Our application uses Screen capture KIT API for screen recording. But from Sequoia OS, we are getting additional permission dialog which states " is requesting to bypass the system private window picker and directly access your screen and audio". It seems we need to add our app under "System settings -> Privacy & Security -> Remote Desktop" setting to avoid getting above additional dialogue in every few days. Some places mention use of .plist file that if mention in this file, the app will request for this permission. But did not seem to work or we do not understand that properly yet.

I must be missing something. How can an iphone that is in lockdown mode, using ONLY data, no Bluetooth connected and only one singular iPhone have seven UNLISTED items on the local network in privacy and settings?

I'm developing an iOS app that utilizes Universal Links and ASWebAuthenticationSession to deep-link from a website to the app itself. This implementation adheres to the recommendations outlined in RFC 8252, ensuring that the app opening the ASWebAuthenticationSession is the same app that is launched via the Universal Link. Problem: 　While most users can successfully launch the app via Universal Links,a few percent of users experience instances where the app fails to launch, and the user is redirected to the browser. What I've Tried: 　ASWebAuthenticationSession Configuration: I've double-checked the configuration of callbackURLScheme and presentationContextProvider. 　Universal Links: Verified the apple-app-site-association file and associated domains entitlement. 　Network Conditions: Tested on various network environments (Wi-Fi, cellular) and devices. Questions: 　What are the potential causes for this behavior? 　Has anyone else encountered a similar issue and found a solution? 　Are there any debugging techniques or ways to generate more detailed logs? I haven't been able to determine which device or OS version is causing this problem. Thank you.

I have something with a new individual on my team I've never seen before. They checked out our code repository from git and now anytime they try to open a .json file that is legitimately just a text file, GateKeeper tells them it cannot verify the integrity of this file and offers to have them throw this file away. I've seen this with binaries, and that makes sense. I removed the com.apple.quarantine extended attribute from all executable files in our source tree, but I've never seen GateKeeper prompt on text files. I could remove the extended attribute from all files in our source tree, but I fear the next time he pulls from git he'll get new ones flagged. Is there someway around this? I've never personally seen GateKeeper blocking text files.

转让app成功了之后，由于开发者账号更改，团队ID改变，导致获取不到原有的keychain中缓存的用户数据，所以在用户进行登录时，无法登录到原有的老账号，而是被识别成了一个新的用户。这种情况怎么解决。

Hi, I hope someone is able to help me with this query: Is there a mandatory requirement to display a view before presenting the App Tracking Transparency modal to explain to the user why the app is asking for tracking? I see there are a few apps which do this, but I don't see any mention of this as a mandatory requirement within the app store review guidelines. The modal can be customised with a description detailing why the app is asking for tracking and I believe this may be sufficient to pass an app store review. The guidelines also mention that the app must provide access to information about how and where the data will be used. We have these details in our privacy policy which is accessible from within the app. Is this sufficient or do we need a pre-modal view which contains a direct link the the privacy policy. Any advice on this would be much appreciated.

During SmartCard pairing the PIN prompt enables the OK button only on user provides a PIN of 6 digits. Is there a way to submit the empty PIN in this flow, where the custom CTK is used here (the custom CTK would take care of the PIN from the custom ctk code). I was able to do an empty PIN submit once the I've paired the user successfully at login, unlock and other cli tools. Is there a way to do the same during the pairing? Once the user has successfully paired with the SmartCard authentication with PIN, I was able to see most of the authentication flows was prompting for the PIN authentication like login, unlock, CLI tools like ssh, su etc., perhaps at few apps where it is still prompted with the Password instead of PIN examples, when I tried to launch Keychain Access app or Add a user from users&groups system setting. Is this expected behaviour?

I have been able to save and remove ASPasskeyCredentialIdentities in the ASCredentialIdentityStore. But after saving a ASPasskeyCredentialIdentity, when I retrieve the current identities stored, it always returns an empty list. I check to make sure the store is enabled. I am using this method which is available starting with iOS 17.4: extension ASCredentialIdentityStore { public func credentialIdentities(forService serviceIdentifier: ASCredentialServiceIdentifier? = nil, credentialIdentityTypes: ASCredentialIdentityStore.IdentityTypes = []) async -> [any ASCredentialIdentity] } I have called it like this: store.credentialIdentities(forService: nil, credentialIdentityTypes: .passkey) And this: store.credentialIdentities() Has anyone got this to work?

