I made a simple Python based app for macOS using this code (empty lines removed): import tkinter as tk window = tk.Tk() label = tk.Label(text="\n I am a macOS app \n") label.pack() window.mainloop() Next I made it an .app using PyInstaller with this command (identity and paths shortened): pyinstaller --noconfirm --onedir --windowed --osx-bundle-identifier "org.tk_test.tk_test" --codesign-identity "<my_identity>" path/to/tk-test.py It worked like a charm and I was also able to notarize and staple the app for distribution. ... 4748 INFO: Signing the BUNDLE... 24899 INFO: Building BUNDLE BUNDLE-00.toc completed successfully. I wanted to repeat the process to do some more testing and now without any reason I cannot sign the .app anymore (identity and paths shortened). Of course, I cleared the folder before trying: ... 5263 INFO: Signing the BUNDLE... 23050 WARNING: Error while signing the bundle: codesign command (['codesign', '-s', '<my_identity>', '--force', '--all-architectures', '--timestamp', '--options=runtime', '--deep', '/abs/path/to/dist/tk-test.app']) failed with error code 1! output: /abs/path/to/dist/tk-test.app: replacing existing signature /abs/path/to/dist/tk-test.app: A timestamp was expected but was not found. In subcomponent: /abs/path/to/dist/tk-test.app/Contents/MacOS/lib-dynload/math.cpython-311-darwin.so 23050 WARNING: You will need to sign the bundle manually! 23050 INFO: Building BUNDLE BUNDLE-00.toc completed successfully. I tried to create it in a fresh and differently named directory and I also made a complete fresh conda env. I don't see any reason, why this should not work anymore. Does anybody have an idea?

Hey everyone, I've ported an app based on Python from Windows to macOS. I can run the app from command line and I was also able to make an .app file an start it on my mac using auto-py-to-exe. Now I want to codesign (and later notarize) it. To do so I set the codesign_identity option of auto-py-to-exe to my Developer ID Application and rerun it. After 2 days it was still running (and I guess collecting information on submodules of the used Python modules). Without the codesigning it takes about 5-10 minutes to build. Any ideas how I could accelerate this or what i happening here? Unfortunately, I am not able to copy the output of auto-py-to-exe while it is still running. thanks :).

I am new to macOS programming. I am trying to run an example from Apple that installs a "NullDriver" and then accesses it from a client CPP app (example available on line, driver kit, "com.example.apple-samplecode.dext-to-user-client) I seem to be able to install the the DEXT correctly; I can see the system extension and the IOUserService. When I run the CPP client access program auto signed by Xcode, the app crashes with "CODESIGNING 1 Taskgated Invalid Signature". If I sign the app with "Sign to Run Locally", the app runs but is unable to connect to the IOUserService. This is being run on Sonoma Beta 5 with a newly paid membership. I am willing to attach whatever files are required but I wonder whether others have had the same code signing problem. My apology if I did not read a post with the answer I hope to find. Gene

I have a Flutter app that should be sandboxed for Appstore and this app should run a binary that I build with make. I sign that binary with Developer ID certificate: codesign -v -f --options=runtime --entitlements "./macos/Runner/binary_sandboxed.entitlements" --sign "Developer ID Application: ..." ./path/to/binary here is binary_sandboxed.entitlements: &lt;?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?&gt; &lt;!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd"&gt; &lt;plist version="1.0"&gt; &lt;dict&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.app-sandbox&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.inherit&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.application-groups&lt;/key&gt; &lt;array&gt; &lt;string&gt;$(TEAM_ID).$(PRODUCT_BUNDLE_IDENTIFIER)&lt;/string&gt; &lt;/array&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.cs.allow-jit&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.network.server&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.network.client&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;/dict&gt; &lt;/plist&gt; and the main app runned with entitlements: &lt;?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?&gt; &lt;!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd"&gt; &lt;plist version="1.0"&gt; &lt;dict&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.app-sandbox&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.inherit&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.application-groups&lt;/key&gt; &lt;array&gt; &lt;string&gt;Q7Q43CUMWT.$(PRODUCT_BUNDLE_IDENTIFIER)&lt;/string&gt; &lt;/array&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.cs.allow-jit&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.network.server&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;com.apple.security.network.client&lt;/key&gt; &lt;true/&gt; &lt;key&gt;keychain-access-groups&lt;/key&gt; &lt;array&gt; &lt;string&gt;$(AppIdentifierPrefix)$(PRODUCT_BUNDLE_IDENTIFIER)&lt;/string&gt; &lt;/array&gt; &lt;/dict&gt; &lt;/plist&gt; When I run app I get an error ProcessException: Operation not permitted In console log I see this message: denied since it was quarantined by Main app and created without user consent, qtn-flags was 0x00000086 if delete quarantine flag binary in Containers xattr -d com.apple.quarantine /Users/appuser/Library/Containers/com.bin/Data/Library/Application Support/com.bin/binary I got an error when run binary zsh: illegal hardware instruction failed: Unable to get bundle identifier because code signature information has no Info.Plist. What did I do wrong? And what should I do?

