When I try to archive an app in order to submit it to the App Store I receive the following errors I do not know how to fix: error: Framework /Users/fbartolom/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData/Virtual_Tags-apzduassdiglhcapscsllvzbfgid/Build/Intermediates.noindex/ArchiveIntermediates/Virtual Tags/InstallationBuildProductsLocation/Applications/VirtualTags.app/Frameworks/StoreKit.framework did not contain an Info.plist (in target 'VirtualTags' from project 'Virtual Tags') error: Framework /Users/fbartolom/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData/Virtual_Tags-apzduassdiglhcapscsllvzbfgid/Build/Intermediates.noindex/ArchiveIntermediates/Virtual Tags/InstallationBuildProductsLocation/Applications/VirtualTags.app/Frameworks/Security.framework did not contain an Info.plist (in target 'VirtualTags' from project 'Virtual Tags') error: Framework /Users/fbartolom/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData/Virtual_Tags-apzduassdiglhcapscsllvzbfgid/Build/Intermediates.noindex/ArchiveIntermediates/Virtual Tags/InstallationBuildProductsLocation/Applications/VirtualTags.app/Frameworks/CloudKit.framework did not contain an Info.plist (in target 'VirtualTags' from project 'Virtual Tags') MacBook Pro M5, Tahoe 26.1, Xcode 26.1.1

急需一个企业开发者证书，有意者可联系tg:@moonkf2025

We have NFC capabilties enabled for our app ID - com.uob.mightyvn but our minimum deployment target is 15.0. We do not have an option deselect PACE from provisioning profile. Hence, the validation is failed for IPA. Invalid entitlement for core nfc framework. The sdk version '18.2' and min OS version '15.0' are not compatible for the entitlement 'com.apple.developer.nfc.readersession.formats' because 'NDEF is disallowed'

I have been notarizing the same program for 3 years now and it's usually completed in minutes. I have not changed anything on my end, is there a reason it's taking 24+ hours all of a sudden? I have seen the posts regarding this issue for new applications where it has to "learn", but I have been notarizing the same apps for 3 years now.

I regularly see questions from folks who’ve run into code-signing problems with their third-party IDE. There’s a limit to how much I can help you with such problems. This post explains a simple test you can run to determine what side of that limit you’re on. If you have any questions or comments, please put them in a new thread here on DevForums. Put it in Code Signing > General topic area and apply whatever tags make sense for your specific situation. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Investigating Third-Party IDE Code-Signing Problems DTS doesn’t support third-party tools. If you’re using third-party tooling and encounter a code-signing problem, run this test to determine whether you should seek help from Apple or from your tool’s vendor. IMPORTANT Some third-party tools create Xcode projects that you then build and run in Xcode. While that approach is understandable, it’s not something that DTS supports. So, the steps below make sense even if you’re already using Xcode. To check that code-signing is working in general: Launch Xcode. In Xcode > Settings > Accounts, make sure you’re signed in with your developer account. Create a new project from the app project template for your target platform. For example, if you’re targeting iOS, use the iOS > App project template. When creating the project: Select the appropriate team in the Team popup. Choose a bundle ID that’s not the same as your main app’s bundle ID. Choose whatever language and interface you want. Your language and interface choices are irrelevant to code signing. Choose None for your testing system and storage model. This simplifies your project setup. In the Signing & Capabilities editor, make sure that: "Automatically manage signing” is checked. The Team popup and Bundle Identifier fields match the value you chose in the previous step. Select a simulator as the run destination. Choose Product > Build. This should always work because the simulator doesn’t use code signing [1]. However, doing this step is important because it confirms that your project is working general. Select your target device as the run destination. Choose Product > Build. Then Product > Run. If you continue to have problems, that’s something that Apple folks can help you with. If this works, there’s a second diagnostic test: Repeat steps 1 through 10 above, except this time, in step 4, choose a bundle ID that is the same as your main app’s bundle ID. If this works then your issue is not on the Apple side of the fence, and you should escalate it via the support channel for the third-party tools you’re using. On the other hand, if this fails, that’s something we can help you with. I recommend that you first try to fix the issue yourself. For links to relevant resources, see Code Signing Resources. You should also search the forums, because we’ve helped a lot of folks with a lot of code-signing issues over the years. If you’re unable to resolve the issue yourself, feel free to start a thread here in the forums. Put it in Code Signing > General topic area and apply whatever tags make sense for your specific situation.