I have a macOS package (.pkg) that checks for installed Java versions on the machine during the preinstall phase using a preinstall script. If the required Java version is not found, the script displays a message using osascript as shown below. /usr/bin/osascript -e 'tell application "Finder"' -e 'activate' -e 'display dialog "Java Development Kit (JDK) 11 is required" buttons{"OK"} with title "Myprod Warning"' -e 'end tell' So far, no issues have been observed with the installation of my package on all versions of macOS. However, on macOS 15.2, the installation is failing with a "Not authorized to send Apple events to Finder" error. Could someone please help me understand what might be causing this issue and how to resolve it?

Hi, I know it's been discussed before, but I'm testing the Sign in with Apple feature, and I only get the user info on the first try. Now, I know that you're supposed to go to the account settings, and look for the list of accounts that you used your Apple account to sign in with, and it used to work a few months back. But for the last few weeks I haven't been able to get the user info, even after deleting the entry from my Sign In With Apple app list. Has there been a recent change to Apple security policy that prevents such a move from working ? Or am I doing something wrong ? Thank you

I was basically saving items into the Keychain with the following query dictionary: let query: [String: Any] = [ kSecClass as String: kSecClassGenericPassword, kSecAttrAccount as String: key, kSecValueData as String: value, kSecAttrAccessible as String: kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock ] Where key is a String value and value is a Data that used to be a String. I was getting the following error: code: -25299 description: The specified item already exists in the keychain After a lot of digging in I saw that I needed to add kSecAttrService to the dictionary and after that it all started working. The service value is a String value. let query: [String: Any] = [ kSecClass as String: kSecClassGenericPassword, kSecAttrService as String: service, kSecAttrAccount as String: key, kSecValueData as String: value, kSecAttrAccessible as String: kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock ] These were the articles that suggested adding the kSecAttrService parameter: https://stackoverflow.com/a/11672200 https://stackoverflow.com/a/58233542 But in the same code base I found that other developers were saving using a dictionary similar to the one I first provided and it works: var query: [String : Any] = [ kSecClass as String : kSecClassGenericPassword as String, kSecAttrAccount as String : key, kSecValueData as String : data ] I don't know how to explain why my first implementation didn't work even though it was similar to what was already in the code base but the second approach worked well. Regardless of the query dictionary, this is how I'm saving things: static func save(value: Data, key: String, service: String) -> KeyChainOperationStatus { logInfo("Save Value - started, key: \(key), service: \(service)") let query: [String: Any] = [ kSecClass as String: kSecClassGenericPassword, kSecAttrService as String: service, kSecAttrAccount as String: key, kSecValueData as String: value, kSecAttrAccessible as String: kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock ] // Remove any existing key let cleanUpStatus = SecItemDelete(query as CFDictionary) let cleanUpStatusDescription = SecCopyErrorMessageString(cleanUpStatus, nil)?.asString ?? "__cleanup_status_unavailable" logInfo("Save Value - cleanup status: \(cleanUpStatus), description: \(cleanUpStatusDescription)") guard cleanUpStatus == errSecSuccess || cleanUpStatus == errSecItemNotFound else { logError("Save Value - Failed cleaning up KeyChain") return .cleanupFailed(code: cleanUpStatus) } // Add the new key let saveStatus = SecItemAdd(query as CFDictionary, nil) let saveStatusDescription = SecCopyErrorMessageString(saveStatus, nil)?.asString ?? "__save_status_unavailable" logInfo("Save Value - save status [\(saveStatus)] : \(saveStatusDescription)") guard saveStatus == errSecSuccess else { logError("Save Value - Failed saving new value into KeyChain") return .savingFailed(code: saveStatus) } return .successs }