I have a macOS app that I have been distributing for free outside the app store for more than 15 years, without notarization, without sandboxing, and without hardened runtime, all with no problems. If I understand correctly, macOS will soon be modified so that it will not launch any developer-distributed apps that are not notarized. Notarization will require both hardened runtime and sandboxing, and unhappily, my app will not run when notarized -- I have added sandboxing and hardened runtime, than gotten it notarized and tried -- and that is because it will not run when sandboxed. Thus I have two questions: Will there be some means, that I perhaps have missed, for my users to run my app as is, in un-notarized form with no sandboxing and no hardened runtime? (Assume that they are willing to click "Okay" on any macOS popups of the form "Abandon hope, all ye who enter here.") Perhaps I have missed something about the signing or distribution process ... ? If not, is there some entitlement I can obtain to allow my app to run when sandboxed? Perhaps the question is even "Should there be such an entitlement?" And to that end, I must now explain why it cannot run sandboxed: My app is a parallel processing system: To work properly it must open multiple copies of itself -- that's right, there will be multiple instances of the app window visible on the console, distinguished by tint, title and location so the user can tell which is which, and multiple app badges in the dock, similarly distinguished. Doing so is easy -- I use the c++ "system" function to call the Unix executable that is buried within the ".app" folder, passing it a command tail whereby the launched copy can tell how to distinguish itself. I build up the text string for the call piece by piece, but the result looks rather like this: system("&lt;path-to-my-app&gt;/MyApp.app/Contents/MacOS/MyApp -tail-item-1 -tail-item-2 ... &amp;"); The app is written in mixed C++ and Objective C. The usual "Main.mm" file contains the entry point for the program, a "main()" function that does nothing but call "NSApplicationMain()", but I have added code to "main()" that runs before the call of NSApplicationMain(). That code uses C function "getopt()" to look for the extra command-tail items. If any are present, the app acts appropriately -- generally assigning non-default values to global variables that are used later in initialization. The first instance of the app that is called -- presumably by the user mousing on an icon somewhere -- knows by the absence of extra command-tail items that it is the first one launched, and thus knows to launch multiple additional instances of itself using this mechanism. The launched instances know by the presence of extra command-tail items that they are not the first one launched, and act differently, based on the command-tail items themselves. All this has been working fine for over a decade when the app is not sandboxed and does not have a hardened runtime. For what it is worth, the app will run with hardened runtime, provided the option "Disable Executable Memory Protection" is checked. Furthermore, when it is also sandboxed and I open it with no extra copies of itself launched (the number to launch is a preferences option), that single app instance runs fine. I have instrumented the code, and what seems to be happening is that the system call to launch another app returns zero -- implying it succeeded -- but has no effect: It is as if someone had special-cased "system" to do nothing, but to report success nonetheless. That is an entirely reasonable feature of a hardened runtime -- allowing arbitrary system calls would be a security disaster looking for a place to happen. The point is that my app would not be making an arbitrary system call -- it would be trying to open one specific app -- itself -- which would be sandboxed with a hardened runtime, and notarized. That is not likely to be a huge security problem. Incidentally, not all system calls fail this way -- I can do system("osascript -e 'tell app \"Safari\" to activate';"); or system( "open -a \"Safari\" &lt;path to a help file located in MyApp's Resources&gt;"); with impunity. Also incidentally, using AppleScript to launch another copy of MyApp from within itself doesn't do what I want: The system notices that MyApp is already running and just makes it active instead of launching a new copy, and there is no way to pass in a command tail anyway. I don't wish to appear to be advertising, so I won't identify my app, but a little more detail might be useful: It is a parallel program interpreter. The language implemented is the "Scheme" dialect of Lisp. Each instance running is a complete read/eval/print loop embedded in an application window where the user can read and type. The first instance of the app launched mmaps a large memory area for the Lisp system's main memory: That works kind of like a big heap in more conventional programs. It is not executable code, it contains Lisp data structures that an application instance can access. The other instances launched use the same mmapped area. The shared memory has lots of lock bits. I use low-level "lockless coding" -- hand-coded assembler with the Intel "lock" prefix or the more complicated arm64 stuff -- to keep simultaneous access by different app instances from corrupting the shared memory. Parallel Scheme has many uses, which include debugging and monitoring of running Scheme programs, and having multiple tail-recursive "actors" (Lisp jargon) operate on the same data at the same time. Enough said. I would like to be able to notarize this app so that users who obtained it outside the app store could understand that Apple had checked it for dangerous code. If that were possible, I might even try submitting it to the app store -- but that would be another story. Do I have any hope of keeping this product available?

I have an App bundle that I signed with the certificate I received from my boss. despite signing and verifying it. it doesn't run on our test Mac without changing the trust settings. It gives an error saying that apple cannot check it for malicious software and software needs to be updated. this is the result of running the code sign verification: `codesign --display --requirements - --verbose=4 ./myapp.app Executable=/Users/*removed*/Documents/test/myapp.app/Contents/MacOS/app Identifier=com.*removed*.*removed*/ Format=app bundle with Mach-O thin (arm64) CodeDirectory v=20400 size=582872 flags=0x0(none) hashes=18208+3 location=embedded VersionPlatform=1 VersionMin=851968 VersionSDK=852736 Hash type=sha256 size=32 CandidateCDHash sha256=*removed* CandidateCDHashFull *removed* Hash choices=sha256 CMSDigest=*removed* CMSDigestType=2 Executable Segment base=0 Executable Segment limit=48218112 Executable Segment flags=0x1 Page size=4096 Launch Constraints: None CDHash=*removed* Signature size=9060 Authority=Developer ID Application: *removed* Authority=Developer ID Certification Authority Authority=Apple Root CA Timestamp=*Removed* Info.plist entries=15 TeamIdentifier=*Removed* Sealed Resources version=2 rules=13 files=475 designated =&amp;gt; identifier "com.*removed*.*removed*" and anchor apple generic and certificate 1[*removed*] /* exists */ and certificate leaf[*removed*] /* exists */ and certificate leaf[subject.OU] = *removed*` I removed some info as I'm not sure if it'd be safe to share online. I apologize. The projector is written in c++ and uses wxWidgets for GUI

Good day. We are moving our CI to Github Actions and we have met a problem whereby even though we have 1/1 codesigning identities that are valid, trying to sign MyTrue as per guides posted in the forum still results in this error. SSH is fine. Would appreciate to have some light shed on this. Thanks in advance!

Dear iOS Developers, I have a question about In-House distribution for iOS 17, currently I am using Xcode 14.x for distribute my application (for iOS 16.x and below). In the future, Apple will release the new iOS version that is iOS 17. So, my question is 1./ "Do I need to build and distribute the mobile application with Xcode 15 for supporting iOS 17? 2./ or iOS 17 can run In-house mobile application fine with building and distribution with Xcode 14.x?" Anybody have knowledge about it? Thanks, Lam

I need an OV certificate to code sign an Electron application. I was used to build in Jenkins the application oth for Windows and macOS using Electron-Forge (https://www.electronforge.io/guides/code-signing/code-signing-macos). To be more specific use XCode and Keychain to store the certificate. Sadly, new certificate industry requirements will force me to use Azure Key Vaults (or other cloud HSM alternatives) to store the certificate. I need to find a way to code-sign it for macOS from Azure Key Vaults or equivalent solutions. Thank you

