I've got a bit of code which is making a HTTPS GET request. On an iPhone it runs as expected, however when running on the simulator there's a HTTP 400 response. I've logged the url and my http headers that I'm adding, and in both cases they are identical for the simulator and iPhone (there is no http body content). Therefore, as everything is identical, I'm wondering how it could work with hardware and not with the simulator? Does the OS append any additional HTTP headers before the request goes out (such as User-Agent for example) and might those be different between iPhone/simulator?

If an app with a Message Filter Extension is run on an iPhone with iOS 18 installed then there's no logging output to the console (using print or NSLog), however there is logging in all previous versions of OS. Being able to view logging at run time for this component is essential as a debugging aid to see, for example, if the extension launches, if a text is handled locally or deferred to the network, to see if there's a network error, to examine the server response etc. Is there a specific reason it was disabled or is it accidental? Thank you

I've got a 2023 M2 MacBook Pro and used to get great battery life out of it (> 6 hours when using it for development purposes). Now however, all of a sudden, that has dropped off a cliff, and the only thing that has changed is Xcode 16 has appeared. As I'm compiling a project I can literally see the % amount of the battery charge remaining tick down in front of my eyes as I watch. I just compiled a project twice and during that time the battery dropped from from %89 to %79 and Xcode is listed as a culprit using significant battery drain. Anybody else noticed anything similar? Anything that can be done to to decrease Xcode's battery drain?

I want to observe/capture logging from my iPhone app when its not running via Xcode. However when using either the Mac's console app, or the console functionality within Apple Configurator, after about 2 or 3 seconds the logging disappears off the console. How can it be prevented from doing so?

If I run an app with a message filter extension on a phone with iOS 17.N then it works as expected. However if I run the same app (totally unchanged) on a phone with iOS 18 RC then there's multiple problems. I noticed there's no longer any logging from the extension in the Console (while there is for iOS 17 devices) in the messages app the filter sub categories aren't displayed (but they are on iOS 17 devices) if I try to debug the extension and place breakpoints in it, then there's an exception that occurs when the extension is enabled and the OS logs this (this doesn't occur with iOS 17 devices) '/private/preboot/Cryptexes/OS/usr/lib/swift/libswiftIdentityLookup.dylib' (no such file), '/usr/lib/swift/libswiftIdentityLookup.dylib' (no such file, not in dyld cache) I tried running on: iPhone with iOS 17.6 - no problems iPhone with iOS 18.1 beta - has all the above problems iPhone with iOS 18 RC - has all the above problems Was surprised the RC is so broken in this area as its release will be imminent. As things stand, I can't get a MFE to work at all with iOS 18. Anybody else with the same issues?

