Hi, and apologies for a long post! We have created an app that enables wireless communication with FIDO2 devices over Bluetooth by creating virtual HID devices and translating the packages. In order to do this, we use the HIDVirtualDevice class as described here: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/corehid/creatingvirtualdevices We learned the hard way that this sample code does not work without the “com.apple.developer.hid.virtual.device“ entitlement, but with it, it behaves as expected. Now, our application has been rejected during Review, both by the initial App Review and the appeal to the App Review Board. The problem is that I can’t really figure out what the issue is. The first rejection states the following: The app requests access to Accessibility features on macOS but does not use these features for accessibility purposes. Specifically, the app uses Accessibility features for non-accessibility feature. (Please see attached screenshot) The attached screenshot is of the screen the app shows when requesting permissions, with this code: else if bluetoothManager.requirePermissions { GradientTitle(text: "PERMISSIONS \nNEEDED") Text( """ This application requires additional permissions to run. Open the settings menu to allow access before restarting the application. """ ) and a button with this action: if let url = URL( string:"x-apple.systempreferences:com.apple.preference.security?Privacy_Accessibility" ) { NSWorkspace.shared.open(url) } The requirePermissions boolean is set from here, let properties = HIDVirtualDevice.Properties( descriptor: VirtualDevice.fidoDescriptor, vendorID: VirtualDevice.vendorId ) if HIDVirtualDevice(properties: properties) != nil { await MainActor.run { self.requirePermissions = false } break } else { await MainActor.run { self.requirePermissions = true } When HIDVirtualDevice(properties: properties) is called, a system pop-up with App would like to control this computer using accessibility features. Grant access to this application in Security and Privacy preferences located in System Preferences. shows. I responded to the rejection by trying to argue that allowing you to use your device wirelessly does increase accessibility, and that this is the only purpose of the app. Their response was: Regarding 2.4.5, Accessibility usage. To resolve this issue, it would be appropriate to remove Accessibility usage for non-accessibility purposes. Should you require more assistance with resolving this issue, Apple Developer Technical Support is available to provide direct one-on-one support for discrete code-level questions. Please be sure to include any crash logs, screenshots or steps to reproduce this issue in your request. I contacted technical support and tried to explain the issue again, and got the following response: Guideline 2.4.5 - Performance The app requests access to Accessibility features on macOS but does not use these features for accessibility purposes. Specifically, the app uses Accessibility features for non-accessibility feature. Accessibility features are intended to help users with different capabilities interact with their devices and app. Apps may not use features designed to increase accessibility for other purposes. We understand that the reason for using Accessibility feature on macOS. However, the usage is not compliant with the provided guideline. The last sentence is not complete, and it’s hard to understand what the issue is, given that they have not actually responded to my arguments. My best guess right now is point 2.4.5 (v): 2.4.5 Apps distributed via the Mac App Store have some additional requirements to keep in mind: (v) They may not request escalation to root privileges or use setuid attributes. If this is the case, I can understand the rejection, although it’s strange they didn’t just say so then. If that is correct, given that the system pop-up and accessibility requirement also trigger when running their sample code (which creates a virtual keyboard), does that mean that no one using this class and framework can submit apps to the App Store? I never intended to use an accessibility framework, and I was quite surprised the first time the pop-up appeared. RIght now I'm just confused and dissapointed with the level of feedback from Apple, and would appreciate any help, either in providing a solution or just explaining what the specific issue is.