I am working on adding RFC4217 Secure FTP with TLS by extending Mike Gleason's classic libncftp client library. I refactored the code to include an FTP channel abstraction with FTP channel abstraction types for TCP, TLS, and TCP with Opportunistic TLS types. The first implementation of those included BSD sockets that libncftp has always supported with the clear TCP channel type. I first embarked on extending the sockets implementation by adding TCP, TLS, and TCP with Opportunistic TLS channel abstraction types against the new, modern Network.framework C-based APIs, including using the “tricky” framer technique to employ a TCP with Opportunistic TLS FTP channel abstraction type to support explicit FTPS as specified by RFC4217 where you have to connect first in the clear with TCP, request AUTH TLS, and then start TLS after receiving positive confirmation. That all worked great. Unfortunately, at the end of that effort, I discovered that many modern FTPS server implementations (vsftpd, pure-ftpd, proftpd) mandate TLS session reuse / resumption across the control and data channels, specifying the identical session ID and cipher suites across the control and data channels. Since Network.framework lacked a necessary and equivalent to the Secure Transport SSLSetPeerID, I retrenched and rewrote the necessary TLS and TCP with Opportunistic TLS FTP channel abstraction types using the now-deprecated Secure Transport APIs atop the Network.framework-based TCP clear FTP channel type abstraction I had just written. Using the canonical test server I had been using throughout development, test.rebex.net, this Secure Transport solution seemed to work perfectly, working in clear, secure-control-only, and secure-control+data explicit FTPS operation. I then proceeded to expand testing to include a broad set of Microsoft FTP Service, pure-ftpd, vsftpd, proftpd, and other FTP servers identified on the Internet (a subset from this list: https://gist.github.com/mnjstwins/85ac8348d6faeb32b25908d447943300). In doing that testing, beyond test.rebex.net, I was unable to identify a single (among hundreds), that successfully work with secure-control+data explicit FTPS operation even though nearly all of them work with secure-control-only explicit FTPS operation. So, I started regressing my libncftp + Network.framework + Secure Transport implementation against curl 8.7.1 on macOS 14.7.2 “Sonoma": % which curl; `which curl` --version /usr/bin/curl curl 8.7.1 (x86_64-apple-darwin23.0) libcurl/8.7.1 (SecureTransport) LibreSSL/3.3.6 zlib/1.2.12 nghttp2/1.61.0 Release-Date: 2024-03-27 Protocols: dict file ftp ftps gopher gophers http https imap imaps ipfs ipns ldap ldaps mqtt pop3 pop3s rtsp smb smbs smtp smtps telnet tftp Features: alt-svc AsynchDNS GSS-API HSTS HTTP2 HTTPS-proxy IPv6 Kerberos Largefile libz MultiSSL NTLM SPNEGO SSL threadsafe UnixSockets I find that curl (also apparently written against Secure Transport) works in almost all of the cases my libncftp does not. This is a representative example: % ./samples/misc/ncftpgetbytes -d stderr --secure --explicit --secure-both ftps://ftp.sjtu.edu.cn:21/pub/README.NetInstall which fails in the secure-control+data case with errSSLClosedAbort on the data channel TLS handshake, just after ClientHello, attempts whereas: % curl -4 --verbose --ftp-pasv --ftp-ssl-reqd ftp://ftp.sjtu.edu.cn:21/pub/README.NetInstall succeeds. I took an in-depth look at the implementation of github.com/apple-oss-distributions/curl/ and git/github.com/apple-oss-distributions/Security/ to identify areas where my implementation was, perhaps, deficient relative to curl and its curl/lib/vtls/sectransp.c Secure Transport implementation. As far as I can tell, I am doing everything consistently with what the Apple OSS implementation of curl is doing. The analysis included: SSLSetALPNProtocols Not applicable for FTP; only used for HTTP/2 and HTTP/3. SSLSetCertificate Should only be relevant when a custom, non-Keychain-based certificate is used. SSLSetEnabledCiphers This could be an issue; however, the cipher suite used for the data channel should be the same as that used for the control channel. curl talks about disabling "weak" cipher suites that are known-insecure even though the default suites macOS enables are unlikely to enable them. SSLSetProtocolVersionEnabled We do not appear to be getting a protocol version negotiation error, so this seems unlikely, but possible. SSLSetProtocolVersionMax We do not appear to be getting a protocol version negotiation error, so this seems unlikely, but possible. SSLSetProtocolVersionMin We do not appear to be getting a protocol version negotiation error, so this seems unlikely, but possible. SSLSetSessionOption( , kSSLSessionOptionFalseStart) curl does seem to enable this for certain versions of macOS and disables it for others. Possible. Running curl with the --false-start option does not seem to make a difference. SSLSetSessionOption( , kSSLSessionOptionSendOneByteRecord) Corresponds to "*****" which seems defaulted and is related to an SSL security flaw when using CBC-based block encryption ciphers, which is not applicable here. Based on that, further experiments I attempted included: Disable use of kSSLSessionOptionBreakOnServerAuth: No impact Assert use of kSSLSessionOptionFalseStart: No impact Assert use of kSSLSessionOptionSendOneByteRecord: No impact Use SSLSetProtocolVersionMin and SSLSetProtocolVersionMax in various combinations: No impact Use SSLSetProtocolVersionEnabled in various combinations: No impact Forcibly set a single cipher suite (TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384, known to work with a given server): No impact Employ a SetDefaultCipherSuites function similar to what curl does (filtering out “weak” cipher suites): No impact Notably, I can never coax a similar set of cipher suites that macOS curl does with that technique. In fact, it publishes ciphers that aren’t even in <Security/CipherSuite.h> nor referenced by github.com/apple-oss-distributions/curl/curl/lib/vtls/sectransp.c. Assert use of kSSLSessionOptionAllowRenegotiation: No impact Assert use of kSSLSessionOptionEnableSessionTickets: No impact Looking at Wireshark, my ClientHello includes status_request, signed_certificate_timestamp, and extended_master_secret extensions whereas macOS curl's never do--same Secure Transport APIs. None of the above API experiments seem to influence the inclusion / exclusion of those three ClientHello additions. Any suggestions are welcomed that might shine a light on what native curl has access to that allows it to work with ST for these FTP secure-control+data use cases.