I distribute an application in a zip file from my website. the application needs access to some files next to it to run properly. The application is correctly signed and notarized and stapled.Of course if I download it from my website, it gets the quarantine attribute. When I try to open it for the first time, a gatekeeper warning saying that the application comes from the internet, but has been checked by apple and no malware has been detected is displayed. My impression is that the application has been correctly signed and notarized. but If confirm that I wan to open it, the quarantine attribute is not deleted. spctl -a -v /path/to/Myapp.app path/to/Myapp.app: accepted source=Notarized Developer ID

I regularly see folks run into problems with their Developer ID signing identities. Historically I pointed them to my posts on this thread, but I’ve decided to collect these ideas together in one place. If you have questions or comments, start a new thread here on DevForums and tag it with Developer ID so that I see it. IMPORTANT Nothing I write here on DevForums is considered official documentation. It’s just my personal ramblings based on hard-won experience. There is a bunch of official documentation that covers the topics I touch on here, including: Xcode documentation Xcode Help Developer Account Help Developer > Support > Certificates For a lot more information about code signing, see the Code Signing Resources pinned post. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" The Care and Feeding of Developer ID Most Apple signing assets are replaceable. For example, if you accidentally lose access to your Apple Development signing identity, it’s a minor inconvenience. Just use the Developer website to revoke your previous certificate and create a replacement. Or have Xcode do that for you. IMPORTANT If you don’t understand the difference between a certificate and a digital identity, and hence signing identity, read Certificate Signing Requests Explained before reading this post. Some signing assets are precious. Losing access to such assets has significant consequences. Foremost amongst those are Developer ID signing identities. These allow you to sign Mac products that ship independently. Anyone with access to your Developer ID signing identity can sign code as you. This has a number of consequences, both for you and for your relationship with Apple. Identify a Developer ID Signing Identity A Developer ID signing identity consists of two parts: the certificate and the private key. There are two different flavours, identifiable by the subject name in the certificate: Developer ID Application — This is named Developer ID Application: TTT, where TTT identifies your team. Use this to sign code and disk images. Developer ID Installer — This is named Developer ID Installer: TTT, where TTT identifies your team. Use this to sign installer packages. Note If you do KEXT development, there’s a third flavour, namely a KEXT-enabled Developer ID Application signing identity. For more details, see KEXT Code Signing Problems. This post focuses on traditional signing identities, where you manage the private key. Xcode Cloud introduced cloud signing, where signing identities are “stored securely in the cloud”. These identities have the Managed suffix in Certificates, Identifiers, and Profiles. For example, Developer ID Application Managed is the cloud signing equivalent of Developer ID Application. To learn more about cloud signing, watch WWDC 2021 Session 10204 Distribute apps in Xcode with cloud signing. To identify these certificates ‘in the wild’, see Identifying a Cloud Managed Signing Certificate. Limit Access to Developer ID Anyone with your Developer ID signing identity can sign code as you. Given that, be careful to limit access to these signing identities. This is true both for large organisations and small developers. In a large organisation, ensure that only folks authorised to ship code on behalf of your organisation have access to your Developer ID signing identities. Most organisations have some sort of release process that they use to build, test, and authorise a release. This often involves a continuous integration (CI) system. Restrict CI access to only those folks involved in the release process. Even if you’re a small developer with no formal release process, you can still take steps to restrict access to Developer ID signing identities. See Don’t Leak Your Private Key, below. In all cases, don’t use your Developer ID signing identities for day-to-day development. That’s what Apple Development signing identities are for. Create Developer ID Signing Identities as the Account Holder Because Developer ID signing identities are precious, the Developer website will only let the Account Holder create them. For instructions on how to do this, see Developer Account Help > Create certificates > Create Developer ID certificates. For more information about programme roles, see Developer > Support > Program Roles. IMPORTANT In an Organization team it’s common for the Account Holder to be non-technical. They may need help getting this done. For hints and tips on how to avoid problems while doing this, see Don’t Lose Your Private Key and Don’t Leak Your Private Key, both below. Limit the Number of Developer ID Signing Identities You Create Don’t create Developer ID signing identities unnecessarily. Most folks only need to create one. Well, one Developer ID Application and maybe one Developer ID Installer. A large organisation might need more, perhaps one for each sub-unit, but that’s it. There are two reasons why this is important: The more you have, the more likely it is for one to get into the wrong hands. Remember that anyone with your Developer ID signing identity can sign code as you. The Developer website limits you to 5 Developer ID certificates. Note I can never remember where this limit is actually documented, so here’s the exact quote from this page: You can create up to five Developer ID Application certificates and up to five Developer ID Installer certificates using either your developer account or Xcode. Don’t Lose Your Private Key There are two standard processes for creating a Developer ID signing identity: Developer website — See Developer Account Help > Create certificates > Create Developer ID certificates. Xcode — See Xcode Help > Maintaining signing assets > Manage signing certificates. Both processes implicitly create a private key in your login keychain. This makes it easy to lose your private key. For example: If you do this on one Mac and then get a new Mac, you might forget to move the private key to the new Mac. If you’re helping your Organization team’s Account Holder to create a Developer ID signing identity, you might forget to export the private key from their login keychain. It also makes it easy to accidentally leave a copy of the private key on a machine that doesn’t need it; see Don’t Leak Your Private Key, below, for specific advice on that front. Every time you create a Developer ID signing identity, it’s a good idea to make an independent backup of it. For advice on how to do that, see Back Up Your Signing Identities, below. That technique is