I recently completed an app transfer from one developer account to another (both controlled by me). The old team ID was GZS3K47B3Y, the new one is LRG5645LP7. Almost everything is working properly, but I am seeing that my iCloud Key-Value store (NSUbiquitousKeyValueStore) is no longer shared across my app and app extensions after the transfer. Previously, my app and app extensions all shared a single iCloud Key-Value store, and they could all read/write to the same iCloud synced store. This is no longer working after the app transfer. According to this support page (https://developer.apple.com/help/app-store-connect/transfer-an-app/overview-of-app-transfer): "If your app uses iCloud Key-Value Storage (KVS), the full KVS value will be embedded in any new provisioning profiles you create for the transferred app. Update your entitlements plist with the full KVS value in your provisioning profile." This seems to be the case for the main app, whose provisioning profile contains the full value: com.apple.developer.ubiquity-kvstore-identifier: GZS3K47B3Y.com.serpentisei.studyjapanese But the app extension's provisioning profile now contains: com.apple.developer.ubiquity-kvstore-identifier: LRG5645LP7.* Is there a way to update the app extension provisioning profile to also include the original identifier from before the transfer, so that I can continue to share iCloud KVS access across the app and extension? Thanks!

A few weeks ago I requested the subject entitlement. I'm still waiting for it to be added to our account. Who or how can I find out what going on with it. I have no correspondence from Apple yet saying it was denied and why. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/bundleresources/entitlements/com.apple.developer.persistent-content-capture?language=objc Thank you.

Hello everyone, We develop an app called Unite (bundle ID: com.BZG.Unite), which allows users to create standalone macOS applications from websites. These user-generated apps are based on a backend browser template called DefaultApp (bundle ID: com.bzg.default.app). Here's how our setup works: Unite and DefaultApp: Both are signed with our Developer ID and include necessary provisioning profiles and entitlements. User-Created Apps: When a user creates an app with Unite, it generates a customized version of DefaultApp with the user's chosen name and settings. These apps are ad-hoc signed upon creation to reflect their unique identity. Issue Since updating to macOS 15, every time a user launches a created app, they encounter a persistent prompt asking for permission to access files outside the app's container. Granting full disk access in System Preferences suppresses the prompt, but this is not a practical solution for end-users. Upon launching a user-created app (e.g., "ExampleTest"), the following prompt appears: This prompt appears on every launch of the app. Steps to Reproduce On a Mac running macOS 15, create a new app using Unite (e.g., "ExampleTest"). Launch the newly created app. Observe the prompt requesting access to files outside the app's container. Close and relaunch the app; the prompt appears again. What We Have Tried Given that our apps use an app group (group.BZG.unite.sharedData) to share data between Unite, DefaultApp, and user-created apps, we believe this is triggering the prompt due to changes in System Integrity Protection (SIP) in macOS 15. We are further confident given that if the user does not allow access, the app does launch, but shows an error indicating that the created app was unable to access the data that is typically in the shared group. Here’s a summary of our troubleshooting efforts: 1. Adjusting App Group Configuration Ensured the app group name aligns with Apple's guidelines, including prefixing with the Team ID (teamid.group.BZG.unite.sharedData). Verified that the app group is correctly declared in the com.apple.security.application-groups entitlement. 2. Provisioning Profile Creation Generated provisioning profiles via Xcode and the Developer Console, ensuring the app group entitlement is included. Applied the provisioning profile to the user-created app during code signing. Despite these efforts, the issue continues. 3. Entitlements and Code Signing Created an entitlements file for the user-created app, mirroring the entitlements from DefaultApp, including: <!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>id.com.BZG.ExampleTest</string> <key>com.apple.developer.team-identifier</key> <string>id</string> <key>com.apple.security.application-groups</key> <array> <string>id.group.BZG.unite.sharedData</string> </array> <key>com.apple.security.app-sandbox</key> <true/> </dict> </plist> Signed the user-created app with our Developer ID and the provisioning profile Verified the entitlements 4. Reviewing System Logs Observed error messages indicating unsatisfied entitlements: message: com.BZG.ExampleTest: Unsatisfied entitlements: com.apple.security.application-groups **5. Consulting Documentation and WWDC Sessions ** Referenced post on App Groups in macOS vs iOS. Reviewed the macOS 15 Release Notes regarding SIP and app group container protection. Watched WWDC 2024 Session 10123: What's new in privacy, starting at 12:23. Questions Is there a way to authorize the com.apple.security.application-groups entitlement in the provisioning profile for ad-hoc signed apps? Given the SIP changes in macOS 15, how can we enable our ad-hoc signed, user-generated apps to access the app group container without triggering the persistent prompt? Are there alternative approaches to sharing data between the main app and user-generated apps that comply with macOS 15's SIP requirements? Is there anything to try that we're missing here to solve this? Any guidance on how to resolve this issue or workarounds to allow app group access without triggering the prompt would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your assistance!

