(queue: queue) { completionHandler() } // The below code at least gives us a compiler warning to add `@Sendable` to our closure argument, which is helpful. // DispatchQueue.global().async { // completionHandler() // } } } The problem: In the above code, the completionHandler implementation inherits main actor isolation from the UIViewController class. However, when we call exampleMethod(), we crash because the completionHandler is called on a background thread via the DispatchGroup.notify(queue:). If were to instead use DispatchQueue.global().async (snippet at the bottom of the sample), the compiler helpfully warns us that completionHandler must be Sendable. Unfortunately, DispatchGroup's notify gives us no such compiler warnings. Thus, we crash at runtime. So my questions are: Why can't the compiler warn us about a potential problem with DispatchGroup().notify(queue:) like it can with DispatchQueue.global().async? How can we address this problem in a holistic way in our app, as it's a very simple mistake to make (with very bad consequences) while we migrate off GCD? I'm sure the broader answer here is "don't mix GCD and Concurrency", but unfortunately that's a little unavoidable as we migrate our large legacy code base! 🙂

TCC Permission Inheritance for Python Process Launched by Swift App in Enterprise Deployment We are developing an enterprise monitoring application that requires a hybrid Swift + Python architecture due to strict JAMF deployment restrictions. We must deploy a macOS application via ABM/App Store Connect, but our core monitoring logic is in a Python daemon. We need to understand the feasibility and best practices for TCC permission inheritance in this specific setup. Architecture Component Bundle ID Role Deployment Swift Launcher com.athena.AthenaSentry Requests TCC permissions, launches Python child process. Deployed via ABM/ASC. Python Daemon com.athena.AthenaSentry.Helper Core monitoring logic using sensitive APIs. Nested in Contents/Helpers/. Both bundles are signed with the same Developer ID and share the same Team ID. Required Permissions The Python daemon needs to access the following sensitive TCC-controlled services: Screen Recording (kTCCServiceScreenCapture) - for capturing screenshots. Input Monitoring (kTCCServiceListenEvent) - for keystroke/mouse monitoring. Accessibility (kTCCServiceAccessibility) - a prerequisite for Input Monitoring. Attempts & Workarounds We have attempted to resolve this using: Entitlement Inheritance: Added com.apple.security.inherit to the Helper's entitlements. Permission Proxy: Swift app maintains active event taps to try and "hold" the permissions for the child. Foreground Flow: Keeping the Swift app in the foreground during permission requests. Questions Is this architecture supported? Can a Swift parent app successfully request TCC permissions that a child process can then use? TCC Inheritance: What are the specific rules for TCC permission inheritance between parent/child processes in enterprise environment? What's the correct approach for this enterprise use case? Should we: Switch to a Single Swift App? (i.e., abandon the Python daemon and rewrite the core logic natively in Swift). Use XPC Services? (instead of launching the child process directly).

On macOS 15.7.1 I'm trying to install an XPC service outside the app (Developer ID). It mostly seems to go ok, but when I set Launch Constraints on Responsible, AMFI complains of a violation, saying the service is responsible for itself, and fails to launch. Removing that constraint (or adding the service itself to the constraint) works fine. The service is an optional download, and installed to /Users/Shared with a LaunchAgent specifying the MachService. The service is correctly launched and seems to pass all codesigning, notarization, and other checks, but the Responsible isn't set to the "calling" app. Is this broken, or working as intended?