also useful if you need to copy the signing identity to a continuous integration system. If you think you’ve lost the private key for a Developer ID signing identity, do a proper search for it. Finding it will save you a bunch of grief. You might be able to find it on your old Mac, in a backup, in a backup for your old Mac, and so on. For instructions on how to extract your private key from a general backup, see Recover a Signing Identity from a Mac Backup. If you’re absolutely sure that you previous private key is lost, use the Developer website to create a replacement signing identity. If the Developer website won’t let you create any more because you’ve hit the limit discussed above, talk to Developer Programs Support. Go to Apple > Developer > Contact Us and follow the path Development and Technical > Certificates, Identifiers, and Provisioning Profiles. Don’t Leak Your Private Key Anyone with your Developer ID signing identity can sign code as you. Thus, it’s important to take steps to prevent its private key from leaking. A critical first step is to limit access to your Developer ID signing identities. For advice on that front, see Limit Access to Developer ID, above. In an Organization team, only the Account Holder can create Developer ID signing identities. When they do this, a copy of the identity’s private key will most likely end up in their login keychain. Once you’ve exported the signing identity, and confirmed that everything is working, make sure to delete that copy of the private key. Some organisations have specific rules for managing Developer ID signing identities. For example, an organisation might require that the private key be stored in a hardware token, which prevents it from being exported. Setting that up is a bit tricky, but it offers important security benefits. Even without a hardware token, there are steps you can take to protect your Developer ID signing identity. For example, you might put it in a separate keychain, one with a different password and locking policy than your login keychain. That way signing code for distribution will prompt you to unlock the keychain, which reminds you that this is a significant event and ensures that you don’t do it accidentally. If you believe that your private key has been compromised, follow the instructions in the Compromised Certificates section of Developer > Support > Certificates. Back Up Your Signing Identities Given that Developer ID signing identities are precious, consider making an independent backup of them. To back up a signing identity to a PKCS#12 (.p12) file: Launch Keychain Access. At the top, select My Certificates. On the left, select the keychain you use for signing identities. For most folks this is the login keychain. Select the identity. Choose File > Export Items. In the file dialog, select Personal Information Exchange (.p12) in the File Format popup. Enter a name, navigate to your preferred location, and click Save. You might be prompted to enter the keychain password. If so, do that and click OK. You will be prompted to enter a password to protect the identity. Use a strong password and save this securely in a password manager, corporate password store, on a piece of paper in a safe, or whatever. You might be prompted to enter the keychain password again. If so, do that and click Allow. The end result is a .p12 file holding your signing identity. Save that file in a secure location, and make sure that you have a way to connect it to the password you saved in step 9. Remember to backup all your Developer ID signing identities, including the Developer ID Installer one if you created it. To restore a signing identity from a backup: Launch Keychain Access. Choose File > Import Items. In the open sheet, click Show Options. Use the Destination Keychain popup to select the target keychain. Navigate to and select the .p12 file, and then click Open. Enter the .p12 file’s password and click OK. If prompted, enter the destination keychain password and click OK. Alternatively, Xcode has a feature to export and import your developer account, including your Developer ID signing identities. Do this using the action menu in Xcode > Settings > Accounts. For the details, see Xcode Help > Maintaining signing assets > Export signing certificates and provisioning profiles. Recover a Signing Identity from a Mac Backup If you didn’t independently backup your Developer ID signing identity, you may still be able to recover it from a general backup of your Mac. To start, work out roughly when you created your Developer ID signing identity: Download your Developer ID certificate from the Developer website. In the Finder, Quick Look it. The Not Valid Before field is the date you’re looking for. Now it’s time to look in your backups. The exact details depend on the backup software you’re using, but the basic process runs something like this: Look for a backup taken shortly after the date you determined above. In that backup, look for the file ~/Library/Keychains/login.keychain. Recover that to a convenient location, like your desktop. Don’t put it in ~/Library/Keychains because that’ll just confuse things. Rename it to something unique, like login-YYYY-MM-DD.keychain, where YYYY-MM-DD is the date of the backup. In Keychain Access, choose File > Add Keychain and, in the resulting standard file panel, choose that .keychain file. On the left, select login-YYYY-MM-DD. Chose File > Unlock Keychain “login-YYYY-MM-DD“. In the resulting password dialog, enter your login password at the date of the backup. At the top, select My Certificates. Look through the list of digital identities to find the Developer ID identity you want. If you don’t see the one you’re looking for, see Further Recovery Tips below. Export it using the process described at the start of Back Up Your Signing Identities. Once you’re done, remove the keychain from Keychain Access: On the left, select the login-YYYY-MM-DD keychain. Choose File > Delete Keychain “login-YYYY-MM-DD”. In the confirmation alert, click Remove Reference. The login-YYYY-MM-DD.keychain is now just a file. You can trash it, keep it, whatever, at your discretion. This process creates a .p12 file. To work with that, import it into your keychain using the process described at the end of Back Up Your Signing Identities. IMPORTANT Keep that .p12 file as your own independent backup of your signing identity. Further Recovery Tips If, in the previous section, you can’t find the Developer ID identity you want, there are a few things you might do: Look in a different backup. If your account has more than one keychain, look in your other keychains. If you have more than one login account, look at the keychains for your other accounts. If you have more than one Mac, look at the backups for your other Macs. The login-YYYY-MM-DD keychain might have the private key but not the certificate. Add your Developer ID certificate to that keychain to see if it pairs with a private key. Revision History 2023-10-05 Added the Recover a Signing Identity from a Mac Backup and Further Recovery Tips sections. 2023-06-23 Added a link to Identifying a Cloud Managed Signing Certificate. 2023-06-21 First posted.