Can someone please describe what is necessary to perform signing using codesign in a system that runs as LaunchDaemon. All workarounds like placing the codesigning cert + private key a custom keychain and unlock it in the session of the LaunchDaemon doesn't work anymore on Sequoia. Or are there alternatives for signing MachO binaries without codesign?

we are currently using an APNs Authentication Key to send notifications and have not generated any Development or Production APNs certificates. Could you please confirm whether using the APNs Authentication Key alone is sufficient under the updated requirements? Alternatively, do we need to generate Development and Production APNs certificates that support SHA-2 for compliance with the changes?

For some reason Xcode said my certificate was revoked. Developer support says it’s active. Could someone point me towards the steps to reactivate it?

I keep having issues with my account. I have certificates that will not revoke. I create new certificates, then I create new profiles for development, distribution and for developer ID application distribution outside of the app store as well. With my app in Xcode, I can only get the Developer profile to work to allow builds. My distribution profile builds and then fails, with an error 5. The Developer ID Application profile will not even accept the profile in XCode, sighting that there is no code signing, yet I have checked things over and over again. Ontop of this, I had developers in the past in my team and they added a whole lot of certificates for Developer ID that I just cannot use now. I also cannot revoke them. I have no active apps on the app store now, so I was wondering if Apple or someone can assist me in removing ALL the certificates, all the profiles and get a clean slate, so that I can setup everything from scratch again, because I have lost countless of hours getting nowhere and I cannot get Apple support to assist? Anyone been through this before?

Hello, After deploying our app, we encountered an issue where the app fails to launch properly on certain devices. To rule out potential code issues, we created a new clean project and tested it with the basic setup (certificate, bundle ID, and team). The app installs and runs fine on most devices, but it fails to open immediately on specific models. (The affected model is listed below.) Version: iOS 18.3.1 Model: iPhone 14 Pro After reviewing the console logs, we found an issue related to the app launching process. Could this issue be related to the app's configuration or the provisioning profile? We would appreciate any insight into why this issue occurs only on certain devices. Thank you for your help!

I have an app Arpeggio.app which I build and then sign without errors: "electron-osx-sign dist/mac-arm64/Arpeggio.app --identity="Developer ID Application: XXXX (XXXXXX)" --hardened-runtime --no-gatekeeper-assess --entitlements=entitlements.plist". It returns "Application signed: dist/mac-arm64/Arpeggio.app". I then use "/usr/bin/ditto -c -k --sequesterRsrc --keepParent src dst" to make a zip with the same signatures. I then submit the zip for notarization: "xcrun notarytool submit dist/mac-arm64/Arpeggio.zip --apple-id XXXX etc" which returns "Waiting for processing to complete. Current status: Accepted.............. Processing complete id: ***-***-xx-xx status: Accepted". Then I staple the notarization to the app and get "The staple and validate action worked!". Now it shows all validated and that the notarization is stapled. I then run "spctl --assess --type execute -vv 'dist/mac-arm64/Arpeggio.app'" as a last check and always get this: dist/mac-arm64/Arpeggio.app: unknown error 99999=1869f Why is this happening? I can't seem to debug the issue but out notarization and signing is always successful and the app works as expected. Pleas ehelp me get to the bottom of this.

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

Hi everyone, I applied for CarPlay Entitlements on [Date 04. 26, 2024] using CarPlay is Case ID "13045151". I haven't received any updates or responses regarding my application yet. It's been 7 days since the application. My service requires CarPlay integration with a Black Box device. The primary purpose of this integration is to allow users to configure device settings through CarPlay. Furthermore, we plan to utilize the "Communication" category of Entitlements to notify users of parking incidents detected by the Black Box device while parked. This functionality is crucial for alerting drivers to potential issues affecting their vehicles. Could anyone share their experience with the typical turnaround time for CarPlay Entitlements, especially for applications involving device integration and the "Communication" category? Is this delay normal? Is there any way to check the application status or contact the appropriate team to inquire about its progress? Thank you for any insights or advice you can provide! Sincerely,