I would like to know whether BGContinuedProcessingTaskRequest supports executing asynchronous tasks internally, or if it can only execute synchronous tasks within BGContinuedProcessingTaskRequest? Our project is very complex, and we now need to use BGContinuedProcessingTaskRequest to perform some long-running operations when the app enters the background (such as video encoding/decoding & export). However, our export interface is an asynchronous function, for example video.export(callback: FinishCallback). This export call returns immediately, and when the export completes internally, it calls back through the passed-in callback. So when I call BGTaskScheduler.shared.register to register a BGContinuedProcessingTask, what should be the correct approach? Should I directly call video.export(nil) without any waiting, or should I wait for the export function to complete in the callback? For example: BGTaskScheduler.shared.register(forTaskWithIdentifier: "com.xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx", using: nil) { task in guard let continuedTask = task as? BGContinuedProcessingTask else { task.setTaskCompleted(success: false) return } let scanner = SmartAssetsManager.shared let semaphore = DispatchSemaphore(value: 0) continuedTask.expirationHandler = { logError(items: "xwxdebug finished.") semaphore.signal() } logInfo(items: "xwxdebug start！") video.export { _ in semaphore.signal() } semaphore.wait() logError(items: "xwxdebug finished！") }

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

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

I posted here https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/805554?page=1#867766022 but posting again for visibility (and let me know how I can file a bug) There was a response in that thread that said you could use the childProgress system to help updating progresses to keep the backgroundTask alive. What I've found is that using childProgresses results in more terminations than if you just updated the progress directly. Here is my setups to test this A BGContinuedProcessingTask that uses URLSessions to upload, and registers the task.progress with the Urlsession Progress Same, but the task.progress gets updated via a UrlSession Callback The second is MUCH more stable out in the field in cellular settings, the first fails extremely frequently. My suspicion is that in the documentation here https://developer.apple.com/documentation/foundation/progress#Reporting-Progress-for-Multiple-Operations it explicitly states The completedUnitCount property for a containing progress object only updates when the suboperation is 100% complete. The fractionCompleted property for a containing progress object updates continuously as work progresses for all suboperations. I wonder if BGContinuedProcessingTask is only looking at completedUnitCount for progress, and not fractionCompleted? In either case, I would love to use the childProgresses because there are bugs with retries by updating the progress manually, so would love some help resolving this, Thanks!

Hi there, I'm trying to work on an architecture where one app exposes an API (Extension Host) that other apps can plugin to. I've been reading all I can from the docs and whatever I can find online. It seemed like iOS26 added the ability to do such a thing (at least in early builds). Is that the case? Has the functionality been walked back such that extensions can only be loaded in iOS from within the single app bundle? My use case is the following: I'm working on an agent app that desires to have 3rd party developers add functionality (think how MCP servers add functionality to LLMs). The 3rd party plugins would be provided in their own app bundles vetted by the AppStore review team, of course, and would only provide hooks, basically, the main app can use to execute functions or get state. This is the best thread I found on the topic, and the subtext is that it needs to be in the same bundle. https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/803896?answerId=865314022#865314022 Let's say for the moment that this isn't possible using ExtensionKit. What's the best way to achieve this? Our current best alternative idea is a hidded WebKit window that runs JS/WASM but that's so hackish. Please let me know, thanks!

I have an older project that was created before Xcode 26.2. In Xcode versions prior to 26.2, there was no Swift Compiler – Concurrency build setting. With those older versions, the following behavior occurs: a nonisolated function executes off the main thread. class ViewController: UIViewController { override func viewDidLoad() { super.viewDidLoad() run() } private func run() { Task { await runInMainThread() } } func runInMainThread() async { print(">>>> IN runInMainThread(), Thread.isMainThread \(Thread.isMainThread)") await runInBackgroundThread() } private nonisolated func runInBackgroundThread() async { print(">>>> IN runInBackgroundThread(), Thread.isMainThread \(Thread.isMainThread)") } } Output: >>>> IN runInMainThread(), Thread.isMainThread true >>>> IN runInBackgroundThread(), Thread.isMainThread false However, starting with Xcode 26.2, Apple introduced the Swift Compiler – Concurrency settings. When running the same code with the default configuration: Approachable Concurrency = Yes Default Actor Isolation = MainActor This is the output Output: >>>> IN runInMainThread(), Thread.isMainThread true >>>> IN runInBackgroundThread(), Thread.isMainThread true the nonisolated function now executes on the main thread. This raises the following questions: What is the correct Swift Compiler – Concurrency configuration if I want a nonisolated function to run off the main thread? Is nonisolated still an appropriate way to ensure code runs on a background thread?

