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.

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.

Hey all, I’m experiencing a consistent issue with notarizing a signed .pkg file that contains a macOS screen saver (.saver) bundle. Nothing online so far except 1 thread on the form from the altool time pre-2023 so i thought it worth another update. Here is what I did: I signed the .saver bundle using my Developer ID Application certificate. I packaged it into a .pkg using pkgbuild with my Developer ID Installer certificate: I submitted the resulting .pkg via xcrun notarytool: xcrun notarytool submit saver-name.pkg --apple-id email@email.com --password [app-specific-password] --team-id xxxxxxxxx The submission appears to be accepted and uploads successfully. However, the notarization status remains stuck at “In Progress” for hours (over 12h), with no update. I also tried: Repackaging the .pkg with a new name using a zip Resubmitting it under a new submission ID All attempts are stuck in the same “In Progress” state indefinitely. Did anyone solve this yet?

*** Error: ERROR: [ContentDelivery.Uploader] Validation failed (409) Invalid Provisioning Profile. The provisioning profile included in the com.baiyun-shuniu.scss bundle [Payload/HBuilder.app] is invalid. [Missing code-signing certificate]. A distribution provisioning profile should be used when uploading apps to App Store Connect. (ID: e21c7a63-520f-49c5-8298-9afa3aa14dd5) 2025-05-13 09:23:20.382 INFO: [ContentDelivery.Uploader]

I am trying to sign a enterprise app with provisioning profile which shows the tap to pay entitlement on Dev portal, but when downloaded on Xcode, it says the profile is missing the tap to pay capability and entitlement The capability was enabled by apple already, it was working fine until the provisioning profile got renewed.

All of my notarization submissions have been stuck at "In Progress" for over a week. I have 6 submissions spanning from March 4 to March 10, 2026, and none of them have completed or returned any errors. Affected submissions: 685708f6 — MeetingRecorder-1.5.0.dmg (submitted Mar 10) — In Progress 6ade1490 — MeetingRecorder-1.5.0.dmg (submitted Mar 10) — In Progress 99d39bd0 — MeetingRecorder-1.4.12.dmg (submitted Mar 6) — In Progress e65f95e1 — MeetingRecorder-1.4.9.dmg (submitted Mar 6) — In Progress eb51b220 — MeetingRecorder-1.4.9.dmg (submitted Mar 5) — In Progress 9cc33cfd — MeetingRecorder-1.4.9.dmg (submitted Mar 4) — In Progress Running notarytool log returns "Submission log is not yet available." Team ID: HXVLV4P425 The app is a macOS menu bar application for meeting recording and transcription. It is signed with a valid Developer ID certificate and has been built with hardened runtime enabled. I've tried resubmitting multiple times across different builds (1.4.9, 1.4.12, 1.5.0), but all submissions remain stuck. Could someone from the notarization team please investigate? Thank you.

Hi everyone, After I recently changed my Apple ID (iCloud) password, my Developer ID certificate stopped working for signing macOS apps. Symptoms: Signing fails with the Developer ID certificate that was previously working fine. I tried re-downloading the certificate from my Apple Developer account and importing it into the Keychain, but the issue persists. It seems that the Developer ID identity is no longer trusted or properly linked to my system since the password change. Attempts: Re-downloaded and installed the certificate from the developer portal. Verified that the private key is present and linked. Checked keychain access and code-signing identity — everything appears normal, but the signed apps are rejected or the signing process fails. Blocking issue: I am unable to delete or revoke the Developer ID certificate on my account (Apple Support says it's not possible). Also, I can't create a new one due to the certificate limit. Questions: Is it expected for a Developer ID certificate to become invalid after changing the Apple ID password? Is there a recommended way to refresh or restore the certificate trust on macOS? How can I invalidate the current certificate and generate a new one if I'm stuck? Any insights or official guidance would be really appreciated. Thanks in advance!