Can you please help us with the scenario below, including details and Apple’s recommendations? I've already read through the Notarization and Gatekeeper documentation. The installed version of our application is 1.2.3, located in /Applications/XYZSecurity.app. We created an upgrade package for version 1.2.4. As part of the pre-install script in the 1.2.4 installer, we explicitly deleted some obsolete .dylib files from /Applications/XYZSecurity.app/Contents/Frameworks and some executable files from /Applications/XYZSecurity.app/Contents/MacOS that were no longer needed in version 1.2.4. The installation of version 1.2.4 completed successfully, but we see the below error logs in installer.log: PackageKit: Failed to unlinkat file reference /Applications/XYZSecurity.app/Contents/Frameworks/libhelper.dylib PackageKit: Failed to unlinkat file reference /Applications/XYZSecurity.app/Contents/MacOS/helper-tool Our Key Questions: Is it the right practice to remove obsolete files in the pre-install script during an upgrade? Is this approach recommended by Apple? Can this cause any issues with Apple Gatekeeper? Is there a possibility of my application getting blocked by Gatekeeper as a result?

I followed the instruction on Preparing your app to be the default browser or email client. I have acquired the permission from Apple. The entitlement is included in the provisioning profile. mailto is specified in URL Schemes. But I downloaded my app from TestFlight and enter Setting > MyApp, the switch that could enable my app to be the default email app was not there. I have no clue what I did it wrong. Does anyone know how to configure the app properly?

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.

I am trying to notarize a simple app I made, but keep getting stuck on "In Progress". The app is a MacOS app, and I'm using XCode. I've tried all the steps listed in the links below: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/notarizing-macos-software-before-distribution https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/resolving-common-notarization-issues I've had the same issue with another app, which got rejected after multiple hours. Never got to resolve this.

Hi All, Like many others I'm a little confused with gaining access to the family controls capability. Our app is ready to push to testflight, and we sent the request to apple last week. However only learning today that we need to request for the shield extension as well. I wanted to ask what the expected timeline is for being approved? I've seen posts here saying less than a week, and some people having to wait longer than 6 weeks. Any advise or guidance on getting approved smoothly & swiftly would be highly appreciated

