急需一个企业开发者证书，有意者可联系tg:@moonkf2025

This post is a ‘child’ of Resolving errSecInternalComponent errors during code signing. 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" Fixing an untrusted code-signing certificate If your code-signing identity is set up correctly, selecting its certificate in Keychain Access should display a green checkmark with the text “This certificate is valid”. If it does not, you need to fix that before trying to sign code. There are three common causes of an untrusted certificate: Expired Missing issuer Trust settings overrides Check for an expired certificate If your code-signing identity’s certificate has expired, Keychain Access shows a red cross with the text “… certificate is expired”. If you try to sign with it, codesign will fail like so: % codesign -s "Apple Development" -f "MyTrue" error: The specified item could not be found in the keychain. If you use security to list your code-signing identities, it will show the CSSMERR_TP_CERT_EXPIRED status: % security find-identity -p codesigning Policy: Code Signing Matching identities 1) 4E587951B705280CBB8086325CD134D4CDA04977 "Apple Development: …" (CSSMERR_TP_CERT_EXPIRED) 1 identities found Valid identities only 0 valid identities found The most likely cause of this problem is that… yep… your certificate has expired. To confirm that, select the certificate in Keychain Access and look at the Expires field. Or double click the certificate, expand the Details section, and look at the Not Valid Before and Not Valid After fields. If your code-signing identity’s certificate has expired, you’ll need to renew it. For information on how to do that, see Developer Account Help. If your certificate hasn’t expired, check that your Mac’s clock is set correctly. Check for a missing issuer In the X.509 public key infrastructure (PKI), every certificate has an issuer, who signed the certificate with their private key. These issuers form a chain of trust from the certificate to a trusted anchor. In most cases the trusted anchor is a root certificate, a certificate that’s self signed. Certificates between the leaf and the root are known as intermediate certificates, or intermediates for short. Your code-signing identity’s certificate is issued by Apple. The exact chain of trust depends on the type of certificate and the date that it was issued. For example, in 2022 Apple Development certificates are issued by the Apple Worldwide Developer Relations Certification Authority — G3 intermediate, which in turn was issued by the Apple Root CA certificate authority. If there’s a missing issuer in the chain of trust between your code-signing identity’s certificate and a trusted anchor, Keychain Access shows a red cross with the text “… certificate is not trusted”. If you try to sign with it, codesign will fail like so: % codesign -s "Apple Development" -f "MyTrue" MyTrue: replacing existing signature Warning: unable to build chain to self-signed root for signer "Apple Development: …" MyTrue: errSecInternalComponent The message unable to build chain to self-signed root for signer is key. If you use security to list your identities, it will not show up in the Valid identities only list but there’s no explanation as to why: % security find-identity -p codesigning Policy: Code Signing Matching identities 1) 4E587951B705280CBB8086325CD134D4CDA04977 "Apple Development: …" 1 identities found Valid identities only 0 valid identities found IMPORTANT These symptoms can have multiple potential causes. The most common cause is a missing issuer, as discussed in this section. Another potential cause is a trust settings override, as discussed in the next section. There are steps you can take to investigate this further but, because this problem is most commonly caused by a missing intermediate, try taking a shortcut by assuming that’s the problem. If that fixes things, you’re all set. If not, you have at least ruled out this problem. Apple publishes its intermediates on the Apple PKI page. The simplest way to resolve this problem is to download all of the certificates in the Apple Intermediate Certificates list and use Keychain Access to add them to your keychain. Having extra intermediates installed is generally not a problem. If you want to apply a more targeted fix: In Keychain Access, find your code-signing identity’s certificate and double click it. If the Details section is collapsed, expand it. Look at the Issuer Name section. Note the value in the Common Name field and, if present, the Organizational Unit field. For example, for an Apple Development certificate that’s likely to be Apple Worldwide Developer