Hello Apple Developer Support, I am experiencing an issue with Apple Sign-In and Private Relay across two separate organizations. I have a web application that supports Apple Sign-In, configured under organization ID: 62P86SVLK4. Users can log in using their Apple accounts with the Hide My Email (Private Relay) feature enabled. This web application was created a long time ago and initially only had a web component. Recently, we developed a native mobile version of this application, which also supports Apple Sign-In. However, due to business constraints, the mobile application was created under a different organization ID: T6JT35U9NW. The Issue Since the web and mobile applications are registered under different organizations, accounts created using Apple Sign-In with Private Relay are not recognized across both applications. For example: A user creates an account in the web app using Apple Sign-In with Private Relay. When they attempt to log in to the mobile app with Apple Sign-In (also using Private Relay), authentication fails because the generated Private Relay email addresses do not match between the two organizations. Question Is there any way to link Private Relay accounts across these two organizations so that users who signed up on the web application can log in to the mobile application seamlessly? I appreciate any guidance on how to resolve this issue. Best regards, Kamil Gronert

Hello, Thanks for the new video on Memory Integrity Enforcement! Is the presented app's sample code available (so that we can play with it and find & fix the bug on our own, using Soft Mode)? Thanks in advance!

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.

Hi. I enter a password using the security command at the command line. It appears in the keychain access app, but not in the passwords app. I don't understand why. rickhedin@Ricks-MacBook-Pro zalando % security add-generic-password -U -s "birds" -a "cats" -w "dogs" rickhedin@Ricks-MacBook-Pro zalando % rickhedin@Ricks-MacBook-Pro zalando % security find-generic-password -s "birds" -wa "cats" dogs rickhedin@Ricks-MacBook-Pro zalando % I'm told the two apps are two views of the same data, so I guess some filter must be being applied?

Hi everyone, I’m looking for clarification on best practices for storing API keys in an iOS app — for example, keys used with RevenueCat, PostHog, AWS Rekognition, barcode scanners, and similar third-party services. I understand that hard-coding API keys directly in the app’s source code is a bad idea, since they can be extracted from the binary. However, using a .plist file doesn’t seem secure either, as it’s still bundled with the app and can be inspected. I’m wondering: What are Apple’s recommended approaches for managing these kinds of keys? Does Xcode Cloud offer a built-in or best-practice method for securely injecting environment variables or secrets at build time? Would using an external service like AWS Secrets Manager or another server-side solution make sense for this use case? Any insights or examples of how others are handling this securely within Apple’s ecosystem would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for considering my questions! — Paul

I have a project with a single app target that serves two environments, and two schemes, one for each env, using xcconfig files for defining environment-specific stuff. I'm trying to figure this out for months, so I've tried multiple approaches throughout this period: Have a single domain in "Associated domains" in Xcode, defined as webcredentials:X where X gets replaced using a value from xcconfig. Have two domain entries in "Associated domains" webcredentials:PROD_DOMAIN and webcredentials:STAGING_DOMAIN. Have a different order of domains Results are very interesting: whatever I do, whatever approach I take, password autofill works on staging, but doesn't work on production. I'm aware that we need to test production on Test Flight and AppStore builds. That's how we're testing it, and it's not working. Tested on multiple devices, on multiple networks (wifi + mobile data), in multiple countries.. you name it. The server side team has checked their implementation a dozen times; it's all configured properly, in the exact same way across environments (except bundle ID, ofc). We tried a couple websites for validating the apple-app-site-association file, and while all of those are focused on testing universal links, they all reported that the file is configured properly. Still, password autofill doesn't work. I prefer not to share my app's domains publicly here. Ideally I would contact Apple Developer Support directly, but they now require a test project for that, and since 'a test project' is not applicable to my issue, I'm posting here instead.

Hello, I’m storing some values in the Keychain with the attribute ‘ksecattraccessibleafterfirstunlockthisdeviceonly’ (https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/ksecattraccessibleafterfirstunlockthisdeviceonly). When I migrate user data between iPhones via iCloud, this behaves as expected and the keys are not preserved. However, when I migrate using a direct connection between two devices, the keys are preserved, which seems to contradict the attribute’s intent. Is this a known behavior, and if so, is there a workaround?