My app has the App Sandbox enabled and the File Access to Downloads folder is set to Read / Write in XCode. Upon clicking on a button the app should open the Finder displaying the Downloads folder. The following code snippet is used to launch the Finder if let inspirationsDirectory = FileManager.default.urls(for: .downloadsDirectory, in: .userDomainMask).first{ NSWorkspace.shared.open(inspirationsDirectory) } On my MacOS it works well. After releasing the app to the AppStore and installing it on another Mac the following message is received upon clicking the button: The application does not have permission to open "Downloads" Which would be the solution to launch the Finder successfully ? Is it possible to launch the Finder showing the Downloads folder sorted by the Date Added column descending ?

Developing a ios app in Unreal Engine 5. Everything was alright. Until it wasn’t. Build to iOS device. Click. Cooking. Building… “ERROR: CodeSign Failed” D4mn it! hahaha Here’s the log: UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): Command CodeSign failed with a nonzero exit code UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): ** BUILD FAILED ** UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): The following build commands failed: UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): CodeSign /Users/jordansktorres/My\ Drive/PROJECTS/CRUZEIRO-DO-SUL/ValenteGO/ValenteGO_V1/Binaries/IOS/Payload/ValenteGO_V1.app (in target ‘ValenteGO_V1’ from project ‘ValenteGO_V1’) UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): (1 failure) UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): Took 12,659139s to run env, ExitCode=65 UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): ERROR: CodeSign Failed UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): (see /Users/jordansktorres/Library/Logs/Unreal Engine/LocalBuildLogs/Log.txt for full exception trace) UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): AutomationTool executed for 0h 1m 51s UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): AutomationTool exiting with ExitCode=32 (Error_FailedToCodeSign) UATHelper: Packaging (IOS): RunUAT ERROR: AutomationTool was unable to run successfully. Exited with code: 32 PackagingResults: Error: Failed to Code Sign I have deleted the binaries, build, intermediate, and saved folders. I have generated and created new certificates. I have deleted UE5 and re-install it again. I have thrown the project into the garbage can and created a whole new project file with the same content folder. It all led to the same result. “ERROR: CodeSign Failed” Please, someone, anyone, give me a light here. hahaha