Relations Certification Authority and G3, respectively. Go to the Apple PKI and download the corresponding intermediate. To continue the above example, the right intermediate is labelled Worldwide Developer Relations - G3. Use Keychain Access to add the intermediate to your keychain. Sometimes it’s not obvious which intermediate to choose in step 4. If you’re uncertain, download all the intermediates and preview each one using Quick Look in the Finder. Look in the Subject Name section for a certificate whose Common Name and Organizational Unit field matches the values from step 3. Finally, double check the chain of trust: In Keychain Access, select your code-signing identity’s certificate and choose Keychain Access > Certificate Assistant > Evaluate. In the resulting Certificate Assistant window, make sure that Generic (certificate chain validation only) is selected and click Continue. It might seem like selecting Code Signing here would make more sense. If you do that, however, things don’t work as you might expect. Specifically, in this case Certificate Assistant is smart enough to temporarily download a missing intermediate certificate in order to resolve the chain of trust, and that’ll prevent you from seeing any problems with your chain of trust. The resulting UI shows a list of certificates that form the chain of trust. The first item is your code-signing identity’s certificate and the last is an Apple root certificate. Double click the first item. Keychain Access presents the standard the certificate trust sheet, showing the chain of trust from the root to the leaf. You should expect to see three items in that list: An Apple root certificate An Apple intermediate Your code-signing identity’s certificate If so, that’s your chain of trust built correctly. Select each certificate in that list. The UI should show a green checkmark with the text “This certificate is valid”. If you see anything else, check your trust settings as described in the next section. Check for a trust settings override macOS allows you to customise trust settings. For example, you might tell the system to trust a particular certificate when verifying a signed email but not when connecting to a TLS server. The code-signing certificates issued by Apple are trusted by default. They don’t require you to customise any trust settings. Moreover, customising trust settings might cause problems. If code signing fails with the message unable to build chain to self-signed root for signer, first determine the chain of trust per the previous section then make sure that none of these certificates have customised trust settings. Specifically, for each certificate in the chain: Find the certificate in Keychain Access. Note that there may be multiple instances of the certificate in different keychains. If that’s the case, follow these steps for each copy of the certificate. Double click the certificate to open it in a window. If the Trust section is collapsed, expand it. Ensure that all the popups are set to their default values (Use System Defaults for the first, “no value specified” for the rest). If they are, move on to the next certificate. If not, set the popups to the default values and close the window. Closing the window may require authentication to save the trust settings. Another way to explore trust settings is with the dump-trust-settings subcommand of the security tool. On a stock macOS system you should see this: % security dump-trust-settings SecTrustSettingsCopyCertificates: No Trust Settings were found. % security dump-trust-settings -d SecTrustSettingsCopyCertificates: No Trust Settings were found. That is, there are no user or admin trust settings overrides. If you run these commands and see custom trust settings, investigate their origins. IMPORTANT If you’re working in a managed environment, you might see custom trust settings associated with that environment. For example, on my personal Mac I see this: % security dump-trust-settings -d Number of trusted certs = 1 Cert 2: QuinnNetCA Number of trust settings : 10 … because my home network infrastructure uses a custom certificate authority and I’ve configured my Mac to trust its root certificate (QuinnNetCA). Critically, this custom trust settings are nothing to do with code signing. If you dump trust settings and see an override you can’t explain, and specifically one related to code-signing certificate, use Keychain Access to remove it. Revision History 2025-09-29 Added information about the dump-trust-settings command to Check for a trust settings override. Made other minor editorial changes. 2022-08-10 First posted.