I'm distributing a macOS .pkg installer signed with Developer ID Installer and notarized via notarytool. On macOS 26.3 (Tahoe, Build 25D125), the package is rejected by Gatekeeper when downloaded from the internet. What works: pkgutil --check-signature → signed, Developer ID Installer, full chain (G2 intermediate + Apple Root CA) xcrun stapler validate → "The validate action worked!" xcrun notarytool info <id> → status: Accepted The .app inside the .pkg passes spctl -a -vvv → "accepted, source=Notarized Developer ID" What fails: spctl -a -vvv --type install mypackage.pkg → rejected, origin=Developer ID Installer Raw assessment: assessment:remote = true, assessment:verdict = false Double-clicking the downloaded .pkg shows only "Move to Trash" / "Done" (no "Open" option) syspolicyd log: meetsDeveloperIDLegacyAllowedPolicy = 0 (expected, since the cert is new), but no "notarized" match is logged Certificate details: Developer ID Installer, issued Feb 28, 2026, valid until 2031 OID 1.2.840.113635.100.6.1.14 (Developer ID Installer) — critical OID 1.2.840.113635.100.6.1.33 — timestamp 20260215000000Z Intermediate: Developer ID Certification Authority G2 (OID 1.2.840.113635.100.6.2.6) security verify-cert → certificate verification successful Build process: productbuild --distribution ... --sign <SHA1> (also tried productsign) Both produce: Warning: unable to build chain to self-signed root xcrun notarytool submit → Accepted xcrun stapler staple → worked Workaround: xattr -d com.apple.quarantine ~/Downloads/mypackage.pkg allows opening the installer. Question: Is spctl --type install assessment expected to work differently on macOS 26 Tahoe? The same signing and notarization workflow produces .app bundles that pass Gatekeeper, but .pkg installers are rejected. Is there a new requirement for .pkg distribution on macOS 26? Environment: macOS 26.3 (25D125), Xcode CLT 26.3

All notarization submissions remain stuck "In Progress" and never complete. Tested both DMG and ZIP formats — same result. This has been consistent across 5+ attempts on March 29, 2026. App: Electron desktop app (arm64), signed with Developer ID Application, hardened runtime enabled, secure timestamp present. DMG submissions (all stuck): 568cc9c3-e711-41ba-99ce-6af5a1860ae9 (10 min timeout) e0a345c3-ddf8-4771-bdda-e0bc133ff723 (20 min timeout) 6757e5a9-d95b-45b3-95d5-41cb23384bea (20 min timeout) ZIP submission (.app bundle via ditto, ~207MB): Also stuck "In Progress" for 10+ minutes notarytool log returns "Submission log is not yet available" for all submissions. Developer ID Notary Service shows "Available" on System Status page. Environment: macOS GitHub Actions runner (macos-latest), latest Xcode, xcrun notarytool. Seeing similar reports from other developers this week. Is there a known service issue?

Hello all, I am attempting to notarize my newly made Mac OS application using the notarization command in VS Code. "/Users/teejgotit/Desktop/Cursor Workspace/Rust CutContour v2/cutcontour-app/src-tauri/target/release/bundle/dmg/CC Studio_0.1.0_aarch64.dmg" \ --key "/Users/teejgotit/AppleCerts/AuthKey_MATVLX3.p8" \ --key-id "MATVLX9" \ --issuer "887ba428-aa39-4fb3-a3dc-f83b9145cab0" \ --wait Only to be met with a continual "Current State: In Progress.." for what has been about 1 day and 16 hours now. Current status: In Progress........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ My app and project are rather small and was curious if this is a normal thing for this to day takes for a first time notarization? Would love any help or feedback.

My notarization submission been "In Progress" status for over 30 minutes now. I thought this process should be much faster.

Hey, So i am trying to setup OpenGL on my mac. Specs : M2 Pro, 15.5 (24F74) Now i have setup the entire project properly as far as i know. GLFW, GLAD and the OpenGL framework. the build libraries are also reference and everything. I have also included the glad.c file in the folder. i have also kept it to run locally in signing tab. its still giving me Command CodeSign failed with a nonzero exit code All the ss are provided

Hi Team, i'm running into same issue with notarization time. I create new, small app for a customer but however the notarization is running since this morning, so almost a few hours. This isn't normal or ? Is there anything what i can do ? Best regard, Lars

We have 8 consecutive notarytool submit submissions for the same .dmg artifact all stuck In Progress with no movement and no logs available. Submission IDs (all Recall-0.3.6-arm64.dmg, Team ID: H9S7XRPUCA): Diagnostic evidence: notarytool log on all 8 returns exit 69 (log not available) — no rejection reason, no processing output The app bundle submitted as a ZIP (same binary, same signing, submission d21e9fea) was accepted in 41 seconds at 2026-03-27T02:15Z A separate probe submission of a small signed binary on the same team (fcf018c5) was accepted in ~5 minutes All prior Recall DMG builds (0.1.0–0.3.5) processed normally in ~8 minutes on this same team Normal processing time for this team/account is ~8 minutes Conclusion: Content and signing are clean. Account queue is healthy. The issue appears specific to the DMG submission path for this build. Requesting Apple investigate the stuck DMG submissions and advise on next steps.