Hello everyone, I am looking for some advice or shared experiences regarding a prolonged App Review Board appeal process. I submitted my app earlier this month. On March 3rd, it was rejected under guideline 4.3(b) Spam. On the exact same day (March 3rd), I submitted a detailed appeal to the App Review Board. In my appeal, I provided clear documentation and explanations to prove that the app is not a generic template. I specifically highlighted our proprietary algorithm that calculates a unique total daily energy percentage for users, which distinctly separates it from standard, saturated apps in the market. The issue: It has now been 23 days since I submitted the appeal, and I have not received any response from the Board. My main concern is the lack of visibility. Since appeals to the Board do not appear in the Resolution Center UI, I have no way of knowing if my ticket is actually actively open, in a queue, or if it has been lost due to a system glitch. I recently tried reaching out to general support to verify the ticket's status, but I only received an automated generic response stating that if I have already appealed, I should just wait. My questions for the community: Has anyone else experienced wait times exceeding 3 weeks for a 4.3(b) appeal recently? Is there any workaround to simply verify that an internal appeal ticket is genuinely open and hasn't fallen through the cracks? Any insights or advice on how to proceed would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

I'm developing a sandboxed clipboard history manager for macOS. When a user selects an item from their clipboard history, the app: Writes the data to NSPasteboard.general Posts a ⌘V keystroke via CGEvent.post(tap: .cgSessionEventTap) This requires the user to grant permission under System Settings > Privacy & Security > Accessibility (kTCCServicePostEvent). The app does not use any Accessibility framework APIs (AXUIElement, AXIsProcessTrusted, etc.) — only Core Graphics event posting. The app has been rejected twice under Guideline 2.4.5, with the reviewer stating that Accessibility features should not be used for non-accessibility purposes. My understanding is that kTCCServicePostEvent (used by CGEvent.post) is a separate TCC service from kTCCServiceAccessibility (used by AXUIElement APIs), but both appear under "Accessibility" in System Settings, which may be causing confusion. My questions: Is there an approved way for a sandboxed Mac App Store app to simulate a keystroke (specifically ⌘V) after writing to the pasteboard? If CGEvent.post is not appropriate for App Store apps, what alternative API should clipboard managers use to provide a "paste" action? Is there a way to use CGEvent.post that is compliant with Guideline 2.4.5? I have a minimal sample project (single Swift file, sandboxed) that demonstrates the behavior. I can share it if helpful. I was referred here by DTS (Case-ID: 19088416).

Hi, I created an anti virus app that worked within the sandbox. It was non commercial essentially a test to find a marketable anti virus app that could work within the sandbox. App store review kept saying it was malicious over and over again then told us our developer account was pending termination. We have a lot of others app that are my only source of income. I managed to work myself out of homelessness by being an App Developer (I've been an app developer since 2009). Now I'm facing it again for innovation. Thanks David

Hi all, Submitted first ever app for review to app store and got rejected. My app isn't live and I have demo accounts too which they seemed to use. For context my app is free on launch, no in app transactions, and it is a marriage app. What I did not account for is them going through apple sign in and right now I have no way to catch that so that account doesn't mix with real users. I've thought about adding a tap feature and disclosing it, so they tap something x times and it is marked as reviewer account, but that violates guideline 2.3.1. Also thought about adding just visible text for reviewers, but then real users would see that too so its a no go. Asked Claude and it says to try Sandbox Receipt Detection, which should work for a free app, but I'm not sure and would rather ask then implement, submit and find out it doesn't work. Appreciate any help y'all can give me! Thanks!

I've published my app with subscriptions (app changed from paid to subscription model). I've have succesfully pass review process and app was published to App Store without subscription store, so no one can buy app (still working as paid, but will expire in few days forcing users to subscribe). I want to attach subscriptions to new build, but I can't - there are no options mentioned in documentation. I'm stuck. There is no any contact point to review team. I've created 3 cases, nobody reads them (oldest 3 weeks). The whole approval process looks broken, Apple team shouldn't approve app with subscriptions without subscriptions added to review. I must immediately publish my app with critical fixes, but I can't. I am devastated, i don't know what to do...

