Hi, This is my first time developing for iPhone, and I believe I have encountered an unusual edge case related to user management. Background: I work at a very small company currently in the proof-of-concept stage of building an iOS app. We created an Apple account under the company name: Green Vibe, using our corporate email. Initially, I developed the app under the free account on my local iPhone, and everything worked smoothly. When NFC functionality became necessary, we upgraded to a paid Apple Developer account. At that point, I enrolled as a developer under my personal name (Or Itach) while logged in with the Green Vibe Apple account. I want to emphasize that only one Apple account was created — the Green Vibe account. The Issue: When attempting to add NFC, I was able to create the required certificate under the name Or Itach. However, when compiling the project, Xcode prompts me to enter the login password for the user Or Itach. This is problematic because there is no Apple ID associated with that name — only the Apple Developer enrollment under Green Vibe exists. Request: Could you please advise on the proper way to resolve this situation? Specifically: Should the developer enrollment be tied directly to the Green Vibe account rather than to an individual name? How can I correctly configure the account so that Xcode no longer requires a nonexistent Apple ID password? Thank you very much for your support and clarification.

I was working in Xcode with a free personal Team ID. I upgraded to the Dev Program and now have a paid Team ID. I used the same Apple ID for both. The paid Team ID shows up in developer.apple.com as associated with my Apple ID. However, Xcode is not using the paid Team ID in signing, it's stuck on my old personal Team ID. In addition, I'm getting provisioning errors (0xe8008015) when we try to run our app on an iPhone. Anyone have any thoughts? I've scoured the forums and ChatGPT'd, Cursor'd, etc...all of the suggested fixes do not work. This almost seems like Apple needs to make my Apple ID associated with the paid Team ID or something, to start. Thanks all.

The capability associated with "FAMILY_CONTROLS" could not be determined. Please file a bug report at https://feedbackassistant.apple.com and include the Update Signing report from the Report navigator.

we have organization account I'm the admin of team. and i have additional resources: Additional Resources Access to Reports Access to Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles. Access to Cloud Managed Distribution Certificate Create Apps Generate Individual API Keys Issues: i can't find my team certificate in Xcode I don't have access to https://developer.apple.com/account/resources/

Hi, I'm currently at 19 hours waiting for notarization. My dev account is new and this is the first time I'm submitting anything to be notarized. I've gathered from my research that this is normal (unfortunately). I figure the only thing I can do is wait, but is there any way for me to know if I'm waiting for a human to manually review it? I was going to file a support request, but I saw that they won't be responding to any support requests until after their Thanksgiving break, and I assume nobody is manually reviewing notary submissions for the next week+. I attached the submission below, thanks! createdDate: 2025-11-21T21:17:10.082Z id: c9746d42-1dc7-4641-aec1-62c6cedff1a2 name: ***********.zip status: In Progress

