Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles

RSS for tag

Discuss the technical details of security certificates, identifiers, and profiles used by the OS to ensure validity of apps and services on device.

Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles Documentation

Posts under Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles subtopic

Post

Replies

Boosts

Views

Activity

New Capabilities Request Tab in Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles
You can now easily request access to managed capabilities for your App IDs directly from the new Capability Requests tab in Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles > Identifiers. With this update, view available capabilities in one convenient location, check the status of your requested capabilities, and see any notes from Apple related to your requests. Learn more about capability requests.
0
0
839
Jun ’25
I cannot get my certificate to be production ready
No matter how many times I download what seems to be a cert for Mac App Distribution Certificate Type Mac App Distribution When I look at its Apple Mac App Signing extension property in the keychain, it always says Apple Mac App Signing (Development) Whenever I try to use it to code sign, the signing is 'generic' which fails security checks. AI says... The certificate field Apple Mac App Signing (Development) (1.2.840.113635.100.6.1.7) indicates that the certificate is intended for development purposes. This type of certificate is used for signing macOS applications during the development and testing phases. But that is not what I am expecting to get from the certificate type Mac App Distribution. What can I do to actually get to production?
0
0
387
Dec ’24
How to issue a code signing certificate with RSA4096bit
I would like to code sign an app or installer with an RSA 4096-bit code signing certificate. I created a CSR using RSA4096bit and ECC in Mac Keychain Access, but I was unable to use that CSR to create a code signing certificate on the Apple Developer site. How do I issue an RSA4096-bit or ECC code signing certificate?
0
0
417
Dec ’24
The product archive package's signature is invalid
The product archive package's signature is invalid. Ensure that it is signed with your "3rd Party Mac Developer Installer" certificate. (90237) I'm receiving this error, despite the fact that I'm using this certificate when creating the pkg (with electron-forge) My configuration is shown below - note the 3rd Party Mac Developer Installer identity when using new MakerPKG. const config: ForgeConfig = { packagerConfig: { asar: true, name: 'Deep Focus', icon: 'resources/icon.icns', osxSign: { identity: 'Apple Distribution: Timeo Williams (3Y4F3KTSJA)', type: 'distribution', provisioningProfile: '/Users/timeo/Desktop/Deep Focus/deepWork/distribution.provisionprofile', preAutoEntitlements: false, // eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/explicit-function-return-type optionsForFile() { return { entitlements: 'build/entitlements.mas.plist' } } }, extendInfo: 'build/info.plist', osxUniversal: { mergeASARs: true }, appCategoryType: 'public.app-category.productivity', appBundleId: 'com.electron.deepfocus', extraResource: [ 'resources/.env', 'resources/icon.icns', ] }, rebuildConfig: {}, makers: [ new MakerSquirrel({}), new MakerZIP({}), new MakerRpm({}), new MakerDeb({}), new MakerDMG({ appPath: './out/Deep Focus-darwin-arm64/Deep Focus.app', name: 'Deep Focus', icon: './resources/icon.icns', format: 'ULFO', overwrite: true, contents: (opts) => [ { x: 130, y: 220, type: 'file', path: opts.appPath }, { x: 410, y: 220, type: 'link', path: '/Applications' } ] }), new MakerPKG({ name: 'Deep Focus', identity: '3rd Party Mac Developer Installer: Timeo Williams (3Y4F3KTSJA)' }) ], plugins: [ new VitePlugin({ build: [ { entry: 'src/main.ts', config: 'vite.main.config.ts', target: 'main' }, { entry: 'src/preload.ts', config: 'vite.preload.config.ts', target: 'preload' } ], renderer: [ { name: 'main_window', config: 'vite.renderer.config.mts' // Path to Vite config for renderer process } ] }), new FusesPlugin({ version: FuseVersion.V1, [FuseV1Options.RunAsNode]: false, [FuseV1Options.EnableCookieEncryption]: true, [FuseV1Options.EnableNodeOptionsEnvironmentVariable]: false, [FuseV1Options.EnableNodeCliInspectArguments]: false, [FuseV1Options.EnableEmbeddedAsarIntegrityValidation]: true, [FuseV1Options.OnlyLoadAppFromAsar]: true }) ] } Yet, I'm getting the error from Transporter that it's invalid?
0
0
534
Dec ’24
Family Control Request Form
I am writing to follow up on my request for Family Control permission, which I submitted through the appropriate form over a week ago. Unfortunately, I have not yet received any response or access to the requested permissions. Could you kindly provide an update on the status of my request? If any further information or action is needed from my end, please let me know.
0
0
377
Dec ’24
xcode unable to find app store provisioning profile in command line build
Hi, I am trying to make my app build on GitHub Action CI pipeline. App builds fine on xcode on my mac. For CI I am using command line xcode. I am getting following error: No profiles for 'com.snslocation.electricians-now' were found: Xcode couldn't find any iOS App Development provisioning profiles matching 'com.snslocation.electricians-now'. Automatic signing is disabled and unable to generate a profile. To enable automatic signing, pass -allowProvisioningUpdates to xcodebuild. (in target 'myapp' from project 'myapp') You can see full log of the build here: https://github.com/nbulatovi/ElectriciansNow/actions/runs/12603115423/job/35127512689 The provisioning profile is present, and verified in the previous steps in the pipeline, however xcode refuses to find it. If I add -allowProvisioningUpdates error stays. I tried manually mapping app id to profile name. Is there a way to get any debug log from xcode profile search, to see why is it not picking up the correct profile? Or can you maybe help in some other way? xcode version is 15.4, iOS SDK 17.5