Knows anyone a point in systemlog etc. To find out when and why my or other apps are terminated by os. At the moment a lot of apps inclusive my apps seems to be terminated instead set to sleep by OS if no power coord is connected There are no crashlogs recorded, Sentry or firebase don‘t report issues.

I’ve built an app that connects via Bluetooth to a device. The device sends up, down, left and right commands. I want to build an SDK for other third party developers to use so that whenever a third party app with the SDK opens, if we press a button on the device, my app which captures the button press should be able to forward the event to the third party app. I want to achieve this with the lowest latency possible so that I can enable a variety of use cases like simple games and interactions within other apps. What would be the best way for me to achieve this as part of my SDK and my app?

Our app will launch automatically in the background，Doubt is the result of background fetch ，so we cancel the background modes setting of the background fetch,but we still can see the performFetchWithCompletionHandler method called when app launch in the background。Background launch will cause some bugs in our app. We don't want the app to start in the background. We hope to get help

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.

I have an app that uses background audio recording. From what others say, I have enabled the audio background mode to keep the audio session active, and this worked. But when submitting the app to the app store, the app was rejected because the audio background mode is only supposed to be used for audio playback. How do I create this background mode while following Apple's guidelines?

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

Hi, I have a sandboxed app with a bundled sandboxed XPC service. When it’s launched, the XPC service registers a repeating XPC activity with the system. The activity’s handler block does get called regularly like I’d expect, but it stops being called once the main app terminates. What’s the recommended way to fix this issue? Could I have a bundled XPC service double as a launch agent, or would that cause other problems?

For some reason, after invoking an unrelated dlclose() call to unload any .dylib that had previously been loaded via dlopen(..., RTLD_NOW), the subsequent call to task_info(mach_task_self(), TASK_DYLD_INFO, ...) syscall returns unexpected structure in dyld_uuid_info image_infos-&gt;uuidArray, that, while it seems to represent an array of struct dyld_uuid_info elements, there is only 1 such element (dyld_all_image_infos *infos-&gt;uuidArrayCount == 1) and the app crashes when trying to access dyld_uuid_info image-&gt;imageLoadAddress-&gt;magic, as image-&gt;imageLoadAddress doesn't seem to represent a valid struct mach_header structure address (although it looks like a normal pointer within the process address space. What does it point to?). This reproduces on macOS 15.4.1 (24E263) Could you please confirm that this is a bug in the specified OS build, or point to incorrect usage of the task_info() API? Attaching the C++ file that reproduces the issue to this email message It needs to be built on macOS 15.4.1 (24E263) via Xcode or just a command line clang++ compiler. It may crash or return garbage, depending on memory layout, but on this macOS build it doesn’t return a correct feedfacf magic number for the struct mach_header structure. Thank you Feedback Assistant reference: FB18431345 //On `macOS 15.4.1 (24E263)` create a C++ application (for example, in Xcode), with the following contents. Note, that this application should crash on this macOS build. It will not crash, however, if you either: //1. Comment out `dlclose()` call //2. Change the order of the `performDlOpenDlClose()` and `performTaskInfoSyscall()` functions calls (first performTaskInfoSyscall() then performDlOpenDlClose()). #include &lt;iostream&gt; #include &lt;dlfcn.h&gt; #include &lt;mach/mach.h&gt; #include &lt;mach-o/dyld_images.h&gt; #include &lt;mach-o/loader.h&gt; void performDlOpenDlClose() { printf("dlopen/dlclose function\n"); printf("Note: please adjust the path below to any real dylib on your system, if the path below doesn't exist!\n"); std::string path = "/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/lib/libswiftDemangle.dylib"; printf("Dylib to open: %s\n", path.c_str()); void* handle = ::dlopen(path.c_str(), RTLD_NOW); if(handle) { ::dlclose(handle); } else { printf("Error: %s\n", dlerror()); } } void performTaskInfoSyscall() { printf("Making a task_info() syscall\n"); printf("\033[34mSource File: %s\033[0m\n", __FILE__); task_t task = mach_task_self(); struct task_dyld_info dyld_info; mach_msg_type_number_t size = TASK_DYLD_INFO_COUNT; kern_return_t kr = task_info(task, TASK_DYLD_INFO, (task_info_t)&amp;dyld_info, &amp;size); if (kr != KERN_SUCCESS) { fprintf(stderr, "task_info failed: %s\n", mach_error_string(kr)); } const struct dyld_all_image_infos* infos = (const struct dyld_all_image_infos*)dyld_info.all_image_info_addr; printf("version: %d, infos-&gt;infoArrayCount: %d\n", infos-&gt;version, infos-&gt;infoArrayCount); for(uint32_t i=0; i&lt;infos-&gt;infoArrayCount; i++) { dyld_image_info image = infos-&gt;infoArray[i]; const struct mach_header* header = image.imageLoadAddress; printf("%d ", i); printf("%p ", (void*)image.imageLoadAddress); printf("(%x) ", header-&gt;magic); printf("%s\n", image.imageFilePath); fflush(stdout); } printf("\n\n"); printf("infos-&gt;uuidArrayCount: %lu\n", infos-&gt;uuidArrayCount); for(uint32_t i=0; i&lt;infos-&gt;uuidArrayCount; i++) { dyld_uuid_info image = infos-&gt;uuidArray[i]; const struct mach_header* header = image.imageLoadAddress; printf("%d ", i); printf("%p ", (void*)image.imageLoadAddress); printf("(%x)\n", header-&gt;magic); fflush(stdout); } printf("task_info() syscall result processing is completed\n\n"); } int main(int argc, const char * argv[]) { performDlOpenDlClose(); performTaskInfoSyscall(); return 0; }