I help a lot of developers with macOS trusted execution problems. For example, they might have an app being blocked by Gatekeeper, or an app that crashes on launch with a code signing error. If you encounter a problem that’s not explained here, start a new thread with the details. Put it in the Code Signing > General subtopic and tag it with relevant tags like Gatekeeper, Code Signing, and Notarization — so that I see it. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Resolving Trusted Execution Problems macOS supports three software distribution channels: The user downloads an app from the App Store. The user gets a Developer ID-signed program directly from its developer. The user builds programs locally using Apple or third-party developer tools. The trusted execution system aims to protect users from malicious code. It’s comprised of a number of different subsystems. For example, Gatekeeper strives to ensure that only trusted software runs on a user’s Mac, while XProtect is the platform’s built-in anti-malware technology. Note To learn more about these technologies, see Apple Platform Security. If you’re developing software for macOS your goal is to avoid trusted execution entanglements. You want users to install and use your product without taking any special steps. If, for example, you ship an app that’s blocked by Gatekeeper, you’re likely to lose a lot of customers, and your users’ hard-won trust. Trusted execution problems are rare with Mac App Store apps because the Mac App Store validation process tends to catch things early. This post is primarily focused on Developer ID-signed programs. Developers who use Xcode encounter fewer trusted execution problems because Xcode takes care of many code signing and packaging chores. If you’re not using Xcode, consider making the switch. If you can’t, consult the following for information on how to structure, sign, and package your code: Placing content in a bundle Embedding nonstandard code structures in a bundle Embedding a command-line tool in a sandboxed app Creating distribution-signed code for macOS Packaging Mac software for distribution Gatekeeper Basics User-level apps on macOS implement a quarantine system for new downloads. For example, if Safari downloads a zip archive, it quarantines that archive. This involves setting the com.apple.quarantine extended attribute on the file. Note The com.apple.quarantine extended attribute is not documented as API. If you need to add, check, or remove quarantine from a file programmatically, use the quarantinePropertiesKey property. User-level unarchiving tools preserve quarantine. To continue the above example, if you double click the quarantined zip archive in the Finder, Archive Utility will unpack the archive and quarantine the resulting files. If you launch a quarantined app, the system invokes Gatekeeper. Gatekeeper checks the app for problems. If it finds no problems, it asks the user to confirm the launch, just to be sure. If it finds a problem, it displays an alert to the user and prevents them from launching it. The exact wording of this alert varies depending on the specific problem, and from release to release of macOS, but it generally looks like the ones shown in Apple > Support > Safely open apps on your Mac. The system may run Gatekeeper at other times as well. The exact circumstances under which it runs Gatekeeper is not documented and changes over time. However, running a quarantined app always invokes Gatekeeper. Unix-y networking tools, like curl and scp, don’t quarantine the files they download. Unix-y unarchiving tools, like tar and unzip, don’t propagate quarantine to the unarchived files. Confirm the Problem Trusted execution problems can be tricky to reproduce: You may encounter false negatives, that is, you have a trusted execution problem but you don’t see it during development. You may also encounter false positives, that is, things fail on one specific Mac but otherwise work. To avoid chasing your own tail, test your product on a fresh Mac, one that’s never seen your product before. The best way to do this is using a VM, restoring to a snapshot between runs. For a concrete example of this, see Testing a Notarised Product. The most common cause of problems is a Gatekeeper alert saying that it’s blocked your product from running. However, that’s not the only possibility. Before going further, confirm that Gatekeeper is the problem by running your product without quarantine. That is, repeat the steps in Testing a Notarised Product except, in step 2, download your product in a way that doesn’t set quarantine. Then try launching your app. If that launch fails then Gatekeeper is not the problem, or it’s not the only problem! Note The easiest way to download your app to your test environment without setting quarantine is curl or scp. Alternatively, use xattr to remove the com.apple.quarantine extended attribute from the download before you unpack it. For more information about the xattr tool, see the xattr man page. Trusted execution problems come in all shapes and sizes. Later sections of this post address the most common ones. But first, let’s see if there’s an easy answer. Run a System Policy Check macOS has a syspolicy_check tool that can diagnose many common trusted execution issues. To check an app, run the distribution subcommand against it: % syspolicy_check distribution MyApp.app App passed all pre-distribution checks and is ready for distribution. If there’s a problem, the tool prints information about that problem. For example, here’s what you’ll see if you run it against an app that’s notarised but not stapled: % syspolicy_check distribution MyApp.app App has failed one or more pre-distribution checks. --------------------------------------------------------------- Notary Ticket Missing File: MyApp.app Severity: Fatal Full Error: A Notarization ticket is not stapled to this application. Type: Distribution Error … Note In reality, stapling isn’t always required, so this error isn’t really Fatal (r. 151446728 ). For more about that, see The Pros and Cons of Stapling forums. And here’s what you’ll see if there’s a problem with the app’s code signature: % syspolicy_check distribution MyApp.app App has failed one or more pre-distribution checks. --------------------------------------------------------------- Codesign Error File: MyApp.app/Contents/Resources/added.txt Severity: Fatal Full Error: File added after outer app bundle was codesigned. Type: Notary Error … The syspolicy_check isn’t perfect. There are a few issues it can’t diagnose (r. 136954554, 151446550). However, it should always be your first step because, if it does work, it’ll save you a lot of time. Note syspolicy_check was introduced in macOS 14. If you’re seeing a problem on an older system, first check your app with syspolicy_check on macOS 14 or later. If you can’t run the syspolicy_check tool, or it doesn’t report anything actionable, continue your investigation using the instructions in the following sections. App Blocked by Gatekeeper If your product is an app and it works correctly when not quarantined but is blocked by Gatekeeper when it is, you have a Gatekeeper problem. For advice on how to investigate such issues, see Resolving Gatekeeper Problems. App Can’t Be Opened Not all failures to launch are Gatekeeper errors. In some cases the app is just broken. For example: The app’s executable might be missing the x bit set in its file permissions. The app’s executable might be subtly incompatible with the current system. A classic example of this is trying to run a third-party app that contains arm64e code on systems prior to macOS 26 beta. macOS 26 beta supports arm64e apps directly. Prior to that, third-party products (except kernel extensions) were limited to arm64, except for the purposes of testing. The app’s executable might claim restricted entitlements that aren’t authorised by a provisioning profile. Or the app might have some other code signing problem. Note For more information about provisioning profiles, see TN3125 Inside Code Signing: Provisioning Profiles. In such cases the system displays an alert saying: The application “NoExec” can’t be opened. [[OK]] Note In macOS 11 this alert was: You do not have permission to open the application “NoExec”. Contact your computer or network administrator for assistance. [[OK]] which was much more confusing. A good diagnostic here is to run the app’s executable from Terminal. For example, an app with a missing x bit will fail to run like so: % NoExec.app/Contents/MacOS/NoExec zsh: permission denied: NoExec.app/Contents/MacOS/NoExec And an app with unauthorised entitlements will be killed by the trusted execution system: % OverClaim.app/Contents/MacOS/OverClaim zsh: killed OverClaim.app/Contents/MacOS/OverClaim In some cases running the executable from Terminal will reveal useful diagnostics. For example, if the app references a library that’s not available, the dynamic linker will print a helpful diagnostic: % MissingLibrary.app/Contents/MacOS/MissingLibrary dyld[88394]: Library not loaded: @rpath/CoreWaffleVarnishing.framework/Versions/A/CoreWaffleVarnishing … zsh: abort MissingLibrary.app/Contents/MacOS/MissingLibrary Code Signing Crashes on Launch A code signing crash has the following exception information: Exception Type: EXC_CRASH (SIGKILL (Code Signature Invalid)) The most common such crash is a crash on launch. To confirm that, look at the thread backtraces: Backtrace not available For steps to debug this, see Resolving Code Signing Crashes on Launch. One common cause of this problem is running App Store distribution-signed code. Don’t do that! For details on why that’s a bad idea, see Don’t Run App Store Distribution-Signed Code. Code Signing Crashes After Launch If your program crashes due to a code signing problem after launch, you might have encountered the issue discussed in Updating Mac Software. Non-Code Signing Failures After Launch The hardened runtime enables a number of security checks within a process. Some coding techniques are incompatible with the hardened runtime. If you suspect that your code is incompatible with the hardened runtime, see Resolving Hardened Runtime Incompatibilities. App Sandbox Inheritance If you’re creating a product with the App Sandbox enabled and it crashes with a trap within _libsecinit_appsandbox, it’s likely that you’re having App Sandbox inheritance problems. For the details, see Resolving App Sandbox Inheritance Problems. Library Loading Problem Most library loading problems have an obvious cause. For example, the library might not be where you expect it, or it might be built with the wrong platform or architecture. However, some library loading problems are caused by the trusted execution system. For the details, see Resolving Library Loading Problems. Explore the System Log If none of the above resolves your issue, look in the system log for clues as to what’s gone wrong. Some good keywords to search for include: gk, for Gatekeeper xprotect syspolicy, per the syspolicyd man page cmd, for Mach-O load command oddities amfi, for Apple mobile file integrity, per the amfid man page taskgated, see its taskgated man page yara, discussed in Apple Platform Security ProvisioningProfiles You may be able to get more useful logging with this command: % sudo sysctl -w security.mac.amfi.verbose_logging=1 Here’s a log command that I often use when I’m investigating a trusted execution problem and I don’t know here to start: % log stream --predicate "sender == 'AppleMobileFileIntegrity' or sender == 'AppleSystemPolicy' or process == 'amfid' or process == 'taskgated-helper' or process == 'syspolicyd'" For general information the system log, see Your Friend the System Log. Revision History 2025-08-06 Added the Run a System Policy Check section, which talks about the syspolicy_check tool (finally!). Clarified the discussion of arm64e. Made other editorial changes. 2024-10-11 Added info about the security.mac.amfi.verbose_logging option. Updated some links to point to official documentation that replaces some older DevForums posts. 2024-01-12 Added a specific command to the Explore the System Log section. Change the syspolicy_check callout to reflect that macOS 14 is no longer in beta. Made minor editorial changes. 2023-06-14 Added a quick call-out to the new syspolicy_check tool. 2022-06-09 Added the Non-Code Signing Failures After Launch section. 2022-06-03 Added a link to Don’t Run App Store Distribution-Signed Code. Fixed the link to TN3125. 2022-05-20 First posted.