I have a project which when I attempt to build with XCode 16 RC fails with the message "XCBBuildService quit unexpectedly". This occurs 100% of the time, thus I am unable to build the project. It first occurred in Xcode 16 beta 1 and has been present ever since, ever present in every beta; and now as its still present in the RC its highly unlikely it'll be fixed when the RC release becomes the final release. I submitted a ticket for this many weeks ago (FB14062261), but its not been looked at/updated. This is a problem in the short term because my app needs updating to use some iOS 18 specific features, in the longer term, it won't be possible to submit the app to the App Store if it continues to only be buildable with Xcode 15. As its impossible to build the app, I attempted to create a support ticket to get assistance. However I am unable to create a support ticket because the web page won't permit me to proceed raising a ticket unless there is a test Xcode project that recreates the issue. However, the issue does not occur with small simple Xcode projects. The Xcode project which I cannot be build contains dozens of sources files, thousands of lines of code, and many dependences. I can't submit that as the text Xcode project as its larger than that stated minimum requirements to attach to a support ticket. So how can I proceed, I can't build the app, I've raised a feedback ticket which hasn't been looked at, and when I attempt to raise a support ticket, the website won't let me proceed and create one. What can I do to get a support ticket created? What Xcode outputs: Process: XCBBuildService [9024] Path: /Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/SharedFrameworks/XCBuild.framework/Versions/A/PlugIns/XCBBuildService.bundle/Contents/MacOS/XCBBuildService Identifier: com.apple.dt.XCBBuildService Version: 1.0 (23000.1.226) Build Info: XCBuild-23000001226000000~13 (16A242) Code Type: ARM-64 (Native) Parent Process: Xcode [8990] Responsible: Xcode [8990] User ID: 504 Date/Time: 2024-09-09 14:03:16.8948 -0700 OS Version: macOS 14.6.1 (23G93) Report Version: 12 Anonymous UUID: EB8CED5F-F888-D71F-3893-33504A2FE3FD Time Awake Since Boot: 1800 seconds System Integrity Protection: enabled Crashed Thread: 13 Exception Type: EXC_CRASH (SIGABRT) Exception Codes: 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000 Termination Reason: Namespace SIGNAL, Code 6 Abort trap: 6 Terminating Process: XCBBuildService [9024] Application Specific Information: abort() called Kernel Triage: VM - (arg = 0x3) mach_vm_allocate_kernel failed within call to vm_map_enter VM - (arg = 0x3) mach_vm_allocate_kernel failed within call to vm_map_enter VM - (arg = 0x3) mach_vm_allocate_kernel failed within call to vm_map_enter VM - (arg = 0x3) mach_vm_allocate_kernel failed within call to vm_map_enter Thread 0:: Dispatch queue: com.apple.main-thread 0 libsystem_kernel.dylib 0x1871fcdf4 mach_msg2_trap + 8 1 libsystem_kernel.dylib 0x18720f5e4 mach_msg2_internal + 80 2 libsystem_kernel.dylib 0x1872059c4 mach_msg_overwrite + 476 3 libsystem_kernel.dylib 0x1871fd178 mach_msg + 24 4 CoreFoundation 0x18731d680 __CFRunLoopServiceMachPort + 160 5 CoreFoundation 0x18731bf44 __CFRunLoopRun + 1208 6 CoreFoundation 0x18731b434 CFRunLoopRunSpecific + 608 7 CoreFoundation 0x18739945c CFRunLoopRun + 64 8 libswift_Concurrency.dylib 0x24eabd4e0 swift_task_asyncMainDrainQueueImpl() + 40 9 libswift_Concurrency.dylib 0x24eabd4a0 swift_task_asyncMainDrainQueue + 92 10 XCBBuildService 0x1043b392c main + 84 11 dyld 0x186eb3154 start + 2476 Thread 1: 0 libsystem_kernel.dylib 0x1871fd9b4 read + 8 1 XCBServiceCore 0x104c34688 closure #3 in ServiceHostConnection.resume() + 624 2 XCBServiceCore 0x104c326ed partial apply for closure #1 in Service.registerMessageHandler<A>(_:) + 1 3 XCBServiceCore 0x104c32a55 closure #1 in closure #1 in OS_dispatch_queue.async(group:qos:flags:execute:) + 1 4 XCBServiceCore 0x104c32a55 closure #1 in closure #1 in OS_dispatch_queue.async(group:qos:flags:execute:) + 1 5 XCBServiceCore 0x104c35c21 $sxIeAgHr_xs5Error_pIegHrzo_s8SendableRzs5NeverORs_r0_lTRyt_Tg5TQ0_ + 1 6 XCBServiceCore 0x104c326ed partial apply for closure #1 in Service.registerMessageHandler<A>(_:) + 1 7 libswift_Concurrency.dylib 0x24eabe0f9 completeTaskWithClosure(swift::AsyncContext*, swift::SwiftError*) + 1 Thread 2:: llb_buildsystem_build 0 libsystem_kernel.dylib 0x1872005ec __psynch_cvwait + 8 1 libsystem_pthread.dylib 0x18723e55c _pthread_cond_wait + 1228 2 libc++.1.dylib 0x187163b14 std::__1::condition_variable::wait(std::__1::unique_lock<std::__1::mutex>&) + 28 3 llbuild 0x10531730c (anonymous namespace)::BuildEngineImpl::executeTasks(llbuild::core::KeyType const&) + 4552 4 llbuild 0x105314390 llbuild::core::BuildEngine::build(llbuild::core::KeyType const&) + 580 5 llbuild 0x10532da38 (anonymous namespace)::BuildSystemImpl::build(llbuild::buildsystem::BuildKey) + 208 6 llbuild 0x10532dc14 llbuild::buildsystem::BuildSystem::build(llvm::StringRef) + 260 7 llbuild 0x1053203f4 llbuild::buildsystem::BuildSystemFrontend::build(llvm::StringRef) + 56 8 llbuild 0x1052a6d8c 0x10528c000 + 109964 9 XCBBuildSystem 0x104d8ad1c partial apply for closure #13 in BuildOperation.build() + 28 10 libswift_Concurrency.dylib 0x24ea89a4c TaskLocal.withValue<A>(_:operation:file:line:) + 304 11 XCBUtil 0x1048d8864 closure #1 in closure #1 in static Task<>.detachNewThread(name:_:) + 296 12 XCBUtil 0x1048854ec thunk for @escaping @callee_guaranteed @Sendable () -> () + 28 13 Foundation 0x188bc2e1c __NSThread__block_start__ + 76 14 libsystem_pthread.dylib 0x18723df94 _pthread_start + 136 15 libsystem_pthread.dylib 0x187238d34 thread_start + 8 <snip>