Since around September (iOS 26 release), i'm unable to test my app normally. It says "internet connection is required to verify [my certificate id]", or just crashing. All terms and conditions accepted, everything is valid, certificates are OK. Reinstallation via xcode does not help. Removal of provisioning profile, generating new does not help. Revoking of certificate and generating new does for around week, then it happens again, but do i need to do it every week now? In logs i see the following: default amfid validation failed because of missing trust and/or authorization (0xe8008026) error amfid not valid: 0xe8008026: The provisioning profile requires online authorization. error amfid Unexpected MISError (0xe8008026): The provisioning profile requires online authorization. default +0300 amfid /private/var/containers/Bundle/Application/5B8E560E-75B2-46EF-8606-02072D99E9CF//Frameworks/oss.dylib not valid: Error Domain=AppleMobileFileIntegrityError Code=-400 "An unknown error was encountered" UserInfo={NSURL=file:///private/var/containers/Bundle/Application/5B8E560E-75B2-46EF-8606-02072D99E9CF//Frameworks/oss.dylib, NSLocalizedDescription=An unknown error was encountered} default kernel AMFI: code signature validation failed. It looks like apple validation servers are not working, or is it iOS bug? All provisioning profiles are showing like "valid" in apple developer center. My network is not behind a proxy, connection is direct. If use EXACTLY the same app, signed with the same provisioning, same signature, on another test device, it works! When i reset current device to default settings and installing the EXACTLY same app after it, it works as well. Looking for a help from apple developer support