Hello, I’m experiencing an unusual issue with App Store review and would appreciate any guidance. I currently have two apps in the review queue: • Tendre – submitted on February 4 • After Midnight – submitted on February 19 The first app has now been stuck in "Waiting for Review" for over a month, and the second one has also not progressed at all since submission. During this time: • I contacted Apple Developer Support multiple times • I submitted support requests (including escalation) • I requested an expedited review However, I have not received any meaningful response or update. What makes this concerning is that typical review times are usually much shorter (often within a few days), and there are no visible issues or rejections. This situation is currently blocking our release, and we are unable to move forward. As these are our first app releases, this delay is critical and is significantly affecting our planned launch. Could this be related to: • an account-level issue • a review queue problem • or something else on Apple’s side? If anyone from Apple or other developers has experienced something similar, I would really appreciate any insight or advice. Thank you in advance.

Hi all, Looking for some clarity.. I have an app (Pocket Love: AI Roleplay Chat, Apple ID: 6745031268) that went through a long review process with many resubmissions. The feedback I received across those reviews was often generic “overtly sexual”) message, but without any detail on exactly what needed to change. Because of that, I approached it iteratively making adjustments each time based on what I thought the issue might be. Over time I made quite significant changes across the app (imagery, unlockable content, voice-overs, menus, copy, etc.), and increased the age rating to 18+. I also had a call with a policy eexpert & App Review. In the final interaction, I was asked to ensure all unlockable content was visible, so I re-uploaded a build and provided screenshots with everything pre-unlocked for transparency. Despite this, my account has now been flagged under 3.2(f) for “dishonest or fraudulent activity,” and is pending termination. What I’m struggling to understand is: Can repeated resubmissions / iterative changes alone be interpreted as “evasion” under 3.2(f)? Or does this typically mean App Review believes there was something intentionally misleading? From my perspective, I was trying to respond to feedback and get the app into a compliant state, not bypass review or hide anything. The game does have "sexy" imagery lingerie etc..and adult themes but 0 nudity and is tamer than similar games live on the app store. Would really appreciate any insight from others who’ve experienced similar, or from anyone familiar with how this is interpreted internally. I can't believe my account is pending termination without any intentional wrongdoing, I currently have 3 other live games one with strong revenue, that will be removed too due to this. My initial appeal was rejected today. Thanks!

Our app has been stuck in "Waiting for Review" for over a week now. We have submitted expedited review requests, but none of them have received a response. We also reached out through the Contact Us support page, but have not heard back either. What's strange is that during this same period, we submitted an update for another app under the same developer account, and it was approved in less than 12 hours. We believe there may be an issue on the App Store side. We are posting here in hopes of getting assistance from the engineering and review teams. Our app has been on the App Store for 7 years and has 10 million users. We need to deliver a critical bug fix and address certain review compliance requirements, but for reasons unknown to us, the submission has been stuck — something that has never happened to us before.

I submitted an app build and filled out the expedited review form, they quickly replied: “The issues we've identified below are eligible to be resolved on your next update. If this submission includes bug fixes and you'd like to have it approved at this time, reply to this message and let us know. You do not need to resubmit your app for us to proceed.” I replied with “Yes, please accept the current version now as it contains bug fixes, will resolve that issue later lalala” I replied again 1 day after the letter. And nothing. 2 days total have passed. So the replies do not go to the Expedited Review queue? What should I do? Reply again? Or resubmit the build with a comment “Important bug fixes, please accept immediately”? Or maybe call them, will a call help? Thank you so much!

Hello all - just developed my first app. Submitted to apple for review since February 26, 2026 and still stuck in "Waiting for review" status. Is this timing normal? I've filled out support tickets and no response I can see either. Curious how app review and response timing is for others?

I am submitting a new app, so the subscription has to be submitted as part of the overall app review at first, I can't submit it directly on its own. I didn't know this at first, and submitted the subscription directly. It obviously got rejected with the status "developer action needed". Now no matter what I change I cannot seem to get the status to update from "Developer Action Needed" to a more favorable status. This is obviously a problem because until I can get the status to update, I cannot attach it to submit with my app. Any ideas on how to get the status on my subscription to update to "Ready to submit" so that I can attach it with my binary and submit it with my overall app submission?

