Hello, I’m building an iOS application that supports peer-to-peer file transfer. My goal is to use the WebRTC data channel only (no audio or video) to send files between users. I understand from Apple’s documentation that: • Apps are generally suspended in the background, and arbitrary sockets (like WebRTC) do not continue running. • Background file transfer is officially supported via URLSessionConfiguration.background, which the system manages reliably even if the app is suspended or terminated. • VoIP use cases require CallKit + audio/VoIP background modes, and CallKit must be used for legitimate calls (audio/video). What I want to confirm is: Is it supported for a WebRTC peer connection using only the data channel (no audio/video track, no CallKit call) to continue sending data when the app is in the background or locked? I considered using BGProcessingTask and BGAppRefreshTask, but as far as I can tell, those don’t allow maintaining long-lived sockets for active data transfer. Real-world developer discussions suggest that WebRTC connections are dropped when the app is backgrounded on iOS unless there’s at least one active audio track to keep the session alive. Can someone from Apple confirm if my understanding is correct—that data-only WebRTC connections will be killed in background unless they’re part of an active audio/video call with the appropriate entitlements? Thanks in advance!

Apple must comply with U.S. laws. Under U.S. sanctions regulations and export controls, Apple cannot do business with certain apps or developers connected to U.S. embargoed countries or regions. We have recently identified that the app is subject to U.S. sanctions regulations or export controls. Therefore, we are unable to approve the app at this time. This area of law is complex and constantly changing, and should changes be made to U.S. law in the future you can resubmit the app. You can contact the U.S. Department of the Treasury or the Bureau of Industry and Security of the U.S. Department of Commerce should you have questions. Our app we did is for mainly for syria , Any idea how it can be solved , its a classified app

Hi. My friend and I are new to app developing. We made an app together and I made one alone on the side. But we are not joined. we each pay seperate taxes and not som scam design post of apps. Apple flagged both with spam design, so we assumed it was related. but not sure anymore. app1 is a travel related app operating globally. we have IAP but also destination inspirarion and global food information, which is free in the app. app2 is about one single country and has a lot of information about travelling in that country and some IAP too. IAP in both app are the same product, but unique in appstore. it only exists on websites apart from these two apps. both are made in adalo so even though the colours are different they are made in the same system. we have tried so much to get app1 through but they keep rejecting with spam design. they approved app 2 after a while they suddenly approved app2. we are trying hard to figure out what the issue is, we dont see any other apps with this. does anyone know what it can be? we have changed name, re designed, made sure text is not generic, added value for the users. explained we operate seperate even though we know each other. Also my name is in app1 apple id and bundle id, as well as in app2. if that could be an issue?

Hi. My friend and I are new to app developing. We made an app together and I made one alone on the side. But we are not joined. we each pay seperate taxes and not some scam design post of apps. Apple flagged both with spam design, so we assumed it was related. but not sure anymore. app1 is a travel related app operating globally. we have IAP but also destination inspiration and global food information, which is free in the app. app2 is about one single country and has a lot of information about travelling in that country and some IAP too. IAP in both apps are the same product, but unique in appstore. it only exists on websites apart from these two apps. both are made in adalo so even though the colours are different they are made in the same system. In app1 IAP is the main product, in app2 its not. we have tried so much to get app1 through but they keep rejecting with spam design. After a while they suddenly approved app2, after renaming it, changing colours and highlighting the information about the country is a demand. But we did the same to app1. It very frustrating not to know exactly whats wrong. we are trying hard to figure out what the issue is, we dont see any other apps with this. does anyone know what it can be? we have changed name, re designed, made sure text is not generic, added value for the users. explained we operate seperate even though we know each other. This is the message: Hello, The issues we previously identified still need your attention. If you have any questions, we are here to help. Reply to this message in App Store Connect and let us know. Review Environment Submission ID: fa7d0e0a-661b-4101-afc4-b0d6cee7e648 Review date: September 05, 2025 Version reviewed: 1.0 Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam We continue to notice your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as apps submitted to the App Store by other developers, with only minor differences. Submitting similar or repackaged apps is a form of spam that creates clutter and makes it difficult for users to discover new apps. Next Steps Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a unique app with distinct content and functionality.

Hi I am a developer working on an enterprise app. I was recently rejected from the Apple Develop Enterprise Program. So I'm thinking of distributing Unlisted App as an alternative. The app I want to review is as follows Authentication App Requires installation of external security solution for login (Screen Protect, OTP) Sign in with an account managed by your organization Forward authentication to the integration app Groupware requires installation of an authenticator app login by forwarding authentication from the authenticator app View intranet information I want to know if the above type of app can pass through Unlisted App.