This issue keeps cropping up on the forums and so I decided to write up a single post with all the details. If you have questions or comments: If you were referred here from an existing thread, reply on that thread. If not, feel free to start a new thread. Use whatever topic and subtopic is appropriate for your question, but also add the Entitlements tag so that I see it. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Determining if an entitlement is real In recent months there’s been a spate of forums threads involving ‘hallucinated’ entitlements. This typically pans out as follows: The developer, or an agent working on behalf of the developer, changes their .entitlements file to claim an entitlement that’s not real. That is, the entitlement key is a value that is not, and never has been, supported in any way. Xcode’s code signing machinery tries to find or create a provisioning profile to authorise this claim. That’s impossible, because the entitlement isn’t a real entitlement. Xcode reports this as a code signing error. The developer misinterprets that error [1] in one of two ways: As a generic Xcode code signing failure, and so they start a forums thread asking about how to fix that problem. As an indication that the entitlement is managed — that is, requires authorisation from Apple to use — and so they start a forums thread asking how to request such authorisation. The fundamental problem is step 1. Once you start claiming entitlements that aren’t real, you’re on a path to confusion. Note If you’re curious about how provisioning profiles authorise entitlement claims, read TN3125 Inside Code Signing: Provisioning Profiles. There are a couple of ways to check whether an entitlement is real. My preferred option is to create a new test project and use Xcode’s Signing & Capabilities editor to add the corresponding capability to it. Then look at what Xcode did. You might find that Xcode claimed a different entitlement, or added an Info.plist key, or did nothing at all. IMPORTANT If you can’t find the correct capability in the Signing & Capabilities editor, it’s likely that this feature is available to all apps, that is, it’s not gated by an entitlement or anything else. Another thing you can do is search the documentation. The vast majority of real entitlements are documented in Bundle Resources > Entitlements. IMPORTANT When you search for documentation, focus on the Apple documentation. If, for example, you search the Apple Developer Forums, you might be mislead by other folks who are similarly confused. If you find that you’re mistakenly trying to claim a hallucinated entitlement, the fix is trivial: Remove it from your .entitlements file so that your app starts to build again. Then add the capability using Xcode’s Signing & Capabilities editor. This will do the right thing. If you continue to have problems, feel free to ask for help here on the forums. See the top of this post for advice on how to do that. [1] Xcode 26.2, currently being seeded as Release Candidate, is much better about this (r. 155327166). Give it a whirl! Commonly Hallucinated Entitlements This section lists some of the more commonly hallucinated entitlements: com.apple.developer.push-notifications — The correct entitlement is aps-environment (com.apple.developer.aps-environment on macOS), documented here. There’s also the remote-notification value in the UIBackgroundModes property. com.apple.developer.in-app-purchase — There’s no entitlement for in-app purchase. Rather, in-app purchase is available to all apps with an explicit App ID (as opposed to a wildcard App ID). com.apple.InAppPurchase — Likewise. com.apple.developer.storekit — Likewise. com.apple.developer.in-app-purchase.non-consumable — Likewise. com.apple.developer.in-app-purchase.subscription — Likewise. com.apple.developer.app-groups — The correct entitlement is com.apple.security.application-groups, documented here. And if you’re working on the Mac, see App Groups: macOS vs iOS: Working Towards Harmony. com.apple.developer.background-modes — Background modes are controlled by the UIBackgroundModes key in your Info.plist, documented here. UIBackgroundModes — See the previous point. com.apple.developer.voip-push-notification — There’s no entitlement for this. VoIP is gated by the voip value in the UIBackgroundModes property. com.apple.developer.family-controls.user-authorization — The correct entitlement is com.apple.developer.family-controls, documented here. IMPORTANT As explained in the docs, this entitlement is available to all developers during development but you must request authorisation for distribution. com.apple.developer.device-activity — The DeviceActivity framework has the same restrictions as Family Controls. com.apple.developer.managed-settings — If you’re trying to use the ManagedSettings framework, that has the same restrictions as Family Controls. If you’re trying to use the ManagedApp framework, that’s not gated by an entitlement. com.apple.developer.callkit.call-directory — There’s no entitlement for the Call Directory app extension feature. com.apple.developer.nearby-interaction — There’s no entitlement for the Nearby interaction framework. com.apple.developer.secure-enclave — On iOS and its child platforms, there’s no entitlement required to use the Secure Enclave. For macOS specifically, any program that has access to the data protection keychain also has access to the Secure Enclave [1]. See TN3137 On Mac keychain APIs and implementations for more about the data protection keychain. com.apple.developer.networking.configuration — If you’re trying to configure the Wi-Fi network on iOS, the correct entitlement is com.apple.developer.networking.HotspotConfiguration, documented here. com.apple.developer.musickit — There is no MusicKit capability. Rather, enable MusicKit via the App Services column in the App ID editor, accessible from Developer > Certificates, Identifiers, and Profiles > Identifiers. com.apple.mail.extension — Creating an app extension based on the MailKit framework does not require any specific entitlement. com.apple.security.accessibility — There’s no entitlement that gates access to the Accessibility APIs on macOS. Rather, this is controlled by the user in System Settings > Privacy & Security. Note that sandboxed apps can’t use these APIs. See the Review functionality that is incompatible with App Sandbox section of Protecting user data with App Sandbox. com.apple.developer.adservices — Using the AdServices framework does not require any specific entitlement. [1] While technically these are different features, they are closely associated and it turns out that, if you have access to the data protection keychain, you also have access to the SE. Revision History 2025-12-09 Updated the Xcode footnote to mention the improvements in Xcode 26.2rc. 2025-11-03 Added com.apple.developer.adservices to the common hallucinations list. 2025-10-30 Added com.apple.security.accessibility to the common hallucinations list. 2025-10-22 Added com.apple.mail.extension to the common hallucinations list. Also added two new in-app purchase hallucinations. 2025-09-26 Added com.apple.developer.musickit to the common hallucinations list. 2025-09-22 Added com.apple.developer.storekit to the common hallucinations list. 2025-09-05 Added com.apple.developer.device-activity to the common hallucinations list. 2025-09-02 First posted.