I'm working on an app that needs access to device activity. When I add device activity entitlement, I'm getting Provisioning profile "..." doesn't include the com.apple.developer.deviceactivity entitlement. This is failing for both, the main app and the extension, and both have entitlements added. It is not clear how to add it to the profile, the provisioning profile is created/managed by XCode. When I remove the entitlement, I can build my app but it won't be able to use device activity data I reached out to Developer Support, and they sent me here. What is the right way to add device activity entitlement? I'm also seeing another issue with XCode Cloud builds. When I remove device activity entitlement. I can build my app w/o any issue, and I can also install it directly on my iPhone. However, XCode Cloud builds fail wit Run command: 'xcodebuild -exportArchive -archivePath /Volumes/workspace/tmp/d41fc2f1-4f39-4906-8941-112488e75f6c.xcarchive -exportPath /Volumes/workspace/adhocexport -exportOptionsPlist /Volumes/workspace/ci/ad-hoc-exportoptions.plist '-DVTPortalRequest.Endpoint=http://172.16.68.193:8089' -DVTProvisioningIsManaged=YES -IDEDistributionLogDirectory=/Volumes/workspace/tmp/ad-hoc-export-archive-logs -DVTSkipCertificateValidityCheck=YES -DVTServicesLogLevel=3' I suspect that it could be related to my app having DeviceActivityExtension but no device activity entitlement is present. Thanks, Peter.