We are developing a macOS application for distribution outside the Mac App Store. This application requires additional entitlements, including Keychain access groups, Network Extension, App Groups, and Sandbox. Both the app and the network extension import a custom framework. After creating the .app via Xcode, I ensured that a new Developer ID Application provisioning profile was generated. These profiles were then injected into the Contents folder of the .app and Plugins/.netappex as embedded.provisionprofile. Next, .entitlements files were created with the necessary "-systemextension" entitlement for the network extension and used for code signing. When inspecting the extracted entitlements from the .provisioningprofile as described in TN3125, everything appears correct. Code signing flow: codesign --force --options runtime --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <team>" <.app>/Contents/Frameworks/<sdk>.framework/ codesign --force --options runtime --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <team>" <.app>/Contents/PlugIns/vpn.appex/Contents/Frameworks/<sdk>.framework/Versions/A/<sdk> codesign --force --options runtime --entitlements <vpn-plist>.entitlements --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <team>" <.app>/Contents/PlugIns/vpn.appex/ codesign --force --options runtime --entitlements <app-plist>.entitlements --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <team>" <.app> The .app is then zipped with ditto -c -k --keepParent and set off for notarization, which is succesful and the .app is stapled. After that, a .dmg or .pkg is created, which is then sent for notarization and subsequently stapled. The problem occurs when the app is distributed to the client. Opening the extracted .app fails, as Gatekeeper refuses to launch it with the following error message: 661 debug staticCode syspolicyd Security 0x88d68d818 done serializing <?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.application-identifier</key><string><teamid.bundleid></string><key>com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension</key><array><string>packet-tunnel-provider-systemextension</string></array><key>com.apple.developer.team-identifier</key><string>team-id</string><key>com.apple.security.app-sandbox</key><true/><key>com.apple.security.application-groups</key><array><string>teamid.group.appgroup</string></array><key>com.apple.security.files.user-selected.read-write</key><true/><key>com.apple.security.network.client</key><true/><key>com.apple.security.network.server</key><true/><key>keychain-access-groups</key><array><string>teamid.group.appgroup</string></array></dict></plist> com.apple.securityd 22207 debug ProvisioningProfiles taskgated-helper ConfigurationProfiles entitlements: { "com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension" = ( "packet-tunnel-provider-systemextension" ); "com.apple.developer.team-identifier" = team-id; "keychain-access-groups" = ( “teamid.group.appgroup” ); } com.apple.ManagedClient 22207 error ProvisioningProfiles taskgated-helper ConfigurationProfiles <bundle-id>: Unsatisfied entitlements: com.apple.developer.team-identifier, com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension, keychain-access-groups com.apple.ManagedClient After encountering this problem every time, we tried using a different development team with a new bundle ID, app groups, developer ID, developer ID certificate, and provisioning profiles. The .entitlements file remained the same (with different IDs), as did the capabilities for the App IDs in App Store Connect. With this new development team, we were successful, and the gatekeeper did not block the launch job. From a configuration standpoint, everything appears identical. Updating the App Store Connect App ID capabilities and generating new provisioning profiles for the first development team did not resolve the issue. Thank you for your help.

Hi support, Currently we are in a process of migrating our Qt application for MAC OS - ventura -v13.4. There is a specific feature in our application in which client tries to communicate with server (Socket communication) using Qt's QsslSocket Apis . To achieve this we are using self signed Ca certificate (.pem ) generated by using openSSl commands which uses IP address of the server. We are manually installing the certificate inside MAC OS - keychain and trusting it manually as well after installing . This is working fine in XCode environment in debug mode in MAC OS and client -server handshake is happening successfully. How ever after creating .dmg file (installer) the same handshake is not happening and we are getting error -Connection time out. Upon investigating this online, we got to know there has to be codesigning (both app bundle and the dmg file )along with notarization of the .dmg file in order to access keychain of MAC OS at runtime to access the self signed certificate installed. Now we have 2 queries here. Is code signing mandatory if we want to verify our app through keychain with .dmg file ? If yes, whats the best way to achieve this ? We have tried 2 options without any luck. option1 - Trying to build our specific target among 'ALL_BUILD' with signing key settings inside xcode where we are providing developer provisional certificate with apple team ID . After that we are trying to archive to generate dmg file which is code signed. We are failing here as the signed dmg is not getting installed due to other app related dependencies are missing . option 2- Code signing the dmg and the app bundle manually outside the environment of xcode with developer certificate and team ID. We are failing here as notarization needs to be done it seems to access keychain for certificate verification If Code signing is not mandatory then whats the best possible way to achieve this considering manually installation of certificate inside keychain with adding trust option is not working at the moment. Please specify the best solution if possible.

I haven't been able to notarize my macOS app for the past two days. Now, I believe this is an issue with the notarization process because I've tried notarizing the default app that's provided whenever you open a new Swift application, but that completely failed as well. And I've been waiting for the past two days and it's been stuck on in progress. This is the second time this has happened to me in the past two months and oftentimes I have to wait more than a day or two for the notarization to occur. I just, I don't understand why it's deadlocked like this. I've done nothing. I haven't changed my certificates. I haven't done any different configurations within my Mac. The last time that this happened, the issue went away after two days, but my biggest concern right now is that if this happens whenever we need to urgently push updates, we can't. I have absolutely no idea what to do and I'm just extremely frustrated because this is happening right before our launch day. I've been stuck on notarizing again for the past two days and I've seen no progress, I've seen no responses from support emails and the ones that do aren't even applicable to my current scenario. ⁠

I'm trying to notarize an application for the first time & it's stuck for more than 24 hours now. I ended up submitting the same app more than 5 times, but all are stuck in waiting state. There is no visibility into what's happening & whenever i check the status it just shows as "In Progress". How can i expedite this process ?