Hi, When calling generateAssertion on DCAppAttestService.shared, it gives invalidKey error when there was an update for an offloaded app. The offloading and reinstall always works fine if it is the same version on app store that was offloaded from device, but if there is an update and the app tries to reuse the keyID from previous installation for generateAssertion, attestation service rejects the key with error code 3 (invalid key) for a significant portion of our user. In our internal testing it failed for more than a third of the update attempts. STEPS TO REPRODUCE: install v1 from app store generate key using DCAppAttestService.shared.generateKey Attest this key using DCAppAttestService.shared.attestKey Send the attestation objection to our server and verify with apple servers Generate assertions for network calls to backend using DCAppAttestService.shared.generateAssertion with keyID from step 2 Device offloads the app (manually triggered by user, or automatically by iOS) A new version v2 is published to App Store Use tries to open the app Latest version is download from the App Store App tries to use the keyID from step 2 to generate assertions DCAppAttestService throws invalidKey error (Error Domain=com.apple.devicecheck.error Code=3) Step 7 is critical here, if there is no new version of the app, the reinstalled v1 can reuse the key from step 2 without any issues Is this behaviour expected? Is there any way we can make sure the key is preserved between offloaded app updates? Thanks

In response to inquiries from users, we have confirmed the following phenomenon. If you select "Private email address" in the flow of new user registration with Apple ID, you will not receive the verification code email when performing two-factor authentication. ■User impact If you use your Apple ID to link an external account without making your email address public, you will not receive the authentication code during two-factor authentication and will not be able to proceed. The date and time of the impact is currently unknown. ◎Impact 1: New registration If you select "Private email address" in the flow of registering a new user with Apple ID, the verification code will not be received during two-factor authentication and registration will not be completed. ◎Impact 2: Login of existing account When two-factor authentication is required for an existing account registered with Apple ID set to "Private email address," the verification code is not received and the user cannot log in. →If you have not registered a login method other than Apple ID for the relevant account, there is no other way to log in. ■About workarounds ・I thought that I could avoid this issue by canceling the private setting of my Apple ID, but I was unable to do so. →There is currently no workaround found for existing users who are experiencing this issue. ・However, the scope of influence is limited. ■Cause investigation status Premise: For an Apple ID whose email address is not made public, the two-factor authentication authentication code email follows the following route. ①CDC/GIGYA miraiz-persol.jp (SendGrid) Apple's email server (relay server to hide the user's real email address) User mailbox →Since '1' are working, the problem seems to have occurred after the connection from ② or ③. (At this stage, we cannot determine who is at fault: the user, MIRAIZ, or Apple. We are currently investigating.) ◎Hypothesis ・Is there something wrong with Apple's mail server? ・Is it not delivered because the user's mailbox is full? ■Questions, research, and responses we would like to receive Please check the following two points and reply. 1st point As shown in the attached image, there seems to be no problem with the SPF settings. Is it possible to check to see if any errors have occurred with Apple's mail server? 2nd point Are there any cases where you still can't receive emails even if you deactivate your Apple ID? I would like to know if there are any patterns in which emails are not being delivered in terms of past inquiries or overall specifications

Hi team, if I log into my app on Safari and try to enroll/challenge MFA security key option, I will be able to see this pop-up that gives me the option to pick either passkeys or external security keys However, my team member who's using the same version of safari, can only see the external security key option Why is this?