My goal is to implement a moving background in a virtual camera, implemented as a Camera Extension, on macOS 13 and later. The moving background is available to the extension as a H.264 file in its bundle. I thought i could create an AVAsset from the movie's URL, make an AVPlayerItem from the asset, attach an AVQueuePlayer to the item, then attach an AVPlayerLooper to the queue player. I make an AVPlayerVideoOutput and add it to each of the looper's items, and set a delegate on the video output. This works in a normal app, which I use as a convenient environment to debug my extension code. In my camera video rendering loop, I check self.videoOutput.hasNewPixelBuffer , it returns true at regular intervals, I can fetch video frames with the video output's copyPixelBuffer and composite those frames with the camera frames. However, it doesn't work in an extension - hasNewPixelBuffer is never true. The looping player returns 'failed', with an error which simply says "the operation could not be completed". I've tried simplifying things by removing the AVPlayerLooper and using an AVPlayer instead of an AVQueuePlayer, so the movie would only play once through. But still, I never get any frames in the extension. Could this be a sandbox thing, because an AVPlayer usually renders to a user interface, and camera extensions don't have UIs? My fallback solution is to use an AVAssetImageGenerator which I attempt to drive by firing off a Task for each frame each time I want to render one, I ask for another frame to keep the pipeline full. Unfortunately the Tasks don't finish in the same order they are started so I have to build frame-reordering logic into the frame buffer (something which a player would fix for me). I'm also not sure whether the AVAssetImageGenerator is taking advantage of any hardware acceleration, and it seems inefficient because each Task is for one frame only, and cannot maintain any state from previous frames. Perhaps there's a much simpler way to do this and I'm just missing it? Anyone?

Context : I'm developing a python app with Tkinter GUI on a 2020 M1 Macbook Air. I have already built, signed, and notarized the app successfully on the native arm64 architecture - so far so good. Now I am trying to do the same for x86_64, on the same machine. I've built a conda environment for x86_64, built the app with pyinstaller, and verified that it runs when I double-click on AppName.app. So far so good. The problem happens when I sign it. After signing with the same command I used for the arm64 version: codesign -s "Developer ID Application: MY_CERTIFICATE_NAME" -v --deep --timestamp --entitlements entitlements.plist -o runtime "dist/MyAppName.app" --force Entitlements file just sets com.apple.security.cs.allow-unsigned-executable-memory to true - apparently necessary for python programs. The app now crashes when I double-click. The crash-log contains the line: Termination Reason: Namespace ROSETTA, Code 0 rosetta error: unable to mmap __TEXT: 1 /var/db/*/libffi.8.dylib.aot When I try to run from command line with ./projects/eagle_eyes_video_scanner/dist/EagleEyesScan.app/Contents/MacOS/main I get another error: rosetta error: unable to mmap __TEXT: 1   /var/db/oah/ffdfb26a8f1f835406614fae08b99665733faafa40599b6bc0aace0981564015/4893345e2743c970aa1c71f137e03f8e791c82b6b7354da038bebfac5673be73/libffi.8.dylib.aotzsh: abort   ./projects/eagle_eyes_video_scanner/dist/EagleEyesScan.app/Contents/MacOS/mai I don't know if this libffi is central to the problem or just the first thing to fail. So, how can I sign my app without breaking it?

I’ve got a run of the mill Drag&amp;Drop DMG installer. It works as expected when the drop target is /Applications. However I deliver plugins which I want to be copy to somewhere below /Library/Aplication Support/. Here too, everything works fine until I upload and download the dmg to my webserver. Now when dropping the plugins onto the target alias they just slide back. No error, no dialog asking for permissions, no nothing… just silently sliding back. And I haven’t the faintest idea how to address this. Would somebody please be my hero of the day and point me into the right direction, pretty please? The plugins and the dmg are codesigned and notarized. They work as expected when moving them to the plugins folder directly. It’s only the alias that will not work. The alias btw. is a soft link created using ln - s. Not sure this is the right category to post in. But it feels like it’s a probably a permission/entitlements issue.

General: DevForums tag: App Sandbox App Sandbox documentation App Sandbox Design Guide documentation — This is no longer available from Apple. There’s still some info in there that isn’t covered by the current docs but, with the latest updates, it’s pretty minimal (r. 110052019). Still, if you’re curious, you can consult an old copy [1]. App Sandbox Temporary Exception Entitlements archived documentation — To better understand the role of temporary exception entitlements, see this post. Embedding a Command-Line Tool in a Sandboxed App documentation Discovering and diagnosing App Sandbox violations (replaces the Viewing Sandbox Violation Reports DevForums post) Resolving App Sandbox Inheritance Problems DevForums post Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" [1] For example, this one archived by the Wayback Machine.

Trusted execution is a generic name for a Gatekeeper and other technologies that aim to protect users from malicious code. General: DevForums tag: Gatekeeper Developer > Signing Mac Software with Developer ID Apple Platform Security support document Safely open apps on your Mac support article Hardened Runtime document Testing a Notarised Product DevForums post Resolving Trusted Execution Problems DevForums post App Translocation Notes DevForums post WWDC 2022 Session 10096 What’s new in privacy covers some important Gatekeeper changes in macOS 13 (starting at 04:‍32) WWDC 2023 Session 10053 What’s new in privacy covers an important change in macOS 14 (starting at 17:46) Most trusted execution problems are caused by code signing or notarisation issues. See Code Signing Resources and Notarisation Resources. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com"