The documentation for adding images for Live Caller ID specify that they should be in .heic format and be less than 64KB. However the majority of the time they just don't display. Mostly they would with iOS 18 beta 4, but with beta 5, 90% of the time they don't display. Seems there's some other factor at play, such as pixel size of width/height, or resolution density?

Hello Apps and their extensions are able to communicate with each other by reading/writing data stored in a shared group location. However this isn't the case with the the Live Caller ID Extension - if data is written to group defaults for example (as opposed to standard defaults) by the app, then that data isn't readable by the Caller ID extension. This has the consequence that its not possible for a user to dynamically switch which data set the extension connects to. Consider the use case where the Live Caller ID Server has one data set where callers are not blocked, and another where they are blocked, then the caller id extension can route different requests to different datasets based on the "user tier". However as the extension can't read data from the shared group then the app can't communicate user preferences to the extension, therefore the switching isn't possible. Is this by design or due to the immaturity of the feature? If its by design, then it means the use case outlined above isn't possible, and thus greatly reduces the possible functionality of the Live Caller Id feature. (It would be possible for the app to install multiple extensions, each of which connects to a different data set by specifying a different user tier, but the user having to flip these one and off within the Settings app is a dreadful user experience).

A Notification Service Extension is one of the more capable extensions, and there's a lot that can be done within it (for example, it can invoke a Call Extension). However its not possible to use a Contact Provider Extension within it. If a CPE has been enabled by the main app, then if a push is sent to the NSE, then within the NSE the ContactProviderManager class reports that the CPE is disabled and its not possible to anything with it. For example a call to ContactProviderManager.signalEnumerator() will hang and not complete. I was hoping to create a contact and make it available to the system on receipt of a push, but this isn't going to possible. Is this intentional and by design, or just due to the immaturity of this feature/iOS beta? The documentation of a Contact provider Extension says: "signalEnumerator() An example of using this call is to handle a push notification to your app when the provided contacts from your server update" It therefore seems strange that the main cited use case for ContactProviderManager.signalEnumerator() isn't actually possible if the push is delivered to an extension rather than the app.