I tried to create a new IOS provisioning profile and re-apply it to the app using Xcode to build it, but I got into trouble. The build is good, but it bounces when running the app. I would appreciate it if you could let me know what to do.

Hello, I went through the verification process to get the Tap to Pay on iPhone entitlement, and after a couple of corrections I was finally assured that I was granted the entitlement for production use. However, in App Store Connect, I can only see "Development" for "Provisioning Support" of the entitlement, and I'm not able to publish the app to Testflight because the profile doesn't support the entitlement (I'm using automatic code signing with XCode). Where is this going wrong? The Tap to Pay support assured me they granted the right entitlement and pointed me to the developer support. Thank you, Johannes

I am distributing a macOS application outside the App Store using Developer ID and need to provide provisioning profiles to customers for installation during the package installation process. I have two questions: How can I package and provide the provisioning profile(s) so that the customer can install them easily during the application installation process? Are there any best practices or tools that could simplify this step? In my case, there are multiple provisioning profiles. Should I instruct the customer to install each profile individually, or is there a way to combine them and have them installed all at once? Any guidance on the best practices for this process would be greatly appreciated.

Okay, I just pushed a release and notarized. Works great on my test laptop (macOS 26.2) and my test desktop (macOS 14.x) But it seems to fail for a friend who's running macOS 15. I've been using the same GitHub actions successfully for months. How can notarization work for macOS 14 and 26, but not for macOS 15? I think everything looks okay as far as the signing? I've checked codesign -dvv Executable=/Applications/Avogadro2.app/Contents/MacOS/Avogadro2 Identifier=cc.avogadro Format=app bundle with Mach-O thin (arm64) CodeDirectory v=20500 size=11607 flags=0x10000(runtime) hashes=352+7 location=embedded Signature size=8986 Authority=Developer ID Application: Geoffrey Hutchison (…..) Authority=Developer ID Certification Authority Authority=Apple Root CA Timestamp=Feb 5, 2026 at 8:47:21 PM Info.plist entries=24 TeamIdentifier=….. Runtime Version=15.5.0 Sealed Resources version=2 rules=13 files=3306 Internal requirements count=1 size=172 And from spctl -a -vv /Applications/Avogadro2.app: accepted source=Notarized Developer ID origin=Developer ID Application: Geoffrey Hutchison (….)

App translocation, officially known as Gatekeeper path randomisation, comes up from time-to-time. The best resource to explain it, WWDC 2016 Session 706 What’s New in Security, is no longer available from Apple so I thought I’d post some notes here (r. 105455698 ). Questions or comments? Start a new thread here on DevForums, applying the Gatekeeper tag so that I see it. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" App Translocation Notes Gatekeeper path randomisation, more commonly known as app translocation, is a security feature on macOS 10.12 and later. When you run a newly downloaded app, the system executes the app from a randomised path. This prevents someone from taking an app that loads code from an app-relative path and repackaging it to load malicious code. IMPORTANT The best way to prevent your app from being tricked into loading malicious code is to enable library validation. You get this by default once you enable the hardened runtime. Do not disable library validation unless your app needs to load in-process plug-ins from other third-party developers. If you have an in-process plug-in model, consider migrating to ExtensionKit. The exact circumstances where the system translocates an app is not documented and has changed over time. It’s best to structure your app so that it works regardless of whether it’s translocated or not. App Translocation Compatibility Most apps run just fine when translocated. However, you can run into problems if you load resources relative to your app bundle. For example, consider a structure like this: MyApp.app Templates/ letter.myapp envelope.myapp birthday card.myapp Such an app might try to find the Templates directory by: Getting the path to the main bundle Navigating from that using a relative path This won’t work if the app is translocated. The best way to avoid such problems is to embed these resources inside your app (following the rules in Placing Content in a Bundle, of course). If you need to make them easily accessible to the user, add your own UI for that. For a great example of this, run Pages and choose File > New. App Translocation Limits There is no supported way to detect if your app is being run translocated. If you search the ’net you’ll find lots of snippets that do this, but they all rely on implementation details that could change. There is no supported way to determine the original (untranslocated) path of your app. Again, you’ll find lots of unsupported techniques for this out there on the ’net. Use them at your peril! If you find yourself using these unsupported techniques, it’s time to sit down and rethink your options. Your best option here is to make your app work properly when translocated, as illustrated by the example in the previous section. App Translocation in Action The following steps explain how to trigger app translocation on macOS 13.0. Keep in mind that the specifics of app translocation are not documented and have changed over time, so you might see different behaviour on older or new systems: To see app translocation in action: Use Safari to download an app that’s packaged as a zip archive. My go-to choice for such tests is NetNewsWire, but any app will work. Safari downloads the zip archive to the Downloads folder and then unpacks it (assuming your haven’t tweaked your preferences). In Finder, navigate to the Downloads folder and launch the app. When Gatekeeper presents its alert, approve the launch. In Terminal, look at the path the app was launched from: % ps xw | grep NetNewsWire … /private/var/folders/wk/bqx_nk71457_g9yry9c_2ww80000gp/T/AppTranslocation/C863FADC-A711-49DD-B4D0-6BE679EE225D/d/NetNewsWire.app/Contents/MacOS/NetNewsWire Note how the path isn’t ~/Downloads but something random. That’s why the official name for this feature is Gatekeeper path randomisation. Quit the app. Use Finder to relaunch it. Repeat step 5: % ps xw | grep NetNewsWire … /private/var/folders/wk/bqx_nk71457_g9yry9c_2ww80000gp/T/AppTranslocation/C863FADC-A711-49DD-B4D0-6BE679EE225D/d/NetNewsWire.app/Contents/MacOS/NetNewsWire The path is still randomised. Quit the app again. Use the Finder to move it to the desktop. And relaunch it. And repeat step 5 again: % ps xw | grep NetNewsWire … /Users/quinn/Desktop/NetNewsWire.app/Contents/MacOS/NetNewsWire The act of moving the app has cleared the state that triggered app translocation.