This post is part of a cluster of posts related to the trusted execution system. If you found your way here directly, I recommend that you start at the top. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Resolving Code Signing Crashes on Launch A code signing crash has the following exception information: Exception Type: EXC_CRASH (SIGKILL (Code Signature Invalid)) IMPORTANT Most developers never see a code signing crash because they use Xcode to build and sign their product. Xcode’s code signing infrastructure detects problems that could cause a code signing crash, and its automatic code signing fixes them for you! If you’re having problems with code signing crashes and you can use Xcode but aren’t, consider making the switch Xcode. The most common code signing crash is a crash on launch. To confirm that, look at the thread backtraces: Backtrace not available If you see valid thread backtraces this is not a crash on launch. Go back to Resolving Trusted Execution Problems and read through the Code Signing Crashes After Launch section. If you see no thread backtraces, your code didn’t run at all. The trusted execution system has blocked it. In most cases there is some evidence of the problem in the system log. For example: type: error time: 2022-05-19 06:29:17.640331 -0700 process: taskgated-helper subsystem: com.apple.ManagedClient category: ProvisioningProfiles message: com.example.apple-samplecode.OverClaim: Unsatisfied entitlements: com.apple.overclaim This indicates that the OverClaim app, with bundle ID com.example.apple-samplecode.OverClaim, claimed a restricted entitlement, com.apple.overclaim, that wasn’t authorised by a provisioning profile. For more information about provisioning profiles, see TN3125 Inside Code Signing: Provisioning Profiles. Specifically, the Entitlements on macOS section discusses the concept of restricted entitlements. For general information about the system log, see Your Friend the System Log. Normalise the Entitlements Property List Entitlement property list files look like text and so it’s tempting to edit them with a text editor. This can lead to all sorts of problems. If you have code whose entitlements property list contains comments, non-Unix line endings, or other weird formatting, the trusted execution system may block it. To avoid such problems, normalise your entitlements property list before passing it to codesign. For example: % plutil -convert xml1 MyApp.plist % codesign -s III --entitlements MyApp.plist MyApp.app Problems like this typically show up on older systems. Modern systems use DER-encoded entitlements, as discussed in The future is DER section of TN3125. A related gotcha is line breaks. Consider this entitlements property list file: % cat MyApp.plist … <plist version="1.0"> <dict> <key> com.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation</key> <true/> </dict> </plist> This is a valid property list but it doesn’t do what you think it does. It looks like it claims the com.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation entitlement but in reality it claims \ncom.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation. The system treats the latter as a restricted entitlement and thus requires it to be authorised by a profile. Of course no such profile will authorise that entitlement, and so the app is blocked by the trusted execution system. Similarly, consider this: % cat MyApp.plist … <plist version="1.0"> <dict> <key> com.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation</key> <true/> </dict> </plist> This claims com.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation, note the leading space, and that’s also blocked by the trusted execution system. Check for Unauthorised Entitlements Sometimes the system log may not make it obvious what’s gone wrong. It may be easier to work this out by looking at the built program. The most common cause of problems like this is the app claiming a restricted entitlement that’s not authorised by a provisioning profile. To start your investigation, dump the entitlements to check for restricted entitlements: % codesign -d --entitlements - "OverClaim.app" …/OverClaim.app/Contents/MacOS/OverClaim [Dict] [Key] com.apple.application-identifier [Value] [String] SKMME9E2Y8.com.example.apple-samplecode.OverClaim [Key] com.apple.developer.team-identifier [Value] [String] SKMME9E2Y8 [Key] com.apple.overclaim [Value] [Bool] true [Key] com.apple.security.get-task-allow [Value] [Bool] true In this case all the entitlements except com.apple.security.get-task-allow are restricted. Note If there are no restricted entitlements, something else has gone wrong. Go back to Resolving Trusted Execution Problems and look for other potential causes. Now check that the provisioning profile was embedded correctly and extract its payload: % ls -l "OverClaim.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile" … OverClaim.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile % security cms -D -i "OverClaim.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile" -o "OverClaim-payload.plist" Check that the profile applies to this app by dumping the com.apple.application-identifier entitlement authorised by the profile: % /usr/libexec/PlistBuddy -c "print :Entitlements:com.apple.application-identifier" OverClaim-payload.plist SKMME9E2Y8.com.example.apple-samplecode.* This should match the com.apple.application-identifier entitlement claimed by the app. Repeat this for all the remaining restricted entitlements: % /usr/libexec/PlistBuddy -c "print :Entitlements:com.apple.developer.team-identifier" OverClaim-payload.plist SKMME9E2Y8 % /usr/libexec/PlistBuddy -c "print :Entitlements:com.apple.overclaim" OverClaim-payload.plist Print: Entry, ":Entitlements:com.apple.overclaim", Does Not Exist In this example the problem is the com.apple.overclaim entitlement, which is claimed by the app but not authorised by the profile. If that’s the case for your program, you have two choices: If you program doesn’t need this entitlement, update your code signing to not claim it. If you program relies on this entitlement, update your profile to authorise it. The entitlement allowlist in the profile is built by the Apple Developer website based on the capabilities enabled on your App ID. To change this allowlist, modify your App ID capabilities and rebuild your profile. Some capabilities are only available on some platforms and, within that platform, for some distribution channels. For these details for macOS, see Developer Account Help > Reference > Supported capabilities (macOS). Some capabilities require review and approval by Apple. For more on this, see Developer Account Help > Reference > Provisioning with capabilities. Check for Required Entitlements If your app claims any restricted entitlements, it must also claim the com.apple.application-identifier entitlement, with its value being your app’s App ID. macOS uses this value to confirm that the embedded provisioning profile is appropriate for your app. Without this, macOS might not use this profile, which means there’s nothing to authorise your app’s use of restricted entitlements, which prevents your app from launching. IMPORTANT macOS 12 and later will use an embedded provisioning profile even if the app doesn’t claim the com.apple.application-identifier entitlement. So, if your app works on macOS 12 and later but fails on macOS 11, this is likely the cause. If you claim the com.apple.application-identifier entitlement then I recommend that you also claim the com.apple.developer.team-identifier entitlement. That’s what Xcode does, and my experience is that it’s best to stay on that well-trodden path. Check the Signing Certificate If your program’s entitlements look good, the next most likely problem is that your program was signed by a signing identity whose certificate is not authorised by the profile. To debug this, first extract the certificate chain from your program: % codesign -d --extract-certificates=signed-with- "OverClaim.app" … % for i in signed-with-* ; do mv "${i}" "${i}.cer" ; done The first certificate is the one that matters: % certtool d "signed-with-0.cer" Serial Number : 53 DB 60 CC 85 32 83 DE 72 D9 6A C9 8F 84 78 25 … Subject Name : Other name : UT376R4K29 Common Name : Apple Development: Quinn Quinn (7XFU7D52S4) OrgUnit : SKMME9E2Y8 Org : Quinn Quinn Country : US … Now check this against each of the certificates authorised by the profile. Start by extracting the first one: % plutil -extract DeveloperCertificates.0 raw -o - OverClaim-payload.plist | base64 -D > "authorised0.cer" % certtool d "authorised0.cer" Serial Number : 46 A8 EF 2C 52 54 DE FD D1 76 9D 3A 41 7C 9E 43 … Subject Name : Other name : UT376R4K29 Common Name : Mac Developer: Quinn Quinn (7XFU7D52S4) OrgUnit : SKMME9E2Y8 Org : Quinn Quinn Country : US … That’s not a match. So try the next one: % plutil -extract DeveloperCertificates.1 raw -o - OverClaim-payload.plist | base64 -D > authorised1.cer % certtool d "authorised1.cer" Serial Number : 53 DB 60 CC 85 32 83 DE 72 D9 6A C9 8F 84 78 25 … Subject Name : Other name : UT376R4K29 Common Name : Apple Development: Quinn Quinn (7XFU7D52S4) OrgUnit : SKMME9E2Y8 Org : Quinn Quinn Country : US … This matches, which means the profile applies to this code. IMPORTANT When checking for a match, look at the Serial Number field. Don’t just rely on the Common Name field. A common mistake is to have two signing identities whose certificates have identical common names but the profile only lists one of them. If you get to the end of the list of certificate list in the profile and don’t find the certificate that the program was signed with, you know what the problem is: Your program is signed with a signing identity whose certificate is not listed in its profile. To fix this, either: Reconfigure your code signing to use a signing identity whose certificate is listed. Or update the profile to include the certificate of the signing identity you’re using. Check for Expiration If your certificates aren’t the problem, check that nothing has expired. Start with the certificate from the app’s signature: % certtool d "signed-with-0.cer" Serial Number : 53 DB 60 CC 85 32 83 DE 72 D9 6A C9 8F 84 78 25 … Not Before : 10:52:56 Apr 21, 2022 Not After : 10:52:55 Apr 21, 2023 … Also check the expiry date on the profile: % plutil -extract ExpirationDate raw -o - OverClaim-payload.plist 2023-04-21T11:02:58Z If either has expired, update it and re-sign your product. IMPORTANT Developer ID-signed code and installers include a secure timestamp. When the system checks the expiry date on a Developer ID certificate, it only checks that the certificate was valid at the time that the code was signed, base on that secure timestamp. Thus, an old Developer ID-signed app will continue to run after it’s certificate has expired. To learn more about secure timestamps, see TN3161 Inside Code Signing: Certificates. Check the Supported Devices If everything else checks out, the last thing to check is that the profile authorises the code to run on this machine. There are two cases here: Developer ID profiles authorise the code on all machines. Other profiles authorise the code on a specific list of machines. If you think you have a Developer ID profile, confirm that by looking for the ProvisionsAllDevices property: % plutil -extract "ProvisionsAllDevices" xml1 -o - "OverClaim-payload.plist" … No value at that key path or invalid key path: ProvisionsAllDevices If that’s not the case, get the ProvisionedDevices property and verify that the current machine’s provisioning UDID is listed there: % plutil -extract "ProvisionedDevices" xml1 -o - "OverClaim-payload.plist" … <array> … <string>A545CA26-80D7-5B38-A98C-530A798BE342</string> … </array> </plist> % system_profiler SPHardwareDataType … Provisioning UDID: A545CA26-80D7-5B38-A98C-530A798BE342 … If you get to the end any everything looks OK, your provisioning profile is not the cause of this crash. Return to Resolving Trusted Execution Problems for more suggestions. Revision History 2024-02-20 Added the Check for Required Entitlements section. Added a link to TN3161. Fixed the Developer Account Help links. 2022-06-08 Added the Normalise the Entitlements Property List section. 2022-05-20 First posted.