0
0
648
Jan ’25
Outdated and Restrictive Certificate Signing Process
Title: Apple's Outdated and Restrictive Certificate Signing Process: A Barrier to Innovation Introduction In the dynamic field of mobile app development, the agility and freedom offered to developers can significantly dictate the pace of innovation and user satisfaction. Apple's certificate signing process, a legacy from an earlier era of computing, starkly contrasts with more modern approaches, particularly Android's Keystore system. This article delves into the cumbersome nature of Apple's approach, arguing that its outdated and proprietary methods hinder the development process and stifle innovation. The Burdensome Nature of Apple's Certificate Signing Proprietary Restrictions: Apple's certificate signing is not just a process; it's a gatekeeper. By forcing developers to go through its own system to obtain certificates, Apple maintains a tight grip on what gets published and updated. This closed ecosystem approach reflects a dated philosophy in an age where flexibility and openness are key drivers of technological advancement. Complex and Time-Consuming: The process to acquire and maintain a valid certificate for app signing is notoriously intricate and bureaucratic. Developers must navigate a maze of procedures including certificate requests, renewals, and provisioning profiles. Each step is a potential roadblock, delaying urgent updates and bug fixes, which can be crucial for user retention and satisfaction. Lack of Autonomy: Apple's centralized control means every application must be signed under the stringent watch of its guidelines. This lack of autonomy not only slows down the release cycle but also curbs developers' creative processes, as they must often compromise on innovative features to meet Apple's strict approval standards. Comparing Android’s Keystore System Developer-Friendly: In stark contrast, Android’s Keystore system empowers developers by allowing them to manage their cryptographic keys independently. This system supports a more intuitive setup where keys can be generated and stored within the Android environment, bypassing the need for any external approval. Speed and Flexibility: Android developers can use the same key across multiple applications and decide their expiration terms, which can be set to never expire. This flexibility facilitates a quicker development process, enabling developers to push updates and new features with minimal delay. The Impact on the Developer Ecosystem Innovation Stifling: Apple's outdated certificate signing process does not just affect the technical side of app development but also impacts the broader ecosystem. It places unnecessary hurdles in front of developers, particularly small developers who may lack the resources to frequently manage certificate renewals and navigate Apple’s rigorous approval process. Market Response: The market has shown a preference for platforms that offer more freedom and less bureaucratic interference. Android's growing market share in many regions can be partially attributed to its more developer-friendly environment, which directly contrasts with Apple's tightly controlled ecosystem. Conclusion Apple’s certificate signing method, while ensuring a secure environment, is an archaic relic in today’s fast-paced tech world. It binds developers with outdated, proprietary chains that hinder rapid development and innovation. As the technological landscape evolves towards more open and flexible systems, Apple’s restrictive practices could potentially alienate developers and erode its competitive edge. For Apple to maintain its relevance and appeal among the developer community, a significant overhaul of its certificate signing process is not just beneficial—it's necessary.
0
0
329
Jan ’25
Best Practices for Maintaining Long-Term Validity of Signed XCFrameworks
I am developing and distributing an XCFramework, and I want to ensure that it remains valid for as long as possible. I have some questions regarding certificate expiration and revocation: I understand that if an XCFramework is signed with a timestamp, it remains valid even after the signing certificate expires. However, if the signing certificate is revoked, the XCFramework immediately becomes unusable. As far as I know, Apple allows a maximum of two active distribution certificates at the same time. I assume that once a certificate expires, it will eventually need to be revoked in order to issue a third certificate. Is this correct? If an expired certificate is later revoked, will the XCFrameworks signed with that certificate also become invalid, even though they were timestamped? I want to ensure that released XCFrameworks remain valid for as long as possible. What is the best approach to achieve this? If anyone has insights or official documentation references on how to manage signing certificates for long-term XCFramework validity, I would appreciate your guidance. Thank you!
0
0
411
Feb ’25
any pyqt user here? can you tech me how to make a perfect app
i was complete my program, and export a mac app already it work ok in my macmini, but if i want send it to app store, that i have no way now i still do not know how to make this app perfect like, when i use pyinstaller to build this app, is there any info or elements need make with? i can sign my app now, even i use codesign -dvvv my.app to check the sign, it is also ok, there no any feedback said it anything wrong. so, any master know fix app sign or any infoplist please tech me... help
0
0
237
Feb ’25
watchkitapp.complication identifier is not available
The mentioned way of setting up complications does not work. We can't create the identifier according to the guideline mentioned in the WWDC session. https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2020/10049/?time=1021 Timestamp: 17:04 Error: An attribute in the provided entity has invalid value An App ID with Identifier '.watchkitapp.complication' is not available. Please enter a different string. To clarify - the non masked identifier is not used on another property inside our dev program. Without creating the identifier our tests result in not working push notifications. Error message while testing: discarded as application was not registered. Is the way mentioned in the WWDC session still valid? BR
