We are developing an application for local file discovery and transfer. We applied to Apple for two permissions. One is com.apple.developer.networking.multicast, which supports the four provisioning profiles: Development, Ad hoc, App Store Connect, and Developer ID. The other is com.apple.developer.device-information.user-assigned-device-name, but Apple only approved it for Development and Ad hoc, without granting App Store Connect support. This prevents us from using the user-assigned-device-name permission in the archive. Could you please clarify the situation? How can we get user-assigned-device-name supported for App Store Connect?

Hi. I'm an iOS developer, We are creating a Automaker Carplay app for an Automaker provider, but we are facing some troubles: Xcode error: Provisioning profile "iOS Team Provisioning Profile: BundleIdentifier" doesn't match the entitlements file's value for the com.apple.developer.carplay-protocols entitlement. We have the entitlements requested and approved by apple, but we cannot deploy the app in real devices. We don't know if we need to do an extra step. Thank you very much.

After installing n application to my AppleTv I can't open it up. I get: This app cannot be installed because its integrity could not be verified.

Is it correct to codesign dylib/framewoks with entitlements? My understanding is that only executables need to have the entitlement and the dylibs loaded in that process will automatically inherit those entitlements. However, I am seeing a lot of scripts on the internet that are signing dylibs as well with entitlements. For eg - # sign *.dylibs find "$APP_BUNDLE" -type f -name "*.dylib" -exec codesign --deep --force --verify --verbose --timestamp --options runtime --entitlements "$ENTITLEMENTS_FILE" --sign "$SIGNING_IDENTITY" {} \; Is this even allowed? I know of at least one app that has passed notarization checks as well. If allowed, can a dylib have more entitlements than the process that loaded it?

I'm working on a system extension leveraging endpoint security entitlement. However, while in development, is there a way to continue working and testing locally without having the endpoint security entitlement approved or needing the extension signed. I got these errors running a build: Provisioning profile "Mac Team Provisioning Profile: "com.xxxxx.extension" doesn't include the com.apple.developer.endpoint-security.client entitlement.

/Users/varunashokbhaisidpara/Desktop/Screenshot 2024-11-15 at 5.43.44 PM.png This error occurs When I try to upload an app on the test flight or App Store. I checked "Automatically manage signing" in the main target. and i have added extensions DeviceActivityMonitorExtension, ShieldConfigurationExtension, ShieldActionExtension, DeviceActivityReport. and all have selected "Automatically manage signing" in the target > signing and capability. pls provide me with an exact solution set by step. Thank you

Hello, I cannot build a signed app that will both be accepted by Testflight and run locally. Only one or the other! I'm singing my .app and building the package thus: CODESIGN_ID="Apple Distribution: company (number)" INSTALLSIGN_ID="3rd Party Mac Developer Installer: company (number)" codesign --force --deep --entitlements plist.xcent -o runtime --timestamp --sign "$CODESIGN_ID" myapp.app productbuild --sign "$INSTALLSIGN_ID" --timestamp --component myapp.app /Applications myapp.pkg With entitlements: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <plist version="1.0"> <dict> <key>com.apple.security.get-task-allow</key> <false/> <key>com.apple.security.app-sandbox</key> <true/> <key>com.apple.security.network.client</key> <true/> <key>com.apple.security.files.user-selected.read-write</key> <true/> <key>com.apple.security.inherit</key> <true/> <key>com.apple.application-identifier</key> <string>TEAM.com.COMPANY.APPNAME</string> <key>com.apple.developer.team-identifier</key> <string>TEAM/string> </dict> </plist> If I leave out the last two entitlements "com.apple.application-identifier" and "com.apple.developer.team-identifier", the package validates and runs locally. It can be uploaded but it is NOT accepted by Testflight. When i add the last two entitlements (above), it will not validate until i also add in my provisioning profile into; myapp.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile When this is done, the package validates, uploads and is accepted by Testflight. It can be tested and runs. But, myapp.app will no longer run locally!! no will the local copy of myapp.pkg install. It will only run through Testflight or will run again if i take out the above keys that Testflight apparently requires. Can anyone shed any light on this? Am i doing something wrong. Thanks for any help.

We have a DriverKit entitlement for our USB driver. We now wish to use this same driver with a variant of our existing application. Of course this application has its own separate App ID and will be published in the App Store alongside our existing application. Will we need to go back to the well and ask Apple for another entitlement?