This is my .entitlements file: Code signing: codesign --sign -vvv --timestamp --options=runtime --force --entitlements ./UES.entitlements -s "Developer ID Application: XXX. (XXXXXXX)" ./UES.app I work fine in the macOS 13.x system, but the "killed" error occurs in macOS11.x. The system log is displayed as follows: (If codesign remove the --entitlements ./UES.entitlements, it will operate normally) 2025-04-21 13:58:27.039638+0800 0xd5941 Default 0x0 149 0 amfid: /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES signature not valid: -67050 2025-04-21 13:58:27.039762+0800 0xd5bbf Default 0x0 0 0 kernel: mac_vnode_check_signature: /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES: code signature validation failed fatally: When validating /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES: 2025-04-21 13:58:27.039815+0800 0xd5bbf Default 0x0 0 0 kernel: proc 29354: load code signature error 4 for file "UES" 2025-04-21 13:58:27.040720+0800 0xd5bc0 Default 0x0 0 0 kernel: (AppleSystemPolicy) ASP: Security policy would not allow process: 29354, /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES 2025-04-21 13:58:27.045974+0800 0xd58be Error 0x0 66405 0 CoreServicesUIAgent: [com.apple.launchservices:uiagent] handle LS launch error: {\n Action = oapp;\n AppMimimumSystemVersion = "10.13";\n AppPath = "/Applications/UES.app";\n ErrorCode = "-10826";\n} 2025-04-21 13:58:39.121619+0800 0xd5941 Default 0x0 149 0 amfid: /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES signature not valid: -67050 2025-04-21 13:58:39.121832+0800 0xd5e0f Default 0x0 0 0 kernel: mac_vnode_check_signature: /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES: code signature validation failed fatally: When validating /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES: 2025-04-21 13:58:39.121861+0800 0xd5e0f Default 0x0 0 0 kernel: proc 29415: load code signature error 4 for file "UES" 2025-04-21 13:58:39.122571+0800 0xd5e10 Default 0x0 0 0 kernel: (AppleSystemPolicy) ASP: Security policy would not allow process: 29415, /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES 2025-04-21 13:58:46.297915+0800 0xd5941 Default 0x0 149 0 amfid: /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES signature not valid: -67050 2025-04-21 13:58:46.298031+0800 0xd5f85 Default 0x0 0 0 kernel: mac_vnode_check_signature: /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES: code signature validation failed fatally: When validating /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES: 2025-04-21 13:58:46.298072+0800 0xd5f85 Default 0x0 0 0 kernel: proc 29485: load code signature error 4 for file "UES" 2025-04-21 13:58:46.300248+0800 0xd5f86 Default 0x0 0 0 kernel: (AppleSystemPolicy) ASP: Security policy would not allow process: 29485, /Applications/UES.app/Contents/MacOS/UES What causes the pattern to be narrow?

I want to help contribute a feature in a virtual-machine app in macOS that supports PCIe device passthrough over thunderbolt. I have a question about the entitlements. Since I do not represent the GPU vendors, would I be allowed to get a driver signed that matches GPU vendor IDs? Is there such a thing as wildcard entitlement for PCIDriverKit? I don't want end-users to have to disable SIP to be able to use this. Any suggestions/leads? Thank you.

我是一名开发人员。除了App Store，我们公司的官方网站也是软件下载的一种方式。DMG签名提交后，通过网站下载安装软件时，仍然有提示说来自身份不明的开发者。您能告诉我如何解决这个问题吗？如果你能用中文回复就最好了。

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.

i encountered an error when i distributing my app on xcode 26.0.1. Below is error log. { "logFormatVersion": 1, "jobId": "ed2b622b-61f6-4c8a-90b7-7c3cdfbafc7a", "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": "mychm.zip", "uploadDate": "2025-12-10T01:50:34.198Z", "sha256": "b61e224154823c8e06c3db904d67a78969f1564c7602f1fa77335fdd12a8d22b", "ticketContents": null, "issues": null }