I've been following the instructions on how to set up Live Caller ID Lookup using the example PIRService. And I have been successful - I'm managed to get name information and images retrieved and displayed on the call screen, in addition to being able to block numbers via PIRService too. So while I did get it working, it was, and still is, incredibly painful to do so due to the fact it only works about 1% of the time. There's two main problems, which look like they're different manifestations of the same issue. The first problem is difficulty enabling the Live CallerID lookup feature via the flip switch in the iPhone's settings, and then the second issue is when this has been enabled, then a phone number's details is being attempted to be retrieved. There's a lot, a very lot, of timeout issues being reported by CallKit logging i.e.: configure failed Error Domain=com.apple.CipherML Code=1100 "Unable to query status due to errors: The request timed out." UserInfo={NSLocalizedDescription=Unable to query status due to errors: The request timed out., NSUnderlyingError=0xd98344450 {Error Domain=NSURLErrorDomain Code=-1001 "The request timed out." UserInfo={NSLocalizedDescription=The request timed out., NSErrorFailingURLKey=http://192.168.1.100:8080/issue}}} When this occurs I can see that the request is getting through to the PIRService as it outputs logging to the Mac console: 2024-07-28T09:33:15-0700 info Hummingbird : [HummingbirdCore] Server started and listening on 0.0.0.0:8080 2024-07-28T09:33:37-0700 info Hummingbird : hb_id=5e0330c893af6a98c20e5100fdb26871 hb_method=GET hb_uri=/.well-known/private-token-issuer-directory [Hummingbird] Request 2024-07-28T09:33:37-0700 info Hummingbird : hb_id=5e0330c893af6a98c20e5100fdb26872 hb_method=GET hb_uri=/token-key-for-user-token [Hummingbird] Request So it would appear that requests are getting through to PIRService but then something is timing out after that. Could that be the PrivacyPass/Homomorphic Encryption stuff? Or something else? What could be a cause of this instability, and is there anything that can be done to increase reliability of it? (Xcode 16 beta 4, iOS 18 developer beta 4, Sonoma 14.5, the iPhone(s) being tested are connected to the Mac via usb cable, running on the same Wifi network).

Hello I work for a company which is not itself a carrier, however we develop applications on behalf of carriers (the relationship between us and several large household name US carriers has existed for many years). The applications that we develop typically need carrier and/or special entitlements, for example: com.apple.CommCenter.fine-grained/public-subscriber-info com.apple.developer.coretelephony.sim-inserted com.apple.developer.pushkit.unrestricted-voip com.apple.developer.usernotifications.filtering com.apple.developer.associated-domains Obtaining those entitlements for the carrier applications that are released to the App Store is itself not a problem as the customers apply for them and they are duly granted and applied to the applications. However, what is a problem is working around the strict Apple development and distribution requirements and limitations, and the consequences that has given that the apps don't belong to our Apple account but the customers. Typically, a customer would provide us a developer certificate and set of provisioning profiles, but they would keep the distribution certificate and do the TestFlight/App Store release themselves. There's two limitations that come into play here, the first is that we can't distribute the app to TestFlight and secondly, we can only install the customer's apps on hardware registered with their Apple account. Given how the limitation for that is 100 in total, and these are large companies, they just don't have slots available and hence we might have a single device on which their app can run. These are very severe limitations given the complex nature of the applications and the need to have several developers/testers involved, which isn't possible. To mitigate those limitations we have "mirror" versions of customers' apps, these are apps which are identical to the customer apps except they have bundle ids registered to our Apple account. This enables the apps to be developed by any number of developers and distributed via Testfight and hence to any number of testers. But the problem is, the functionality of the mirror apps is severely reduced due to the fact they don't have the entitlements of the customers' apps. To get to the point of the post - I would like to know if there any potential solutions to this? For example: could it be possible for our mirror applications to be granted required entitlements (given the relationships we have with the customers. I'm sure the customers could vouch for us as a company and the need for this) could the entitlements be granted if we switched the mirror apps over to an Enterprise account (as enterprise apps can't be released to the App Store)? any other technical options or suggestions? Thank you