I have a werid case that shouldn't happen according to https://forums.developer.apple.com/forums/thread/706390 I have an audio unit which runs in FCP and I want it to launch a sandboxed app as a child process. If I sign the child app with just "com.apple.security.app-sandbox" entitlement it crashes with SYSCALL_SET_PROFILE error. According to the article referenced above: "This indicates that the process tried to setup its sandbox profile but that failed, in this case because it already has a sandbox profile." This makes sense because audio units run in a sandboxed environment (in AUHostingService process). So I added "com.apple.security.inherit" to the entitlements plist and now I get "Process is not in an inherited sandbox." error. According to the article referenced above: "Another cause of a trap within _libsecinit_appsandbox is when a nonsandboxed process runs another program as a child process and that other program’s executable has the com.apple.security.app-sandbox and com.apple.security.inherit entitlements. That is, the child process wants to inherit its sandbox from its parent but there’s nothing to inherit." And this doesn't make sense at all. The first error indicates the child process is trying to create a sandboxed environment within a parent sandboxed environment while the second error indicates there's no a parent sandboxed environment... I specifically checked the child process has "com.apple.security.app-sandbox" and "com.apple.security.inherit" entitlements only. If I remove all entitlements from the child process it launches and runs fine from the audio unit plugin. And if I remove "com.apple.security.inherit" but leave "com.apple.security.app-sandbox" I can successfully launch the app in standalone mode (in Finder). For the testing puroses I use a simple Hello World desktop application generated by XCode (Obj-C). Does anybody have an idea what can be the reason for such a weird behavior?

What is the actual ASN.1 structure of the DER encoded entitlements used for iOS and MacOS applications? You can see a sample output at 'The Future is DER', but is there any official documentation or definition?

I got a error when validate App as flow Asset validation failed App sandbox not enabled. The following executables must include the "com.apple.security.app-sandbox" entitlement with a Boolean value of true in the entitlements property list: [( "com.***.yyy.pkg/Payload/***.app/Contents/MacOS/zzz" )] Refer to App Sandbox page at https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/app_sandbox for more information on sandboxing your app. (ID: dc264017-f236-4e89-a100-e69c7f0fb318) zzz is a command tool build by make, I need codesign it. #1. use two lines below, run succes, but get 'App sandbox not enabled' problem codesign -s "TTT1" -f -v --timestamp --options runtime dist/m_arm64/zzz codesign -s "TTT1" -f -v --timestamp --options runtime dist/m_x64/zzz #2. use two lines below, reduce 'App sandbox not enabled' , but run zzz get 'zsh: trace trap' codesign -s "TTT2" -o runtime --entitlements zzz.entitlements -f dist/debug/zzz codesign -s "TTT2" -o runtime --entitlements zzz.entitlements -f dist/debug/zzz lipo -create dist/m_arm64/zzz dist/m_x64/zzz -output dist/zzz lipo -archs dist/zzz otool -L dist/zzz the zzz.entitlements content is the Info.plist embedded in zzz is #codesign both success codesign -d -vvv ./zzz #use method 2, the sandbox poblem ok codesign --display --entitlements - ./zzz why when codesign with entitlements, the zzz cant run success? if I upload to appstore, the client will get the zsh error? Has anyone encountered this kind of problem before? Reference: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/embedding-a-helper-tool-in-a-sandboxed-app

I am working on a MacOS application in which I need System Extension along with some network extension capabilities. In order to distribute the app externally, I have to create a Developer ID application (provisioning profile) using the App ID that already has Network extension capability. I have followed this documentation to create the App ID and provisioning profiles: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/bundleresources/entitlements/com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension?language=objc What I have: 2 App IDs (For app with network and system extension capability and for extension with only network extension capability) *2 Developer ID application (For both App and Extension) My App's entitlement file contains: <key>com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension</key> <array> <string>app-proxy-provider</string> <string>packet-tunnel-provider</string> </array> My system extension's entitlement file contains: <key>com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension</key> <array> <string>packet-tunnel-provider</string> <string>app-proxy-provider</string> <string>content-filter-provider</string> <string>dns-proxy</string> </array> Both the targets now have the following error: Provisioning profile "StandaloneCSAExtension" doesn't match the entitlements file's value for the com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension entitlement. Note: Instead of Developer ID application if I create a normal development provisioning profile with the same App ID, everything works perfectly fine, the only reason why we need to move to Developer ID application is because we need to distribute the app externally. Please help me if I have missed anything. Thanks in advance!