The Passwords App is accessing websites found in the ASCredentialIdentityStore associated with a 3rd Party password management app (SamuraiSafe). This behaviour appears to be associated with looking up website favicons in order to display in Passwords. However the websites contacted are not stored in the Passwords App/iCloud KeyChain - only the 3rd Party password management app (SamuraiSafe). This is effectively leaking website information stored in the 3rd Party password management app. I first noticed this behaviour on macOS, and it appears to happen every 8 days. Today it was seen on iOS. The behaviour is revealed through the App Privacy Report on iOS (and LittleSnitch on macOS). I would not be surprised to see the Passwords App do this for websites saved in the Passwords App/iCloud KeyChain, however I believe it should not be arbitrarily testing every website found in the ASCredentialIdentityStore as reference to that website url should be entirely under the control of the end user. See attached screenshots from App Privacy Report. Filed bug with Apple: FB16682423

I am developing an Authorization plugin for macOS that should be invoked when a user unlocks their device from the lock screen. Based on advice from the other threads in these forums, I have understood that: The plugin needs to use SFAuthorizationPluginView The auth db entries to modify are system.login.screensaver and authenticate I found the NameAndPassword sample and after making some tweaks to it was able to get it to work from screensaver unlock. I am trying to add Webview-based authentication to the plugin, but have not had any success. The plugin window's width does not change (though the height does) and only a small portion of the HTML gets rendered. Is Webview-based authentication supported with SFAuthorizationPluginView? Are there any alternatives?

We are interested in using a hardware-bound key in a launch daemon. In a previous post, Quinn explicitly told me this is not possible to use an SE keypair outside of the system context and my reading of the Apple documentation also supports that. That said, we have gotten the following key-creation and persistence flow to work, so we have some questions as to how this fits in with the above. (1) In a launch daemon (running thus as root), we do: let key = SecureEnclave.P256.Signing.PrivateKey() (2) We then use key.dataRepresentation to store a reference to the key in the system keychain as a kSecClassGenericPassword. (3) When we want to use the key, we fetch the data representation from system keychain and we "rehydrate" the key using: SecureEnclave.P256.Signing.PrivateKey(dataRepresentation: data) (4) We then use the output of the above to sign whatever we want. My questions: in the above flow, are we actually getting a hardware-bound key from the Secure Enclave or is this working because it's actually defaulting to a non-hardware-backed key? if it is an SE key, is it that the Apple documentation stating that you can only use the SE with the Data Protection Keychain in the user context is outdated (or wrong)? does the above work, but is not an approach sanctioned by Apple? Any feedback on this would be greatly appreciated.

Hi everyone, I’ve been working on storing keys and passwords in the macOS Keychain using the Keychain Services API. Specifically, I’m leveraging SecAccessControlCreateWithFlags to bind items to access control flags, and overall, it’s been working smoothly. I have a question regarding the .applicationPassword flag of SecAccessControlCreateWithFlags. While it successfully prompts the user to input a password, there are no apparent password rules, even a simple “1” is accepted. My questions are: Is there a way to enforce strong password requirements when using the .applicationPassword flag? If enforcing strong passwords isn’t possible, is there an alternative approach to provide a predefined strong password during the creation process, bypassing the need for user input? With SecAccessControlCreateWithFlags, I noticed the item isn’t stored in the traditional file-based Keychain but in an iOS-style Keychain, is there a way to store it in a file-based Keychain while marking it as unexportable? I appreciate any insights or suggestions. Thank you! Neil

I am developing an Authorisation Plugin which talks to Launch daemons over XPC. Above is working neat, now I have to decide on how to get it installed on a machine. Installation requires. Plugin Installation Launch Daemon Installation Both require Moving binary and text (.plist) file into privileged system managed directory. Firing install/load commands as root (sudo). I have referred this post BSD Privilege Escalation on macOS, but I am still not clear how to approach this. Q: My requirement is: I can use .pkg builder and install via script, however I have some initialisation task that needs to be performed. User will enter some details talk to a remote server and get some keys, all goes well restarts the system and my authorisation plugin will welcome him and get him started. If I cannot perform initialisation I will have to do it post restart on login screen which I want to avoid if possible. I tried unconventional way of using AppleScript from a SwiftUI application to run privileged commands, I am fine if it prompts for admin credentials, but it did not work. I don't want that I do something and when approving it from Apple it gets rejected. Basically, how can I provide some GUI to do initialisation during installation or may be an app which helps in this. Q: Please also guide if I am doing elevated actions, how will it affect app distribution mechanism. In Read Me for EvenBetterAuthorizationSample I read it does. Thanks.