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 All, Like many others I'm a little confused with gaining access to the family controls capability. Our app is ready to push to testflight, and we sent the request to apple last week. However only learning today that we need to request for the shield extension as well. I wanted to ask what the expected timeline is for being approved? I've seen posts here saying less than a week, and some people having to wait longer than 6 weeks. Any advise or guidance on getting approved smoothly & swiftly would be highly appreciated

Hi, I am trying to make my app build on GitHub Action CI pipeline. App builds fine on xcode on my mac. For CI I am using command line xcode. I am getting following error: No profiles for 'com.snslocation.electricians-now' were found: Xcode couldn't find any iOS App Development provisioning profiles matching 'com.snslocation.electricians-now'. Automatic signing is disabled and unable to generate a profile. To enable automatic signing, pass -allowProvisioningUpdates to xcodebuild. (in target 'myapp' from project 'myapp') You can see full log of the build here: https://github.com/nbulatovi/ElectriciansNow/actions/runs/12603115423/job/35127512689 The provisioning profile is present, and verified in the previous steps in the pipeline, however xcode refuses to find it. If I add -allowProvisioningUpdates error stays. I tried manually mapping app id to profile name. Is there a way to get any debug log from xcode profile search, to see why is it not picking up the correct profile? Or can you maybe help in some other way? xcode version is 15.4, iOS SDK 17.5

I've developed a Mac app distributed through the App Store that uses NSAppleScript to control Spotify and Apple Music. I'm experiencing inconsistent behavior with automation permission prompts that's affecting user experience. Expected Behavior: When my app first attempts to send Apple Events to Spotify or Apple Music, macOS should display the automation permission prompt, and upon user approval, the app should appear in System Preferences > Security & Privacy > Privacy > Automation. Actual Behavior: Initial permission prompts work correctly when both apps are actively used after my app download. If a user hasn't launched Spotify/Apple Music for an extended period, the permission prompt fails to appear when they later open the music app. The music app doesn't appear in the Automation privacy pane too. Once this happens, permission prompts never trigger again for that app Steps to Reproduce: Fresh install of my app Don't use Spotify for several days/weeks Launch Spotify Trigger Apple Events from my app to Spotify No permission prompt appears, app doesn't show in Automation settings If you're using Apple Music during this time it runs without any problems. Troubleshooting Attempted: Used tccutil reset AppleEvents [bundle-identifier] - no effect Verified target apps are fully launched before sending Apple Events Tried different AppleScript commands to trigger permissions Problem occurs inconsistently across different Macs Technical Details: macOS 13+ support Using standard NSAppleScript with simple commands like "tell application 'Spotify' to playpause" App Store distribution (no private APIs) Issue affects both Spotify and Apple Music but seems more prevalent with Apple Music Questions: Is there a reliable way to programmatically trigger the automation permission prompt? Are there timing dependencies for when macOS decides to show permission prompts? Could app priority/usage patterns affect permission prompt behavior? I use MediaManager to run the functions and initialize it on AppDidFinishLaunching method and start monitoring there. Any insights or workarounds would be greatly appreciated. This inconsistency is affecting user onboarding and app functionality.

Hi, I am a newbie to this, I am trying to build my own ios phone app. I am using my own phone as the developers phone so its set to debug. Using Flutter I do flutter run. it get so far and always stops on : Could not build the precompiled application for the device. Error (Xcode): Unknown platform: "ios". /Users/admin/group2/ios/Runner/Assets.xcassets Error launching application on iPhone XS Max. I have tried everything, so I thought someone on here might have the answer. I am happy to share any files or anything that you might need to recreate the issue.