Hello! I'm suddenly having some difficulty debugging a Flutter-based app. When I run an app from VS Code, it launches Xcode and builds & installs the app on an iPhone running 18.1. However, once the app is installed on the phone, it disappears and in Xcode, a dialog appears with: Failed to install embedded profile for : 0xe800801f (Attempted to install a Beta profile without the proper entitlement.) However, when I look at the provisioning profile being used, it seems to have the correct entitlement: I've also tried enabling automatic signing (instead of the current manual signing using match), as well as generating an adhoc profile and re-adding the device UDID in developers.apple.com. None of these have worked. This issue appeared within the past day or so and was working fine yesterday with no code changes, so I've been stumped. All my certs are relatively new and were issued within the past few months. I've tried regenerating the provisioning profiles using match, but this gives the same thing. What's odd is that I can run the build and upload to testflight, then download and install the app just fine through there. But this obviously makes debugging an issue.

Hi, We have an app that is a default mail client, so it has this entry in its entitlements file: com.apple.developer.mail-client. This seems to create issues with ad-hoc distribution. We can distribute the app on App Store Connect without any issues and have been doing so for a while. We wanted to try using Xcode Cloud to manage our releases. The app export works fine for both App Store Distribution and Development Distribution. However, the ad-hoc distribution step fails. (We don't need ad-hoc distribution, but Xcode Cloud seems to prevent us from removing this step.) I tried building and releasing the app locally for ad-hoc distribution and encountered the same error as on Xcode Cloud. When Xcode tries to generate the profile, it outputs the following error: Provisioning profile "iOS Team Ad Hoc Provisioning Profile: com.infomaniak.mail" failed qualification checks: Profile doesn't support Default Mail App. Profile doesn't include the com.apple.developer.mail-client entitlement. Is it something broken with our config ? What are we missing ? Local error in Xcode Organizer: Remote error on Xcode cloud:

My app is a Safari extension. When trying to validate the app, I get the following error: App sandbox not enabled. The following executables must include the "com.apple.security.app-sandbox" entitlement with a Boolean value of true in the entitlements property list: [( "app.rango.Rango.pkg/Payload/Rango for Safari.app/Contents/MacOS/Rango for Safari" )] Refer to App Sandbox page at https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/app_sandbox for more information on sandboxing your app. I don't know why this is happening. I have app sandbox enabled in both the app and the extension target. I have both entitlement files. When executing codesign -d --entitlements :- /path/to/binary I get the following: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "https://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd"><plist version="1.0"><dict><key>com.apple.security.app-sandbox</key><true/><key>com.apple.security.files.user-selected.read-only</key><true/><key>com.apple.security.get-task-allow</key><true/><key>com.apple.security.network.client</key><true/></dict></plist> If I check on Activity Monitor, on the sandbox column it shows true. I have no idea why I keep getting this error when all indicates that the app is actually sandboxed.

On MacOS, I know that App Groups (com.apple.security.application-groups) do not require a provisioning profile. I was wondering if it's possible to sign them "ad hoc" and have it work? So maybe use a random TEAMID prefix and have it work? I would only need the app to work locally (for testing), not be distributed in that fashion, of course.

I am subscribed to an individual developer license. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/configuring-network-extensions "Network Extension" does not appear in the Capability section in Xcode. Below is my Xcode screenshot.

Hi, I am working on a personal HIDDriverKit project. The documentation suggests that you do not need the entitlements from Apple to do local development - that all you need to do is turn of SIP, enable developer mode, and turn signing to "Sign to Run Locally". However, I have followed all of these steps, and am still running into the error that to build, I need to have a provisioning profile with the DriverKit (development) feature (MacOS 15.2 Xcode 16.2). Am I missing something here regarding the steps for local development? Does one need to request a development version of the entitlements even for local development? Do I need a paid developer account to do this? Thank-you in advance.

After signing and notarizing our application, the entitlement “com.apple.security.get-task-allow” is removed. However, we want this entitlement to remain and we want to be able to create a corefile when needed. Is it possible to make the “com.apple.security.get-task-allow” entitlement persistent after signing and notarizing, so that our application can create a corefile?

I’ve been working on a Catalyst version of my iOS apps. Finally everything is working apart from the custom intents the user user to configure the widgets. The config UI loads: And changing settings at this level works. But it can’t load the options for the other settings: “No options were provided for this parameter” I see this crash in the intent: Termination Reason: Namespace DYLD, Code 1 Library missing Library not loaded: @rpath/CocoaLumberjack.framework/Versions/A/CocoaLumberjack Referenced from: <E1BF4CC5-4181-3272-828C-86B1CD1A66BF> /Applications/my.app/Contents/PlugIns/Intents.appex/Contents/MacOS/Intents Reason: , (security policy does not allow @ path expansion) (terminated at launch; ignore backtrace) I have added the Hardened Runtime Capability to the Main App Target, the Widget Target and the Intents Target. I also allowed “Disable Library Validation” just in case. What am I missing?