I am a new macOS developer, and the codesign issue is persistent. I've been trying to resolve it for days. There are two issues: 1.) When downloading and installing frameworks, they are not showing up in Xcode templates. 2.) Regarding codesigning, even though I've installed it on my external drive and placed it in various locations (Library, Templates, Frameworks, Application Contents, macOS Templates and Frameworks) and added through General Libraries in Xcode, persistently encountering issues. I'm experiencing a codesign problem. I've cleaned the build, cleared derived data, downloaded certificates, added them to the access key, and linked the binary. However, the issue persists. Please help me, as this is making the process much more difficult. I've been stuck on this for weeks.

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. IMPORTANT Don’t go down this path if you’ve simply lost your private key. 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. 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 2025-03-28 Excised the discussion of Xcode’s import and export feature because that was removed in Xcode 16. 2025-02-20 Added some clarification to the end of Don’t Leak Your Private Key. 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.

I'm developing an app that receives push notifications, and writes the contents of the push notification to a shared location between the main app and a Notifications Message Extension, through App Groups. This all seems to work on my phone, with developer mode turned on, but when I archive my app as an Enterprise IPA and distribute it, the users can install the app on their phones and they receive the push notifications, but it doesn't appear that the message extension is running as my app displays the content of the shared data in the App Groups on the main screen and nothing is showing. I have tried on 3 phones, and it only works on the phone with developer mode turned on. I can't tell at this point whether it's because of a signing issue, or build phase order issue, or something else?

Hi everyone, I'm following up on this post I made earlier about an issue I'm having with FamilyControls and the DeviceActivityMonitor extension not working for external TestFlight testers. To briefly recap: I have official Apple approval for the com.apple.developer.family-controls entitlement (distribution) The entitlement is added to both my main app and the DeviceActivityMonitor extension The App Group is correctly configured for both targets On internal TestFlight builds, everything works as expected: app blocking works, the extension runs, and selected apps are shielded. On external TestFlight builds, users get the Screen Time permission prompt, can select apps to block, but nothing is blocked. Since that post, I submitted a Code Level Support request, and Apple asked me to file a bug report via Feedback Assistant. I did that almost a month ago. The only reply I’ve received since is that they can’t give a timeframe or guarantee it will be resolved. I'm stuck in limbo with no updates and no fix. This feature is critical to my app and I cannot launch without it. I’ve reached out to other developers who use app blocking, and none of them have run into this issue. My setup seems correct, and Apple has not said otherwise. If anyone has experienced something similar, found a workaround, or knows how to get real movement on a bug report like this, I would really appreciate any help. It’s been weeks, and I just want to launch my app. Thanks so much.