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.

Is it possible to submit updates to our App Store content (such as new screenshots, Promotional text, or description) using a previously approved build, without submitting a new binary? Essentially, we want to ensure that metadata updates can be reviewed independently and won’t need to be coupled with a feature update. This is primarily because we’d like to avoid a situation where a feature update gets delayed or rejected due to issues in the metadata. Could you please confirm if this is supported? And if so, are there any best practices or guidelines we should follow when submitting metadata only updates?

Hi good day, I uploaded my APP a second time, the first time it took 2 months to have someone look at it. Now it is taking over 3 weeks. Can someone please share with me why my Review keeps getting looked over?

Hey Everyone! I recently submitted an app that aggregates publicly available information from the web. The app does not access device contacts, social graphs, or any private user data. Instead, it only takes user-inputted queries (such as a name and location) and organizes information already available on public websites. During review, I received feedback under Guideline 5.1.2 (Privacy – Data Collection and Storage), stating that the app collects information about third parties without consent. I want to make sure I fully understand the scope of this guideline. Since the app is only aggregating information that is already public, and not accessing private sources or contacts, does this still fall under 5.1.2? If so, are there recommended approaches or wording changes to make sure such apps are compliant? Any insights from other developers or Apple staff would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

Hi, We’re reaching out to the community because we’re stuck in a situation that’s becoming critical for our launch timeline and could really use some advice. We submitted our app on August 11, 2025. Over the following days, we worked closely with App Review, made revisions, and provided every piece of information they requested. On August 19, 2025, we finally received this message: “Your submission’s review will require additional time as we take this new information into account. We do not require any further information at this time. Once we have thoroughly reviewed your submission, we will either contact you in App Store Connect to communicate any issues found, or your submission will be approved.” We followed up days later and got this response: “We apologize for the delay. Your submission is still in review but is requiring additional time. We will provide further status updates as soon as we are able.” It’s been 12+ days with no updates, and the app is still stuck in “Unresolved Issue” status. This delay has now pushed us past our launch deadline, and we’re unsure why the process is taking so long. We completely understand that expedited reviews aren’t always possible, but given the urgency and importance of this project, we’re doing everything we can to move forward. If anyone from App Review happens to see this, or if any developers have gone through something similar and can share advice, we’d really appreciate it. Thanks in advance!

Hello everyone, I’ve been struggling with App Store Review regarding my delivery app, and I’m hoping someone here can shed light on whether my app actually requires In-App Purchase (IAP) under Apple’s guidelines. Here’s my situation: My app connects riders with delivery jobs. We have two rider payment models: Commission Plan (10%) – Riders don’t pay upfront, but 10% is deducted per completed delivery. Fixed Subscription Plan – Riders pay a fixed monthly fee in advance, which allows them to keep 100% of their delivery earnings. The challenge: Apple Review has rejected my app multiple times, insisting that I must use IAP for these payments. I’ve written back and forth with them several times explaining that: The commission plan isn’t a digital feature, it’s simply a revenue share from physical delivery work. The fixed plan is more like a business service fee for using the platform, not for unlocking content or digital features. Despite this, the Review Team continues to state that my app “requires IAP.” My questions are: Based on Apple’s official guidelines, do apps like mine (delivery/logistics with commission/subscription for riders) really fall under IAP rules? Has anyone here had a similar issue with a marketplace or service-based app? If this does require IAP, what’s the reasoning — since the payments are tied to real-world services, not digital content? I’d appreciate advice, shared experiences, or even clarification from someone who has successfully passed review with a similar model. Thanks in advance!

Hi everyone, I currently have two apps stuck in TestFlight beta review for over 30 days without any progress: App ID: 6749024874 — Case ID: 102673603146 App ID: 6749025418 — Case ID: 102673604516 I contacted Apple Support, but they told me this situation is “normal.” From my experience, TestFlight reviews usually take a day or two, sometimes up to a week, but not this long. Has anyone else experienced such long delays with TestFlight beta reviews? Is there anything I should do (cancel and resubmit, escalate further, or just wait)? I would also like to request support from the App Review team to look into these case IDs and provide clarification. Thank you.

My app has been stuck in "Waiting for Review" status since July 25, 2025 (24 days and counting), far exceeding Apple’s typical review timeline. Despite multiple checks, I’ve received no updates or communication from App Review. Is this delay related to a known system issue? How can I escalate this to Apple’s review team? (Email/phone options?) Are there hidden rejections or metadata problems not shown in App Store Connect? Hopefully get help. Best regards!