As the title suggests, I've been waiting over a month for a review. Testing patience to say the least when the official word is less than 72 hours.. What is going on? The version in review is now out of date as I've developed features quicker than Apple has been able to review them, yet I daren't remove the app from review as I'll lose my place in the queue. So even when/if it gets approved, I'll immediately have to add a new version for review. What a farce. Submission ID 994fa30a-92a6-4923-8cc8-b94090986b39

Hi everyone, My app has been stuck in "In Review" status for over 20 days with no updates. I submitted the app on March 1, 2026, the status changed to "In Review" on March 4, 2026, and after that no changes. App ID: 6755649144 I also reached out to Apple Developer Support on March 15 but haven't received any response. Support Case ID: 102845096494 Could someone from App Review please take a look? Also any advice on how to move things forward would be appreciated. Thank you!

Hi, Please review my app I’m reaching out regarding an issue with my app review process. I was expecting a call last week but unfortunately didn’t receive any contact. I would really appreciate it if someone from the team could either review the app as soon as possible or contact me directly. I’m available anytime for a call. thanks

I've been rejected a couple of times for Guidelines 5.1.1(i) and 5.1.2(i) regarding third-party AI data sharing consent. Each time, the reviewer states they cannot see the consent prompt, even though it is the first screen displayed on every app launch. My app (GymFusion) uses Anthropic's Claude AI for features like meal scanning, body composition analysis, and workout coaching. Here is exactly what I've implemented: IN-APP CONSENT (embedded in view hierarchy, not a sheet/popup): In my RootView.swift, the consent is a conditional view that blocks the entire app: } else if !consentManager.hasConsented && !consentManager.hasSeenConsent { AIConsentView() } else if auth.isAuthenticated { MainTabView() } The hasSeenConsent flag is reset to false on every app launch in the App's init(), so the consent screen appears on every launch until the user accepts: init() { UserDefaults.standard.set(false, forKey: "user_ai_consent_seen") AIConsentManager.shared.hasSeenConsent = false FirebaseApp.configure() } THE CONSENT SCREEN INCLUDES: Lists all personal data shared (meal photos, water glass photos, workout history, progress photos, body measurements, fitness profile) Names Anthropic, PBC (Claude AI) as the third-party recipient 3 required acknowledgment checkboxes that must all be checked before "I Agree" is enabled Cannot be swiped away (.interactiveDismissDisabled) "Decline" lets user proceed but consent reappears next launch Users can revoke consent anytime in More tab PRIVACY POLICY INCLUDES: Names Anthropic as third-party AI provider Lists all data collected and shared States Anthropic provides "same or equal protection of user data" Explains consent and revocation process Link: https://ahmedali420911.github.io/gymfusion-legal/privacy-policy.html WHAT THE REVIEWER SAYS EACH TIME: "We were not presented with the consent prompt on launch or anywhere else in the app." WHAT I'VE VERIFIED: Aiconsentview.swift is in the Xcode build target (confirmed in project.pbxproj with 4 references) Consent appears correctly on simulator and physical device UserDefaults resets hasSeenConsent to false on every launch The file compiles without errors DerivedData has been cleared before archiving Clean build performed before every archive MY QUESTIONS: Could there be a reason the consent screen doesn't appear on the reviewer's device even though it shows correctly on mine? Is there a known issue with SwiftUI conditional views not rendering on certain devices or iOS versions? Has anyone else experienced App Review not seeing UI that works correctly in their own testing? Should I attach screenshots of the consent dialog in the App Review notes or reply? Is there something else Apple expects beyond an in-app consent dialog and privacy policy for third-party AI data sharing? I've been stuck on this for over a month across 8 submissions. Any help or insight would be greatly appreciated.

My app has been rejected repeatedly for showing 3rd party content but the content they flagged is owned by me. I believe it was caused by me charging the display name of the app, however the add id is the same and the bundle id is the same as before. Any time I submit with those comment, it is still being rejected. If you have any suggestions it would be helpful.