Hello, I recently had my Electron app notarized by Apple and then performed the following steps: Stapling the Notarization Ticket: xcrun stapler staple "appPath/Aiparalegal.app" Zipping the App for Distribution: ditto -c -k --keepParent "appPath/Aiparalegal.app" theAIParalegal.zip However, after unzipping and attempting to launch the app, macOS displays the following message: Apple could not verify "theAIParalegal" is free of malware that may harm your Mac or compromise your privacy. Yet, when I run validation using: xcrun stapler validate "theAIParalegal.app" I receive confirmation: The validate action worked! I then tried restarting my computer but the problem persist Could you help me understand why the notarization validation appears successful, yet macOS still displays this security warning? Any advice on how to resolve this would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

Hello, I've been trying to notarize a Unity 2023.2 app since yesterday, but our submissions stay stuck in In Progress. The first one has been running for 18 hours now with no signs of stopping, and two more attempts have been made since with no results. Here are the submission IDs in case someone on the team wants to take a look: 00ef6def-601b-46f3-a94f-699d8956a28f d03f5748-2261-430c-934e-14fa9679afd9 a42d3b5c-3cdb-4bf2-9c86-c92320358ff3 Thank you!

From my developer account, when I generate CSR and submit for certificate generation private key not available and loaded into keychain

Chrome has started crashing almost immediately after startup. I've reported the issue to the Chrome team here: https://issues.chromium.org/issues/385433270 I'm hoping to debug the issue a bit more myself. This page from the Chrome team https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/mac/debugging.md#chrome-builds suggests using the follow to strip off the protections: codesign --force --sign - path/to/Google\ Chrome.app However, applying that seems to have no effect: % codesign --force --sign - /Applications/Google\ Chrome\ copy.app /Applications/Google Chrome copy.app: replacing existing signature /Applications/Google Chrome copy.app: resource fork, Finder information, or similar detritus not allowed % lldb /Applications/Google\ Chrome\ copy.app (lldb) target create "/Applications/Google Chrome copy.app" Current executable set to '/Applications/Google Chrome copy.app' (arm64). (lldb) run error: process exited with status -1 (attach failed (Not allowed to attach to process. Look in the console messages (Console.app), near the debugserver entries, when the attach failed. The subsystem that denied the attach permission will likely have logged an informative message about why it was denied.)) I have tried other variations like the following based on Stack Overflow, this forum, etc., but with the same result. (I'm still a little vague on the meaning for some flags, sorry.) Though codesign says that it's "replacing existing signature", as far as I can tell, nothing is changing: % cat <<EOF > debuggee-entitlement.xml <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd"> <plist version="1.0"> <dict> <key>com.apple.security.get-task-allow</key> <true/> </dict> </plist> EOF % codesign --verbose=4 -fs - --options library-validation --entitlements debuggee-entitlement.xml /Applications/Google\ Chrome\ copy.app /Applications/Google Chrome copy.app: replacing existing signature /Applications/Google Chrome copy.app: resource fork, Finder information, or similar detritus not allowed file with invalid attached data: Disallowed xattr com.apple.FinderInfo found on /Applications/Google Chrome copy.app lldb still fails the same way. Here's what I see after the above: % codesign -d -vvv /Applications/Google\ Chrome\ copy.app Executable=/Applications/Google Chrome copy.app/Contents/MacOS/Google Chrome Identifier=com.google.Chrome Format=app bundle with Mach-O universal (x86_64 arm64) CodeDirectory v=20500 size=1821 flags=0x12a00(kill,restrict,library-validation,runtime) hashes=46+7 location=embedded Hash type=sha256 size=32 CandidateCDHash sha256=5d7beab2b03d9892426076b24acc19815d7a3ff8 CandidateCDHashFull sha256=5d7beab2b03d9892426076b24acc19815d7a3ff8c1446966e422c3c10672626b Hash choices=sha256 CMSDigest=5d7beab2b03d9892426076b24acc19815d7a3ff8c1446966e422c3c10672626b CMSDigestType=2 CDHash=5d7beab2b03d9892426076b24acc19815d7a3ff8 Signature size=8989 Authority=Developer ID Application: Google LLC (EQHXZ8M8AV) Authority=Developer ID Certification Authority Authority=Apple Root CA Timestamp=Dec 17, 2024 at 2:47:58 PM Notarization Ticket=stapled Info.plist entries=44 TeamIdentifier=EQHXZ8M8AV Runtime Version=15.0.0 Sealed Resources version=2 rules=13 files=63 Internal requirements count=1 size=288 From what I can tell, my codesign runs have changed nothing... I see no diff as compared with what I see running codesign -d on a fresh copy. Is it possible to strip off the protections on my local instance to allow debugging with lldb? If so, could someone share a command for accomplishing that? Although I'm asking about this because of Chrome specifically, I'm hoping to learn more about codesigning in general and to be more empowered as a user to be able to debug when an app I depend on is crashing. Thanks much! Happy Holidays!