I help a lot of developers with macOS trusted execution problems. For example, they might have an app being blocked by Gatekeeper, or an app that crashes on launch with a code signing error. If you encounter a problem that’s not explained here, start a new thread with the details. Make sure to add relevant tags — like Gatekeeper, Code Signing, and Notarization — so that I see your post. IMPORTANT macOS 14 has a new tool, syspolicy_check, that was specifically designed to help diagnose problems like this. I plan to update this post once I have more experience with it. In the meantime, however, if you hit a trusted execution problem and it reproduces on macOS 14, please try out syspolicy_check and let us know how that pans out. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Resolving Trusted Execution Problems macOS supports three software distribution channels: The user downloads an app from the App Store. The user gets a Developer ID-signed program directly from its developer. The user builds programs locally using Apple or third-party developer tools. The trusted execution system aims to protect users from malicious code. It’s comprised of a number of different subsystems. For example, Gatekeeper strives to ensure that only trusted software runs on a user’s Mac, while XProtect is the platform’s built-in anti-malware technology. Note To learn more about these technologies, see Apple Platform Security. If you’re developing software for macOS your goal is to avoid trusted execution entanglements. You want users to install and use your product without taking any special steps. If, for example, you ship an app that’s blocked by Gatekeeper, you’re likely to lose a lot of customers, and your users’ hard-won trust. Trusted execution problems are rare with Mac App Store apps because the Mac App Store validation process tends to catch things early. This post is primarily focused on Developer ID-signed programs. Developers who use Xcode encounter fewer trusted execution problems because Xcode takes care of many code signing and packaging chores. If you’re not using Xcode, consider making the switch. If you can’t, consult the following for information on how to structure, sign, and package your code: Placing Content in a Bundle Embedding Nonstandard Code Structures in a Bundle Embedding a Command-Line Tool in a Sandboxed App Creating Distribution-Signed Code for Mac DevForums post Packaging Mac Software for Distribution DevForums post Gatekeeper Basics User-level apps on macOS implement a quarantine system for new downloads. For example, if Safari downloads a zip archive, it quarantines that archive. This involves setting the com.apple.quarantine extended attribute on the file. Note The com.apple.quarantine extended attribute is not documented as API. If you need to add, check, or remove quarantine from a file programmatically, use the quarantinePropertiesKey property. User-level unarchiving tools preserve quarantine. To continue the above example, if you double click the quarantined zip archive in the Finder, Archive Utility will unpack the archive and quarantine the resulting files. If you launch a quarantined app, the system invokes Gatekeeper. Gatekeeper checks the app for problems. If it finds no problems, it asks the user to confirm the launch, just to be sure. If it finds a problem, it displays an alert to the user and prevents them from launching it. The exact wording of this alert varies depending on the specific problem, and from release to release of macOS, but it generally looks like the ones shown in Apple > Support > Safely open apps on your Mac. The system may run Gatekeeper at other times as well. The exact circumstances under which it runs Gatekeeper is not documented and changes over time. However, running a quarantined app always invokes Gatekeeper. Unix-y networking tools, like curl and scp, don’t quarantine the files they download. Unix-y unarchiving tools, like tar and unzip, don’t propagate quarantine to the unarchived files. Confirm the Problem Trusted execution problems can be tricky to reproduce: You may encounter false negatives, that is, you have a trusted execution problem but you don’t see it during development. You may also encounter false positives, that is, things fail on one specific Mac but otherwise work. To avoid chasing your own tail, test your product on a fresh Mac, one that’s never seen your product before. The best way to do this is using a VM, restoring to a snapshot between runs. For a concrete example of this, see Testing a Notarised Product. The most common cause of problems is a Gatekeeper alert saying that it’s blocked your product from running. However, that’s not the only possibility. Before going further, confirm that Gatekeeper is the problem by running your product without quarantine. That is, repeat the steps in Testing a Notarised Product except, in step 2, download your product in a way that doesn’t set quarantine. Then try launching your app. If that launch fails then Gatekeeper is not the problem, or it’s not the only problem! Note The easiest way to download your app to your test environment without setting quarantine is curl or scp. Alternatively, use xattr to remove the com.apple.quarantine extended attribute from the download before you unpack it. For more information about the xattr tool, see the xattr man page. Trusted execution problems come in all shapes and sizes. The remaining sections address the most common ones. App Blocked by Gatekeeper If your product is an app and it works correctly when not quarantined but is blocked by Gatekeeper when it is, you have a Gatekeeper problem. For advice on how to investigate such issues, see Resolving Gatekeeper Problems. App Can’t Be Opened Not all failures to launch are Gatekeeper errors. In some cases the app is just broken. For example: The app’s executable might be missing the x bit set in its file permissions. The app’s executable might be subtly incompatible with the current system. A classic example of this is trying to run a third-party app that contains arm64e code. macOS requires that third-party kernel extensions use the arm64e architecture. In other circumstances, stick to arm64 for your shipping products. If you want to test arm64e code locally, see Preparing Your App to Work with Pointer Authentication. The app’s executable might claim restricted entitlements that aren’t authorised by a provisioning profile. Or the app might have some other code signing problem. Note For more information about provisioning profiles, see TN3125 Inside Code Signing: Provisioning Profiles. In such cases the system displays an alert saying: The application “NoExec” can’t be opened. [[OK]] Note In macOS 11 this alert was: You do not have permission to open the application “NoExec”. Contact your computer or network administrator for assistance. [[OK]] which was much more confusing. A good diagnostic here is to run the app’s executable from Terminal. For example, an app with a missing x bit will fail to run like so: % NoExec.app/Contents/MacOS/NoExec zsh: permission denied: NoExec.app/Contents/MacOS/NoExec And an app with unauthorised entitlements will be killed by the trusted execution system: % OverClaim.app/Contents/MacOS/OverClaim zsh: killed OverClaim.app/Contents/MacOS/OverClaim In some cases running the executable from Terminal will reveal useful diagnostics. For example, if the app references a library that’s not available, the dynamic linker will print a helpful diagnostic: % MissingLibrary.app/Contents/MacOS/MissingLibrary dyld[88394]: Library not loaded: @rpath/CoreWaffleVarnishing.framework/Versions/A/CoreWaffleVarnishing … zsh: abort MissingLibrary.app/Contents/MacOS/MissingLibrary Code Signing Crashes on Launch A code signing crash has the following exception information: Exception Type: EXC_CRASH (SIGKILL (Code Signature Invalid)) The most common such crash is a crash on launch. To confirm that, look at the thread backtraces: Backtrace not available For steps to debug this, see Resolving Code Signing Crashes on Launch. One common cause of this problem is running distribution-signed code. Don’t do that! For details on why that’s a bad idea, see Don’t Run App Store Distribution-Signed Code. Code Signing Crashes After Launch If your program crashes due to a code signing problem after launch, you might have encountered the issue discussed in Updating Mac Software. Non-Code Signing Failures After Launch The hardened runtime enables a number of security checks within a process. Some coding techniques are incompatible with the hardened runtime. If you suspect that your code is incompatible with the hardened runtime, see Resolving Hardened Runtime Incompatibilities. App Sandbox Inheritance If you’re creating a product with the App Sandbox enabled and it crashes with a trap within _libsecinit_appsandbox, it’s likely that you’re having App Sandbox inheritance problems. For the details, see Resolving App Sandbox Inheritance Problems. Library Loading Problem Most library loading problems have an obvious cause. For example, the library might not be where you expect it, or it might be built with the wrong platform or architecture. However, some library loading problems are caused by the trusted execution system. For the details, see Resolving Library Loading Problems. Explore the System Log If none of the above resolves your issue, look in the system log for clues as to what’s gone wrong. Some good keywords to search for include: gk, for Gatekeeper xprotect syspolicy, per the syspolicyd man page cmd, for Mach-O load command oddities amfi, for Apple mobile file integrity, per the amfid man page taskgated, see its taskgated man page yara, discussed in Apple Platform Security ProvisioningProfiles Here’s a log command that I often use when I’m investigating a trusted execution problem and I don’t know here to start: % log stream --predicate "sender == 'AppleMobileFileIntegrity' or sender == 'AppleSystemPolicy' or process == 'amfid' or process == 'taskgated-helper' or process == 'syspolicyd'" For general information the system log, see Your Friend the System Log. Revision History 2024-01-12 Added a specific command to the Explore the System Log section. Change the syspolicy_check callout to reflect that macOS 14 is no longer in beta. Made minor editorial changes. 2023-06-14 Added a quick call-out to the new syspolicy_check tool. 2022-06-09 Added the Non-Code Signing Failures After Launch section. 2022-06-03 Added a link to Don’t Run App Store Distribution-Signed Code. Fixed the link to TN3125. 2022-05-20 First posted.