The notary service requires that all Mach-O images be linked against the macOS 10.9 SDK or later. This isn’t an arbitrary limitation. The hardened runtime, another notarisation requirement, relies on code signing features that were introduced along with macOS 10.9 and it uses the SDK version to check for their presence. Specifically, it checks the SDK version using the sdk field in the LC_BUILD_VERSION Mach-O load command (or the older LC_VERSION_MIN_MACOSX command). There are three common symptoms of this problem: When notarising your product, the notary service rejects a Mach-O image with the error The binary uses an SDK older than the 10.9 SDK. When loading a dynamic library, the system fails with the error mapped file has no cdhash, completely unsigned?. When displaying the code signature of a library, codesign prints this warning: % codesign -d vvv /path/to/your.dylib … Library validation warning=OS X SDK version before 10.9 does not support Library Validation … If you see any of these errors, read on… The best way to avoid this problem is to rebuild your code with modern tools. However, in some cases that’s not possible. Imagine if your app relies on the closed source libDodo.dylib library. That library’s vendor went out of business 10 years ago, and so the library hasn’t been updated since then. Indeed, the library was linked against the macOS 10.6 SDK. What can you do? The first thing to do is come up with a medium-term plan for breaking your dependency on libDodo.dylib. Relying on an unmaintained library is not something that’s sustainable in the long term. The history of the Mac is one of architecture transitions — 68K to PowerPC to Intel, 32- to 64-bit, and so on — and this unmaintained library will make it much harder to deal with the next transition. IMPORTANT I wrote the above prior to the announcement of the latest Apple architecture transition, Apple silicon. When you update your product to a universal binary, you might as well fix this problem on the Intel side as well. Do not delay that any further: While Apple silicon Macs are currently able to run Intel code using Rosetta 2, that’s not something you want to rely on in the long term. Heed this advice from About the Rosetta Translation Environment: Rosetta is meant to ease the transition to Apple silicon, giving you time to create a universal binary for your app. It is not a substitute for creating a native version of your app. But what about the short term? Historically I wasn’t able to offer any help on that front, but this has changed recently. Xcode 11 ships with a command-line tool, vtool, that can change the LC_BUILD_VERSION and LC_VERSION_MIN_MACOSX commands in a Mach-O. You can use this to change the sdk field of these commands, and thus make your Mach-O image ‘compatible’ with notarisation and the hardened runtime. Before doing this, consider these caveats: Any given Mach-O image has only a limited amount of space for load commands. When you use vtool to set or modify the SDK version, the Mach-O could run out of load command space. The tool will fail cleanly in this case but, if it that happens, this technique simply won’t work. Changing a Mach-O image’s load commands will break the seal on its code signature. If the image is signed, remove the signature before doing that. To do this run codesign with the --remove-signature argument. You must then re-sign the library as part of your normal development and distribution process. Remember that a Mach-O image might contain multiple architectures. All of the tools discussed here have an option to work with a specific architecture (usually -arch or --architecture). Keep in mind, however, that macOS 10.7 and later do not run on 32-bit Macs, so if your deployment target is 10.7 or later then it’s safe to drop any 32-bit code. If you’re dealing with a Mach-O image that includes 32-bit Intel code, or indeed PowerPC code, make your life simpler by removing it from the image. Use lipo for this; see its man page for details. It’s possible that changing a Mach-O image’s SDK version could break something. Indeed, many system components use the main executable’s SDK version as part of their backwards compatibility story. If you change a main executable’s SDK version, you might run into hard-to-debug compatibility problems. Test such a change extensively. It’s also possible, but much less likely, that changing the SDK version of a non-main executable Mach-O image might break something. Again, this is something you should test extensively. This list of caveats should make it clear that this is a technique of last resort. I strongly recommend that you build your code with modern tools, and work with your vendors to ensure that they do the same. Only use this technique as part of a short-term compatibility measure while you implement a proper solution in the medium term. For more details on vtool, read its man page. Also familiarise yourself with otool, and specifically the -l option which dumps a Mach-O image’s load commands. Read its man page for details. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Revision history: 2025-04-03 — Added a discussion of common symptoms. Made other minor editorial changes. 2022-05-09 — Updated with a note about Apple silicon. 2020-09-11 — First posted.

So we are building a Tauri app and I have no been able to get our App to be Notarized using Developer ID. We have a ticket open for 3 months now. Can anyone help me out here? { "logFormatVersion": 1, "jobId": "e2ec4d13-bb83-41d4-a497-ba80cf830af1", "status": "Rejected", "statusSummary": "Team is not yet configured for notarization. Please contact Developer Programs Support at developer.apple.com under the topic Development and Technical / Other Development or Technical Questions.", "statusCode": 7000, "archiveFilename": "HIDDEN", "uploadDate": "2026-01-23T16:13:37.589Z", "sha256": "fd52815d5edf14b66b25529e89c207b2acff2c41642261e1049a479f19f2b72f", "ticketContents": null, "issues": null } How do we escalate to engineering team? Sincerely, Nash Gadre https://camouflagenetworks.com