In a project I was using Local Authentication to authenticate a user. When I got a request to support smartcard/PIV token authentication (which Local Authentication does not support), I had to switch to Authorization Services, which works pretty. There's only one issue I have. Local Authentication's evaluatePolicy:localizedReason:reply: requires a reason in the form "<appname>" is trying to <localized reason>. The app is currently translated into 41 languages and I would like to use the localized strings for the AuthorizationEnvironment of Authorization Services as well. The problem is that Local Authentication prefixes the localized string with something like "<appname>" is trying to and Authorization Services does not do this. Is there a way to get this prefix from somewhere so I can manually add it to the (partially) localized string? Any help would be highly appreciated. Thank you, Marc

We have an app that has failed during the app review for the Japanese market but has been accepted in several other markets successfully. We need the user's name in native Katakana format as we need it to be displayed in our restaurant Point of Sale systems for workers to be able to read and understand. We use 'Sign up with Apple', but when doing so, if this returns an anglicised given and family name, we have to request the customer supply their Katakana format name so that our in-store systems and staff can process and fulfil their orders. When the App Review process automatically tests the app, it uses "Apple John" as a customer's name. Since this is not a Japanese name, we ask for it again in the correct format, or we cannot allow the user to register. This contravenes Apple's rules, and thus, our app is rejected. If the Apple identity used belonged to a user more typical of the target market, it would work as required. Does anyone else have this issue, and how did you work around it? Tim

Hey there, I’m currently exploring the possibility of integrating Sign in with Apple into my iOS app and backend. Regarding the iOS app, I’ve read that when a user is signed in, you always need to call getCredentialState on the app’s launch. Is this true? If so, how is it possible to sign the user out then? I intend to incorporate SwiftData and CloudKit into my application. In light of this, I’m curious about your approach to user management. Specifically, I’m wondering if you would store the user’s data in a Redis database after successful authentication on the backend. Or, would you separate the user data and save it using SwiftData/ CloudKit?

Hi, I am working on a react native module used for tis connection and I am trying to implement the possibility to use a custom certificate/Private key. I have already implemented on android but on iOS I am getting hard times, we cannot find lots of resources, api is different on macOS and iOS with subtle differences so after having tested SO, chatgpt, ... I am trying here: I even tried to use an internal api since it seems ffmpeg uses it but with no success. I have attached my current code because it does not fit here. to sump up after having inserted cert and private key I try to get a SecIdentityRef but it fails. I assume that it's not enough to simply add certain and private key... // Query for the identity with correct attributes NSDictionary *identityQuery = @{ (__bridge id)kSecClass: (__bridge id)kSecClassIdentity, (__bridge id)kSecMatchLimit: (__bridge id)kSecMatchLimitOne, (__bridge id)kSecReturnRef: @YES, (__bridge id)kSecReturnData: @YES, (__bridge id)kSecAttrLabel: @"My Certificate", //(__bridge id)kSecUseDataProtectionKeychain: @YES }; SecIdentityRef identity = NULL; status = SecItemCopyMatching((__bridge CFDictionaryRef)identityQuery, (CFTypeRef *)&identity); TcpSocketClient.txt SecItemCopyMatching with kSecClassIdentity fails, SecIdentityCreate return NULL... So please help and indicates what I am doing wrong and how I am supposed getting a SecIdentityRef. Thanks

I'd like to implement unit tests that exercise keys made available via a persistent token interface. However, when attempting to list available tokens by passing kSecAttrAccessGroupToken as the kSecAttrAccessGroup to SecItemCopyMatching from a unit test, -34018 is returned. It succeeds without the kSecAttrAccessGroup, which makes sense given the unit test binary does not have com.apple.token Keychain Group. The Xcode UI indicates "Capabilities are not supported" for the unit test binary when attempting to add a Keychain Sharing capability to enable use of persistent tokens. This feels like a dead end but begs the question is there any way to implement unit tests to exercise a persistent token interface? It seems like the only path may be write unit tests that drive an independent app that handles the interactions with the persistent token.