Hi, It may be a stupid question, but we really wonder if there is a way for MDM to push a unique mTLS cert to our iOS application or if it can populate a client certificate in the iOS where our application can access it. Like browser app, how do browser mTLS certs get pushed? Thanks, Ying

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。

I am developing a sample authorization plugin to sync the user’s local password to the network password. During the process, I prompt the user to enter both their old and new passwords in custom plugin. After the user enters the information, I use the following code to sync the passwords: try record.changePassword(oldPssword, toPassword: newPassword) However, I have noticed that this is clearing all saved keychain information, such as web passwords and certificates. Is it expected behavior for record.changePassword to clear previously stored keychain data? If so, how can I overcome this issue and ensure the keychain information is preserved while syncing the password? Thank you for your help!

Testing my security agent plugin on Tahoe and find that when unlocking the screen, I now get an extra window that pops up over the SFAuthorizationPluginView that says "macOS You must enter a password to unlock the screen" with a Cancel (enabled) and OK button (disabled). See the attached photo. This is new with Tahoe. When unlocking the screen, I see the standard username and password entry view and I enter my password and click OK. That is when this new view appears. I can only click cancel so there is no way to complete authenticating.

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

Hi, We are using the following API from sys/random.h to generate entropy in our module. int getentropy(void* buffer, size_t size); Could you confirm if this API internally uses a non-physical entropy source and adhere to SP800-90B as the following document says: https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/projects/cryptographic-module-validation-program/documents/entropy/E181_PublicUse.pdf

Why are we doing this nonsense? We want to be able to run builds in a sandbox such that they can only see the paths they are intended to depend on, to improve reproducibility. With builds with a very large number of dependencies, there's a very large number of paths added to the sandbox, and it breaks things inside libsandbox. Either it hits some sandbox length limit (sandbox-exec: pattern serialization length 66460 exceeds maximum (65535), Nix issue #4119, worked around: Nix PR 12570), or it hits an assert (this report; also Nix issue #2311). The other options for sandboxing on macOS are not viable; we acknowledge sandbox-exec and sandbox_init_with_parameters are deprecated; App Sandbox is inapplicable because we aren't an app. Our use case is closer to a browser, and all the browsers use libsandbox internally. We could possibly use SystemExtension or a particularly diabolical use of Virtualization.framework, but the former API requires notarization which is close to a no-go for our use case as open source software: it is nearly impossible to develop the software on one's own computer, and it would require us to ship a binary blob (and have the build processes to produce one in infrastructure completely dissimilar to what we use today); it also requires a bunch of engineering time. Today, we can pretend that code signing/notarization doesn't exist and that we are writing an old-school Unix daemon, because we are one. The latter is absolutely diabolical and hard to implement. See this saga about the bug we are facing: Nix issue #4119, Nix issue #2311, etc. What is going wrong I can't attach the file fail.sb as it is too large (you can view the failing test case at Lix's gerrit, CL 2870) and run this: $ sandbox-exec -D _GLOBAL_TMP_DIR=/tmp -f fail.sb /bin/sh Assertion failed: (diff <= INSTR_JUMP_NE_MAX_LENGTH), function push_jne_instr, file serialize.c, line 240. zsh: abort sandbox-exec -D _GLOBAL_TMP_DIR=/tmp -f fail.sb /bin/sh Or a stacktrace: stacktrace.txt Credits Full credits to Jade Lovelace (Lix) for writing the above text and filing a bug. This is submitted under FB16964888

I’m using a custom Installer plug-in (InstallerPane) to collect sensitive user input (username/password) during install. After the payload is laid down, I need to send those values to a newly installed agent (LaunchAgent) to persist them. What I tried I expose an XPC Mach service from the agent and have the plug-in call it. On the agent side I validate the XPC client using the audit token → SecCodeCopyGuestWithAttributes → SecCodeCheckValidity. However, the client process is InstallerRemotePluginService-* (Apple’s view service that hosts all plug-ins), so the signature I see is Apple’s, not mine. I can’t distinguish which plug-in made the call. Any suggestion on better approach ?