when we use raise in GCD, the signal handler is executed asynchronously, whereas in pthread, it is executed synchronously as expected. example: #include &lt;Foundation/Foundation.h&gt; #include &lt;pthread/pthread.h&gt; static void HandleSignal(int sigNum, siginfo_t* signalInfo, void* userContext) { printf("handle signal %d\n", sigNum); printf("begin sleep\n"); sleep(3); printf("end sleep\n"); } void InstallSignal(void) { static const int g_fatalSignals[] = { SIGABRT, SIGBUS, SIGFPE, SIGILL, SIGPIPE, SIGSEGV, SIGSYS, SIGTRAP, }; int fatalSignalsCount = sizeof(g_fatalSignals) / sizeof(int); struct sigaction action = {{0}}; action.sa_flags = SA_SIGINFO | SA_ONSTACK; #if defined(__LP64__) action.sa_flags |= SA_64REGSET; #endif sigemptyset(&amp;action.sa_mask); action.sa_sigaction = &amp;HandleSignal; struct sigaction pre_sa; for(int i = 0; i &lt; fatalSignalsCount; i++) { int sigResult = sigaction(g_fatalSignals[i], &amp;action, &amp;pre_sa); } } void* RaiseAbort(void *userdata) { raise(SIGABRT); printf("signal handler has finished\n"); return NULL; } int main(int argc, const char * argv[]) { InstallSignal(); dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(0, 0), ^{ raise(SIGABRT); // abort(); // abort() is ok RaiseAbort(nullptr); }); // pthread is ok // pthread_t tid; // int ret = pthread_create(&amp;tid, NULL, RaiseAbort, NULL); // if (ret != 0) { // fprintf(stderr, "create thread failed\n"); // return EXIT_FAILURE; // } [[NSRunLoop mainRunLoop] run]; return 0; } console log: signal handler has finished handle signal 6 begin sleep end sleep