Hi everyone, I recently submitted the Family Controls request form and received the following request IDs: 429MKWT5VX
 KNL6T2DC7A
 N62KV78DKC However, I haven’t received any updates yet and I’m not sure how these requests are tracked or when we’ll know if they’re approved. Our app is almost ready to launch and this capability is critical for us. Both the main app and an extension depend on Family Controls, so we’re currently blocked from moving forward. I also raised a support ticket with Apple Developer Support (Case ID: 102838723073), but I haven’t received any response there either. To be honest, this is becoming really stressful. Months of work are stuck at the final step and we’re unable to move forward without this approval. This isn’t just a small personal project and we’re building a production app and were hoping to launch very soon. If anyone has been through this process or has any guidance on the approval timeline, or if someone from Apple could help look into these request IDs, it would genuinely mean a lot to us.

 Thank you

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.

In my application I validate the authenticity of my own binaries by checking that the Team Identifier in the code signature matches a predefined value. Currently I do not perform a full signature validation that verifies the certificate chain up to Apple’s root CA. When attempting to do this using SecStaticCodeCheckValidityWithErrors (or validateWithRequirement), the operation sometimes takes several minutes. During that time the calling thread appears blocked, and the system logs show: trustd: [com.apple.securityd:SecError] Malformed anchor records, not an array Because of this delay, I decided to rely only on the Team Identifier. My question is: Can it be assumed that if a Mach-O binary contains a Team Identifier in its code signature, then it must have been signed with a valid Apple Developer certificate? Or are there cases where a binary could contain a Team ID but still not be signed by Apple’s trust chain? Thanks for the help !

I requested the Family Controls (distribution) capability but am not sure if I did it correct. I applied, answered the questions why i needed it and submitted. Its been about 2 weeks since applying. In the app configurations, it on apple dev site, it shows in the request history that I submitted it on March 17, but I can click the request (+) button and request it again. Just want to make sure I didn't mess anything up--it seems like they would prevent me from sendin another request if I had already requested it. It hasn't taken them this long to get back to me in the past which is why I am confused. If anyone knows how to speed up the process, please let me know! Thanks.

This is my submission, my earliest submission has be stuck for a couple of days can someone please help. This is blocking our launch. -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2026-03-01T15:57:46.893Z id: 4cd9bb60-67eb-4f59-be9b-952248da33cf name: Snip-1.0.0-arm64.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2026-03-01T15:07:04.101Z id: fc88fa42-6ffe-4fee-86b2-0cec44c4391b name: Snip.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2026-02-28T06:48:58.307Z id: e6cabf68-2963-4971-a057-fb4c5a1bdb4c name: Snip.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2026-02-27T17:02:33.195Z id: 4e038aab-e429-4dfa-abcd-afcd49241a31 name: Snip.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2026-02-27T17:02:21.907Z id: 4a908c50-812b-48c1-949d-8d6d4c9dec40 name: Snip.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2026-02-27T14:28:38.585Z id: bccbc5bc-1cc7-4417-ab57-545b0cc6cc7b name: Snip.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2026-02-27T08:35:47.185Z id: 4219d594-ee41-4905-8ea5-af89dc924b4f name: Snip.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2026-02-27T08:07:51.982Z id: 08fce978-8dc1-45bb-aac1-ea932bd08b02 name: Snip.zip status: In Progress

When completing signing on Xcode, it shows the following error message "No certificate for team '' matching 'Developer ID Application' found" I have already followed the steps to generate a certificate from keychain and made a new certificate on developer portal, along with its associated provisioning profile. Viewing "Manage Certificate" window shows the newly created certificate, but Xcode seems to not be able to locate it.