Hey everyone, I’m wondering if anyone has run into any issues with this. Before I uploaded, I guess maybe 20 assets of 1080 x 720, my notarization was taking around 2-3 minutes almost instant. Now I’m looking at 30 minutes. I have no idea when the notarization is going to end. I’m wondering if asset size has any impact on notarization speed, and if so, is this going to be a one-time thing or is this going to happen with all my following builds? Let me know if anyone has run into anything similar or if the notarization service is just down right now. ⁠

I’ve been wrestling with this for nearly a week now and none of the proposed fixes have worked. I’m trying to resign an app via Jenkins and have done the following: Created a custom keychain Imported the required .p12 certificates Installed the Apple WWDR certificate in the System keychain Made the login keychain my default Added my development keychain, the login keychain and the System keychain to the user keychain list Unlocked my development keychain Confirmed my signing identity is present Granted the appropriate partition list access to the keychain "security set-key-partition-list -S apple-tool:,codesign: -k pwd /Users/ec2-user/Library/Keychains/development.keychain-db" Yet when I invoke Fastlane’s resign action, I still see: _floatsignTemp/Payload/EverMerge.app/Frameworks/AppLovinSDK.framework: replacing existing signature _floatsignTemp/Payload/EverMerge.app/Frameworks/AppLovinSDK.framework: errSecInternalComponent Encountered an error, aborting! Any guidance on what might be causing this errSecInternalComponent failure or how to get the resign step to succeed would be highly appreciated.

Hello Apple Developer Support Community, I am encountering a persistent issue while trying to code sign my macOS application (PromptVault.app) using a valid Developer ID Application certificate. The signing process fails with the following warning and error for every native .so file inside the app bundle: `Warning: unable to build chain to self-signed root for signer "(null)" <file-path>: errSecInternalComponent` What I have tried so far: Verified that my Developer ID Application certificate and the associated private key exist correctly in the login keychain. Confirmed that the intermediate certificate "Apple Worldwide Developer Relations - G6" is installed and valid in the System keychain. Added Terminal to Full Disk Access in Security & Privacy to ensure signing tools have required permissions. Executed security set-key-partition-list to explicitly allow code signing tools to access the private key. Reinstalled both developer and Apple intermediate certificates. Used codesign to individually sign .so files and then sign the entire bundle. Ensured macOS and Xcode Command Line Tools are up to date. Created a clean Python virtual environment and rebuilt all dependencies. Tested code signing in multiple ways and with verbose logging. Current status: Despite all these efforts, the same warning and error persist during the signing process of every .so file. This prevents successful code signing and notarization, blocking distribution. Request for assistance: Could anyone confirm if my certificate and keychain setup sounds correct? Are there known issues or extra steps necessary to properly build the trust chain for Developer ID certificates on macOS 15.6.1 (Sequoia)? Any suggestions for resolving the errSecInternalComponent during signing native libraries? Guidance on ensuring the entire certificates chain is trusted and usable by codesign tools? I can provide debug logs, screenshots of my keychain and security settings, or any other diagnostic information if needed. Thanks in advance for your help!

Your development team has reached the maximum number of registered iPhone devices. I am use the free provisioning file. So how can I delete old device and use my new iPhone to develop my app. only way is use a paid account? or register a new Apple ID?

Its just stuck in progress. $ xcrun notarytool history --keychain-profile X Successfully received submission history. history -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-07-21T16:46:13.233Z id: X name: X.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-07-20T18:44:35.683Z id: X name: X.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-07-20T11:24:20.319Z id: X name: X.dmg status: In Progress Its a go app; not simple but not very complicated. It is my first time notarising but even then should it take this long?? 3 days is ridiculous!

I started the notarization process for my electron app (just a browser window loading a URL) yesterday (26/03/2025) at around 05:23 GMT. I noticed in a couple of posts here in the forum that it may sometimes take a day to notarize the first app submitted by a team, but it has been over 30 hours since I submitted the app for notarization Here's the log. createdDate: 2025-03-26T05:23:11.102Z id: ddcb3fca-4667-4acb-8fd1-3298a7c244cc name: xolock-browser.zip status: In Progress Is there any reason why it is taking so long? Thanks in advance!