It's been more than a week since the App was validated and published. Yet, the IAP (subscriptions) are still waiting for review. I've sent an email to Apple 5 days ago on the topic and i'm still waitinf or an answer. I have to ship a complete version to my client quickly, can anyone do something, like an admin passing by by any chance ? Or does anyone have a tips/trick to unstuck me ? :') Note : I've tried to send another version with a note saying "please review my IAP", the version got accepted but the IAP are still not reviewed... Thanks in advance, Have a good day.

Hi Team, I have my app's version 1.15 available in App Store. Recently I had a new build 1.15.1 reviewed and deployed in app store. But due to some issue, i need to go back to 1.15 and remove 1.15.1 from store. What options do i have and best course of action? Regards, Sandeep

Hi everyone, We’re a U.S.-registered company and just submitted our primary app for review. We tried to be proactive: our initial submission included very detailed Notes to the Reviewer to avoid back-and-forth. Despite that, our first rejection asked for items we had already covered in Notes. Within ~30 minutes we replied in the Resolution Center with expanded details. The app went back to review and about 90% of the concerns were resolved. After that, we could see from our logs that the reviewer actively tested the app and requested additional legal documentation. We provided everything promptly, but the next response was a rejection under Guideline 4.3(a) – Design – Spam. There was no additional explanation tying 4.3(a) to anything specific in our binary or metadata, and this guideline hasn’t come up for us before. Here’s what we already provided via the Resolution Center: Test credentials and clear steps to access all app areas Detailed terms and in-app disclosures Executed agreements with our partners Copies/links to partner licenses Given that context, a 4.3(a) outcome is confusing. We don’t publish template/duplicate apps, and we’re not keyword-stuffing metadata. The reviewer who requested legal docs appeared to be actively testing, but the final 4.3(a) decision didn’t include clarifying notes. We’re very concerned about this situation and would truly appreciate your advice on how to move forward.

We are currently using Swift to develop our Apple application, and we are considering switching to a cross-platform solution as part of our technical evaluation. Recently, React Native (RN) has been revitalized, and it supports application hot updates, allowing us to update the app without going through the app store release process. Additionally, we have conducted some market research and found that many apps are using RN and leveraging its hot update functionality for app updates. I would like to know whether RN's hot update feature is compliant with Apple's policies and if there is any risk of the app being removed from the App Store. I hope to receive some guidance on this matter. Please do not delete this post—this is just a help-seeking post from an iOS developer without any malicious intent.

We have been developing our game “Ailem Olur Musun” for 8 months and submitted it to the App Store. However, our application was rejected under Guideline 4.1 – Copycats. Our game is a completely original project. Its story, visuals, logo, and design were all created from scratch by our team members. The main character of the game is a delivery worker, and the drawing we made for this character is used as the game’s symbol. Despite this, our application was rejected on the grounds that it was considered to be “imitating another popular game.” This game has also been published on the Play Store and has achieved a significant number of downloads and reviews. How can I best explain this to the review team?

Hi everyone, I’m relatively new to the App Store and currently navigating a review situation. I’d really appreciate any advice or perspective. Here’s the timeline: Aug 11: I submitted version 1.3.0 of my app (App ID: 6742771536). Aug 12: The status moved from “Waiting for Review” to “In Review.” Since then, it has remained in In Review for about 13 working days without further updates. In the past, my submissions have typically moved through review more quickly, so I’m wondering if there’s anything I might be overlooking. I do have a pre-order release scheduled for Sept 2, 2025, so I want to make sure everything is on track. ❓ My questions: -Is it normal for some apps to remain in “In Review” for this long? My previous version was approved within a few hours. -Should I cancel the review and resubmit? I saw folks here mentioned that is a bad idea. -Could there be any metadata or review note details I should double-check? -For newer developers, is this something that occasionally just happens as part of the process? Thanks in advance for any guidance — I’d love to learn from the experience of others here.

I am a CTO and iOS app developer implementing Two-Factor Authentication (2FA) in our application. Our app now requires 2FA for all user accounts. We need guidance on how to provide test access to the App Store Review team. Since the login factors are device binding and Biometrics or password, a tester from your review team will never be able to fulfill the device binding requirement since the account has not been setup on their device. We cannot disable 2FA for some test accounts, as suggested in other forum posts, as this would introduce a major security risk for our application. What is the reccomended approach here? What information should we include in the "App Review Information" section to help reviewers access our app?