Post

Replies

Boosts

Views

Created

macOS ARM64 App Killed with SIGKILL - Gatekeeper Error -67062
Problem My ARM64 macOS application is being immediately killed with SIGKILL when launched. No crash report is generated, and the process terminates instantly. Environment macOS Version: 15.x (Sequoia) Architecture: ARM64 (Apple Silicon) Certificate: Mac Developer certificate (development signing) App Type: Native ARM64 application with embedded Java runtime Symptoms ./MacOS/myapp Immediately returns: zsh: killed ./MacOS/myapp Investigation Results System Logs Show Security Policy Rejection kernel: (AppleSystemPolicy) ASP: Security policy would not allow process: 92850, /path/to/myapp syspolicyd: (Security) MacOS error: -67062 Error Code Analysis Error -67062 = errSecCSReqFailed (Code signature requirement failed) This is a Gatekeeper enforcement issue, not a code signing problem 3. Code Signature is Valid codesign -dvvv myapp Shows valid signature with Mac Developer certificate Authority=Mac Developer: Name (TEAMID) Authority=Apple Worldwide Developer Relations Certification Authority Authority=Apple Root CA What We Tried (That Didn't Help) ✅ Removed hardened runtime flag from Java components ✅ Added JIT entitlements (com.apple.security.cs.allow-jit) ✅ Verified Mach-O structure is correct ✅ Confirmed all libraries are ARM64 ✅ Re-signed with proper entitlements None of these fixed the issue because the problem is Gatekeeper policy enforcement. Question How can I allow this development-signed ARM64 app to run on macOS 15 without full notarization? I've tried: Removing quarantine attributes Various code signing approaches Different entitlements But Gatekeeper still blocks it with error -67062. Is there a way to add a security exception for development builds, or do I need to use a Developer ID certificate even for internal testing? Additional Context This is for internal development/testing. The app works fine when properly notarized, but we need a way to test development builds without going through the full notarization process each time. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
1
0
218
6d
macOS ARM64 App Killed with SIGKILL - Gatekeeper Error -67062
Problem My ARM64 macOS application is being immediately killed with SIGKILL when launched. No crash report is generated, and the process terminates instantly. Environment macOS Version: 15.x (Sequoia) Architecture: ARM64 (Apple Silicon) Certificate: Mac Developer certificate (development signing) App Type: Native ARM64 application with embedded Java runtime Symptoms ./MacOS/myapp Immediately returns: zsh: killed ./MacOS/myapp Investigation Results System Logs Show Security Policy Rejection kernel: (AppleSystemPolicy) ASP: Security policy would not allow process: 92850, /path/to/myapp syspolicyd: (Security) MacOS error: -67062 Error Code Analysis Error -67062 = errSecCSReqFailed (Code signature requirement failed) This is a Gatekeeper enforcement issue, not a code signing problem 3. Code Signature is Valid codesign -dvvv myapp Shows valid signature with Mac Developer certificate Authority=Mac Developer: Name (TEAMID) Authority=Apple Worldwide Developer Relations Certification Authority Authority=Apple Root CA What We Tried (That Didn't Help) ✅ Removed hardened runtime flag from Java components ✅ Added JIT entitlements (com.apple.security.cs.allow-jit) ✅ Verified Mach-O structure is correct ✅ Confirmed all libraries are ARM64 ✅ Re-signed with proper entitlements None of these fixed the issue because the problem is Gatekeeper policy enforcement. Question How can I allow this development-signed ARM64 app to run on macOS 15 without full notarization? I've tried: Removing quarantine attributes Various code signing approaches Different entitlements But Gatekeeper still blocks it with error -67062. Is there a way to add a security exception for development builds, or do I need to use a Developer ID certificate even for internal testing? Additional Context This is for internal development/testing. The app works fine when properly notarized, but we need a way to test development builds without going through the full notarization process each time. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
Replies
1
Boosts
0
Views
218
Activity
6d