I am building an electron app bundled with python. My code signing was fast, but when it came to notarization, it has already taken over 6+ hours. How can I speed things up?

Error in application:didFailToRegisterForRemoteNotificationsWithError: no valid aps-environment entitlement string found for application have tried out the below commands % codesign -d --entitlements - /path/to/your.app % security cms -D -i /path/to/your.app/embedded.mobileprovision and it seems both are working fine, Im currently developing react native app with expo and firebase for notifications this works fine when im running it via installing the app from testflight, but the issue occurs when i test in testflight or while the apple team reviewing my app My entitlements file <dict> <key>aps-environment</key> <string>production</string> </dict> </plist>

IMPORTANT The underlying issue here (FB8830007) was fixed in macOS 11.3, so the advice in this post is irrelevant if you’re building on that release or later. Note This content is a repost of info from another thread because that thread is not world readable (it’s tied to the DTK programme). A number of folks have reported problems where: They have a product that supports older versions of macOS (anything prior to 10.11). If they build their product on Intel, everything works. If they build their product on Apple Silicon, it fails on those older versions of macOS. A developer filed a bug about this (FB8830007) and, based on the diagnosis of that bug, I have some info to share as to what’s going wrong and how you can prevent it. Let’s start with some background. macOS’s code signing architecture supports two different hash formats: sha1, the original hash format, which is now deprecated sha256, the new format, support for which was added in macOS 10.11 codesign should choose the signing format based on the deployment target: If your deployment target is 10.11 or later, you get sha256. If your deployment target is earlier, you get both sha1 and sha256. This problem crops up because, when building for both Intel and Apple Silicon, your deployment targets are different. You might set the deployment target to 10.9 but, on Apple Silicon, that’s raised to the minimum Apple Silicon system, 11.0. So, which deployment target does it choose? Well, the full answer to that is complex but the executive summary is that it chooses the deployment target of the current architecture, that is, Intel if you’re building on Intel and Apple Silicon if you’re building on Apple Silicon. For example: intel% codesign -d --arch x86_64 -vvv Test664892.app … Hash choices=sha1,sha256 … intel% codesign -d --arch arm64 -vvv Test664892.app … Hash choices=sha1,sha256 … arm% codesign -d --arch x86_64 -vvv Test664892.app … Hash choices=sha256 … arm% codesign -d --arch arm64 -vvv Test664892.app … Hash choices=sha256 … The upshot is that you have problems if your deployment target is less than 10.11 and you sign on Apple Silicon. When you run on, say, macOS 10.10, the system looks for a sha1 hash, doesn’t find it, and complains. The workaround is to supply the --digest-algorithm=sha1,sha256, which overrides the hash choice logic in codesign and causes it to include both hashes: arm% codesign -s - --digest-algorithm=sha1,sha256 Test664892.app arm% codesign -d --arch x86_64 -vvv Test664892.app … Hash choices=sha1,sha256 … % codesign -d --arch arm64 -vvv Test664892.app … Hash choices=sha1,sha256 … Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com"

Hi All, Really weird one here... I have two bundle ids with the same reverse dns name... com.company.app1 com.company.app2 app1 was installed on the device a year ago. app2 was also installed on the device a year ago but I released a new updated version and pushed it to the device via Microsoft InTunes. A year ago the vendor Id's matched as the bundle id's were on the same domain of com.company. Now for some reason the new build of app2 or any new app I build isn't being recognised as on the same domain as app1 even though the bundle id should make it so and so the Vendor Id's do not match and it is causing me major problems as I rely on the Vendor Id to exchange data between the apps on a certain device. In an enterprise environment, does anyone know of any other reason or things that could affect the Vendor Id? According to Apple docs, it seems that only the bundle name affects the vendor id but it isn't following those rules in this instance.

You can now easily request access to managed capabilities for your App IDs directly from the new Capability Requests tab in Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles > Identifiers. With this update, view available capabilities in one convenient location, check the status of your requested capabilities, and see any notes from Apple related to your requests. Learn more about capability requests.

Xcode is prompting I enter a codesign login password when I am archiving my project. My password seems incorrect since there is no action after I enter my password and tap allow. what could be the problem?

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.

I get these errors. I think I've checked everything possible. "entitlements file, Identifiers etc." but I couldn't find a solution. I tried manual signing as well. Same result. The profiles I added also become invalid after a while. Everything seems normal in my developer account.