Hi, I have some doubts about certificates expiration given this "new" requirement around signing for some common third party SDKs: https://developer.apple.com/support/third-party-SDK-requirements/ Use case: I build an SDK that will be distributed as an XCFramework and will be used in AppStore apps from different people. My SDK internally uses some other third party libraries that are integrated as binaries Let's assume some of those third party libraries are from the list above and therefore seem to be required to be signed. I distribute my SDK with all in order (third party SDKs from that list with valid signatures) People using my SDK over the time provide an update to their apps on the AppStore but by then some of the third party libraries of my SDK has an expired certificate. What would happen? People using my SDK won't have any issues as far as my SDK has a valid signature (despite third party libraries from the list have expired signatures) People using my SDK will get a warning about it but still will be able to submit to the AppStore. In that case, would AppStore Review process decline the update? People using my SDK will get an error, not being able to submit to the AppStore and will require me an update version of the SDK with those third party libraries re-signed. My understanding is that all would work as far as my SDK has a valid signature (after all is the one taking responsibility of the code inside), independently of what happens with the signature of those libraries themselves, am I correct?.

Hi, I recently got a consistent delay from notary tool. I have viewed all your suggestions and understand that it "occasionally" will have further review and take longer time, but then it will be faster. However, in my case, my app although is accepted many times. It is still significantly delay. It is a native macOS app called ConniePad. Whenever I submit, it took me 2 days or more to finish notarise, which significantly affect my business. Could you please have a look on it. For log detail about the time, and the ids: -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-05T22:54:45.815Z id: 998b5aa8-fc9c-4469-98fe-950d815e734e name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-05T21:32:22.679Z id: c7b1ab49-6f46-4998-8d06-2ffe8a180c8f name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-03T08:39:52.594Z id: aa33d9d0-9d2f-4296-8fc3-d7e0b404596b name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-03T01:23:31.077Z id: b0333d78-497d-491c-b36c-bdfb64520296 name: ConniePad.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-03T01:17:20.925Z id: 83aa12f2-f1bb-457f-940a-4c2281cf8a5f name: ConniePad.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-03T01:12:52.932Z id: 0a921069-fb37-469a-bfb0-6be82e9320ba name: ConniePad.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-03T01:03:30.584Z id: a607fe3c-d10f-43d6-a184-e97df7b632fd name: ConniePad.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-03T00:52:47.322Z id: c42d0ca0-db8a-4431-b5b4-646ccfcad003 name: ConniePad.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-03T00:28:18.626Z id: 7ef8777f-7add-4440-abb5-3c0b19cf92d4 name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Invalid -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-03T00:24:37.320Z id: 36bb1285-0aeb-4c48-b23c-fac737a3d93f name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Invalid -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-02T23:59:27.940Z id: bb4578a5-a67b-49e8-afd0-a9d707c10091 name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-02T08:51:38.295Z id: 93ff89f4-98d3-45ac-9ee8-9483726a9666 name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-02T08:19:13.762Z id: 9e4a62df-3d8a-4cfa-ae9e-56ff35ffe137 name: ConniePad-ConverterTool.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-02T04:15:34.508Z id: 7ee43b74-f73f-462a-bb3d-f6bc53b1cb80 name: ConniePad-ConverterTool.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-02T02:11:53.312Z id: d675e8f6-dc30-48e9-9269-9bc376f1b29e name: ConniePad-ConverterTool.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-02T01:30:32.768Z id: 9901f125-4355-4812-936b-97578ac2de2f name: ConniePad-ConverterTool.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-04-01T20:47:26.035Z id: a79265bc-8ad3-4a4b-ae39-150801aa9da9 name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-18T22:39:54.189Z id: b808b676-a41c-4536-b4fd-4b567701adcb name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-18T05:21:23.607Z id: 797f5d4f-cd94-4511-9217-11e57c2c7ac3 name: ConniePad.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-18T05:18:30.707Z id: c5b5c260-fb7f-4bda-9548-f5b7e57cb2f3 name: ConniePad.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-17T06:45:37.831Z id: f24c1017-9171-4796-bf97-ea47ef83f7ce name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-17T06:38:17.981Z id: 8dd0ea7e-e810-48f9-a48f-62dcc1406284 name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-17T06:33:27.649Z id: 704e339a-4d99-4e5e-8414-deb8b26c57ac name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-17T06:32:06.925Z id: 8e9b09b6-e061-4361-abc1-0bbd8f33b599 name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-17T06:26:52.444Z id: 2b564641-eb87-4de9-a59c-ff5362b8bf4a name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-17T06:22:04.790Z id: 1aa158bd-0afd-4c60-8e2f-3029388710ab name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-17T06:17:17.141Z id: 3bffcf1d-2fd7-41ba-b70c-f85837499736 name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-17T02:38:47.102Z id: 2dd2fb47-7dff-4f30-b2e0-d8c2bfcf10f5 name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-03-14T03:23:54.671Z id: 5cafb2a9-03e3-468e-b918-ff24b17fceee name: ConniePad.app.zip status: Accepted