I've followed the instructions to configure and launch a live caller id test service (https://swiftpackageindex.com/apple/live-caller-id-lookup-example/main/documentation/pirservice/testinginstructions) i.e. I've constructed a database, built and installed the PIRService etc. Additionally I have created a test app with a Live Caller ID Extension. The problem I'm facing is when turning on the Live Caller ID feature on an iPhone (the Settings|Apps|Phone|Call Blocking & Identification|Live CallerID Lookup switch) with iOS 18 Beta 4 is the phone logs: "The request timed out." UserInfo={NSLocalizedDescription=The request timed out., NSErrorFailingURLKey=http://MacBook-Pro.local:8080/.well-known/private-token-issuer-directory The configuration notes say: "When running things locally on your Mac, and your testing device is on the same network, then you can use mDNS to let the device find your Mac. Let’s assume that your Mac’s hostname is Tims-MacBook-Pro.local. Then we should use the following value for the URLs: http://Tims-Macbook-Pro.local:8080. Thanks to the mDNS protocol your device should be able to resolve your hostname to the actual IP address of your Mac and make the connection." My Mac hostname is "MacBook-Pro" therefore the Live Caller ID Extension is configured as: LiveCallerIDLookupExtensionContext( serviceURL: URL(string: "http://MacBook-Pro.local:8080")!, tokenIssuerURL: URL(string: "http://MacBook-Pro.local:8080")!, userTierToken: Data(base64Encoded: "BBBB")! ) And the service-config.json is configured as: { "issuerRequestUri": "http://MacBook-Pro.local:8080", "users": [ <snip> (I've also tried excluding the issuerRequestUri as the instructions say "This value can be omitted from the configuration. Setting this explicitly will not be required for devices using iOS 18.0 beta 4 or later.") And the PIR Service is started on the Mac as: PIRService --hostname 0.0.0.0 service-config.json And it starts and runs. The iPhone and Mac are on the same Wifi network and connected by usb cable. As far as I can tell, everything has been set up in accordance with the Testing Live Caller ID instructions, yet I get the error when attempting to enable the extension on the iPhone. Is there something missing/incorrectly configured?

With iOS 18 there are now five ways for a caller to be blocked/silenced: the caller can be blocked via the Live Caller ID extension the caller can be blocked via the Call Kit extension the caller can be blocked via Block Caller via the call history recents the call could be silenced via Silence Junk Callers the call could be silenced via Silence Unknown Callers These are all totally separate and there's no way of reconciling all of them and presenting a holistic overview and management system to the user. Call blocking applications have no way of knowing which numbers will be blocked by 3) or silenced by 4) or 5), or even of determining 4) and 5) are enabled. And iOS doesn't indicate to users what will be blocked by 1) or 2). Currently users have no way of knowing what's been blocked/silenced where. Neither via call blocking apps nor via the OS. From users' perspectives its a confusing and frustrating mess. If the OS exposed which numbers have been blocked via 3) to applications and exposed if Silence Unknown Callers and Silence Junk Callers are enabled then call blocking applications could present a unified way for users to see and manage what's going on with their device holistically.

If an app has a Live Caller ID Lookup extension and the lookup server indicates that a caller is identified and not blocked, then if the user wished to locally block that number they can do so either via the iPhone call block button, or via the app's Call Extension block list. However there's apparently no way for the user to do the inverse. i.e. if Live Caller Id Lookup indicated that a number should be blocked, then how could a user indicate they don't want that number blocked for them? If they added it to the Call Extension as an identified number, but live lookup is saying the number should be blocked, then what does the OS do? Give priority to the blocking instruction from the live lookup server, or give priority to the fact its in the Call Extension's Identified list?

If using Xcode beta 16 beta 4, a target type of Contact Provider Extension is created, then the auto-generated template code has errors right off the bat. Compiler be like what in the dickens is this?: class ContactProviderExtension: ContactProviderExtension