0
2
281
Mar ’25
After Waiting A Month For The Family Controls Entitlement, I'm Now Finding Out I Need One For Each New App ID To Be Signed?
Hey everyone, I was granted access to Family Controls (Distribution) for my main App ID The entitlement is visible and enabled in the App ID configuration. I’ve successfully created and used a provisioning profile that injects com.apple.developer.family-controls for the main app. ✅ However, the issue is with an extension target under the same parent App ID and all others Despite enabling the Family Controls (Development) capability in this extension’s App ID config, every new provisioning profile I generate for the extension fails to include the entitlement. I’ve confirmed this by: • Dumping the .mobileprovision with security cms -D → no sign of com.apple.developer.family-controls • Recreating the profile multiple times (Development and Distribution) • Ensuring the entitlement is toggled on in the portal • Validating the parent app profile does include it ⸻ ❗Question: Is there a known issue where Family Controls doesn’t get injected into extension App IDs even after team approval? Or is there an extra step I need to take to get this entitlement injected properly into provisioning profiles for app extensions?
0
0
76
Mar ’25
How to Share Provisioning Profiles with Customers for macOS App Distribution
I am distributing a macOS application outside the App Store using Developer ID and need to provide provisioning profiles to customers for installation during the package installation process. I have two questions: How can I package and provide the provisioning profile(s) so that the customer can install them easily during the application installation process? Are there any best practices or tools that could simplify this step? In my case, there are multiple provisioning profiles. Should I instruct the customer to install each profile individually, or is there a way to combine them and have them installed all at once? Any guidance on the best practices for this process would be greatly appreciated.
0
0
104
Jun ’25
Unable to test my apps, crashing with provisioning profile validation
Since around September (iOS 26 release), i'm unable to test my app normally. It says "internet connection is required to verify [my certificate id]", or just crashing. All terms and conditions accepted, everything is valid, certificates are OK. Reinstallation via xcode does not help. Removal of provisioning profile, generating new does not help. Revoking of certificate and generating new does for around week, then it happens again, but do i need to do it every week now? In logs i see the following: default amfid validation failed because of missing trust and/or authorization (0xe8008026) error amfid not valid: 0xe8008026: The provisioning profile requires online authorization. error amfid Unexpected MISError (0xe8008026): The provisioning profile requires online authorization. default +0300 amfid /private/var/containers/Bundle/Application/5B8E560E-75B2-46EF-8606-02072D99E9CF//Frameworks/oss.dylib not valid: Error Domain=AppleMobileFileIntegrityError Code=-400 "An unknown error was encountered" UserInfo={NSURL=file:///private/var/containers/Bundle/Application/5B8E560E-75B2-46EF-8606-02072D99E9CF//Frameworks/oss.dylib, NSLocalizedDescription=An unknown error was encountered} default kernel AMFI: code signature validation failed. It looks like apple validation servers are not working, or is it iOS bug? All provisioning profiles are showing like "valid" in apple developer center. My network is not behind a proxy, connection is direct. If use EXACTLY the same app, signed with the same provisioning, same signature, on another test device, it works! When i reset current device to default settings and installing the EXACTLY same app after it, it works as well. Looking for a help from apple developer support
0
1
66
3w
On macOS Network Extension Deactivation
Hello, I’m developing a macOS application signed with a Developer ID (outside the App Store) that includes a Network Extension. The app has been successfully notarized, and the network filter is registered, but the Network Extension itself remains inactive — it does not install or run properly. It seems that the issue might be related to the entitlements configuration between the container app and the Network Extension target. Could you please provide a detailed checklist for: The required entitlements and configurations for the container app, and The required entitlements and configurations for the Network Extension target? Additionally, are there any specific Xcode settings that are mandatory for the Network Extension to be properly installed and activated on macOS when distributed via Developer ID? Thank you in advance for your help.
0
0
52
14h
On macOS Network Extension Deactivation
Hello, I’m developing a macOS application signed with a Developer ID (outside the App Store) that includes a Network Extension. The app has been successfully notarized, and the network filter is registered, but the Network Extension itself remains inactive — it does not install or run properly. It seems that the issue might be related to the entitlements configuration between the container app and the Network Extension target. Could you please provide a detailed checklist for: 1.The required entitlements and configurations for the container app, and 2.The required entitlements and configurations for the Network Extension target? Additionally, are there any specific Xcode settings that are mandatory for the Network Extension to be properly installed and activated on macOS when distributed via Developer ID? Thank you in advance for your help.
0
0
55
13h