I have an executable file named infogodesk, located in the directory /usr/local/SmpAgent/rustdesk/infogodesk. When I execute it using the terminal with ./infogodesk, the process gets terminated by the kernel. However, if I move the executable to another directory, it works fine. This issue is very frustrating, and I hope to get some help. Below is the console log output: 默认 11:26:28.162205+0800 kernel ASP: Validation category (6) does not match top-level policy match (3) for process: /usr/local/SmpAgent/rustdesk/infogodesk 默认 11:26:28.162211+0800 kernel Validation category policy: Notifying syspolicyd about /usr/local/SmpAgent/rustdesk/infogodesk with PID 88264 默认 11:26:28.166695+0800 kernel CODE SIGNING: cs_invalid_page(0x104e04000): p=88264[infogodesk] final status 0x23000200, denying page sending SIGKILL 默认 11:26:28.166698+0800 kernel CODE SIGNING: process 88264[infogodesk]: rejecting invalid page at address 0x104e04000 from offset 0x0 in file "/usr/local/SmpAgent/rustdesk/infogodesk" (cs_mtime:1734509326.0 == mtime:1734509326.0) (depth:0) 默认 11:26:28.166738+0800 kernel infogodesk[88264] Corpse allowed 1 of 5 默认 11:26:28.255182+0800 ReportCrash ASI found [ReportCrash] (sensitive) 'Pid 88264 'infogodesk' CORPSE: Extracting Completed 1, Recent: Pid 86766 'ReportCrash' CORPSE' 默认 11:26:28.261619+0800 ReportCrash ASI found [ReportCrash] (sensitive) 'Pid 88264 'infogodesk' CORPSE: Extracting Completed 1, Recent: Pid 86767 'ReportCrash' CORPSE'

I'm building an app that uses the Screen Time API and DeviceActivityMonitoring Framework. It works when I run the simulator build on iPhone 16 but when I try to launch it on my own iPhone, I get these errors. Provisioning profile "iOS Team Provisioning Profile: Kanso- Digital-Wellness.Kanso-v2" doesn't include the com.apple.developer.device-activity.monitoring entitlement. KansoMonitorExtension 1 issue x Provisioning profile "iOS Team Provisioning Profile: Kanso-Digital-Wellness.Kanso-v2.KansoMonitorExtension" doesn't include the com.apple.developer.device-activity.monitoring en... Read something online that said a reboot would fix this, but I tried and no luck. Any ideas? I'm not very technical, so would pay someone to fix this for me :)

hi I am using fastlane and match to upload an app to test flight. The app requires com.apple.developer.storekit.external-link.account to be activated. My identifier has activated the capabilities and when I look at provisional profile, it also has it, but when the app has been uploaded, it's missing (although all other entitlements are there). Now it gets weird: Every time I run my flow I delete derived data, deletes all downloaded provisional profiles and use match to redownload them with read only (force is not an option). It does not work. I go to Apple dev and Toggles the capability off and on and saves. This invalidates the profile. I press edit and save. So no real changes. Run my flow and the app is uploaded correctly WITH the correct capabilities. Runs the flow again without the manual steps and the entitlements will be missing once again. Repeats the toggle stuff and the subsequent behavior repeats itself. Same flow and same code and same settings, app and profile.... I am building automated flows so this does not really work for me.... Heeeelp...