My team is evaluating an iOS companion app for our own network-connected device, and we want to understand whether the planned architecture would likely create an App Review problem under Guideline 2.5.17. Our situation is: We are building our own device and our own companion app. We do not intend to market the device as a Matter-certified device initially. We do not intend to support Apple Home or broad third-party Matter ecosystem interoperability in the first release. We are under a tight schedule and are considering reusing Matter/CSA-derived libraries, data models, and protocol concepts internally to reduce engineering effort and move faster toward eventual certification. Our current understanding is that there are already many iOS apps that communicate with LAN-connected devices using proprietary protocols, so our initial assumption is that a vendor-specific local-network device workflow should generally be acceptable. The point we are trying to clarify is whether that changes if the implementation under the hood is based in part on Matter-derived components. The idea we are considering is: Ship an initial release where the device and app use a vendor-specific onboarding and communication flow. The implementation would likely use something based on connectedhomeip under the hood, but the shipped protocol would be intentionally modified so that it is proprietary in practice and not interoperable with the broader Matter ecosystem. In other words, the device would not present as a normal Matter accessory, and other Matter controllers/devices would not be able to communicate with it as if it were a standard Matter device. Later, after full Matter certification work is complete, we would deliver an OTA update to enable proper Matter ecosystem interoperability. The question we are trying to answer is whether the mobile app itself would likely be acceptable on the App Store during that first phase. More specifically: If our app communicates only with our own device and not with Apple Home or third-party Matter controllers, but internally reuses Matter-derived software/protocol components, would Apple still likely consider that an app that “supports Matter” for purposes of Guideline 2.5.17? If the app includes something based on connectedhomeip or a modified subset of such a library, but the shipped device/app behavior is intentionally not interoperable with the general Matter ecosystem, is that still likely to be treated as use of a non-Apple Matter software component that must already be CSA-certified for iOS? From App Review’s point of view, what matters most here: whether Apple’s Matter pairing framework is used, whether the product is presented to users as a Matter accessory, whether the protocol remains interoperable with third-party Matter ecosystems, or simply whether Matter-derived software/components are included in the app at all? Is there a meaningful App Review distinction between: a proprietary device protocol designed entirely in-house, and a vendor-specific protocol that reuses Matter-derived transport/session/data-model components internally but is intentionally incompatible with standard Matter interoperability in the shipped product? We are trying to understand whether this staged approach is fundamentally incompatible with App Review, or whether it can be acceptable as a vendor-specific device workflow during development toward full certification.

I’m working toward an official release of our application. The app is designed to interface with peripheral devices, which means users need both the mobile app and the peripheral devices to log in and use it. Because of that, how would the review process work when I get to that point?

Hello everyone, I recently submitted my iOS app for review, but it was unfortunately rejected under Guideline 2.1(a) - Performance - App Completeness. For context, my app is a healthcare application built with Ionic. According to the App Review team's message, they found the app to be incomplete. They stated they were unable to review the app because they couldn't get past the login screen. The Root Cause: Upon investigating, we discovered the issue is related to IP Geo-blocking. Because the app handles sensitive healthcare data, our API provider strictly blocks all network traffic originating from outside of Italy to legally comply with European GDPR regulations. Since the App Review team tests from the US, their requests are being entirely blocked by the firewall, causing the login to fail and the app to look broken on their end. What I have verified so far: I have provided valid demo account credentials in the App Store Connect App Review Information section. I have tested the app thoroughly on physical devices and simulators (iOS 16/17) in Italy and couldn't reproduce any crashes or login issues. My Questions for the Community: Has anyone successfully navigated this situation before? Will Apple accept a detailed video demonstration of the app functioning correctly from an Italian IP? Is it possible to request that they review it using a local VPN? Or is the only reliable solution to build a completely separate "mock" environment with dummy data just for the App Review team? Are there any common pitfalls I might be overlooking here? Any advice on how to properly address this with the App Review Board would be greatly appreciated. Thank you