Unexpected 4.3 (Spam) rejection for an fully original application

Please explain why the original application was rejected as spam if it is clearly not?

A spam rejection is probably based on the app category, not the source code. Apple doesn't have any access to the source, the backend, servers, or proprietary technology. But if it looks and acts like other apps, Apple might decide it doesn't need any more similar ones.

Is the initial review performed entirely by a human reviewer, or are automated systems also involved in identifying potential issues?

Apple uses both, see this press release.

There a lot of people who have gotten their app rejected for 4.3 Spam (a) or 4.3 Spam (b). One thing that's common in their cry for help is that

1. They don't write the exact statement for rejection.
2. They don't state the app description.
3. they don't show the list of keywords.

So nobody can assist them due to lack of information.

Thank you for your post. There are several factors that may contribute to an app not following App Review Guideline 4.3. Typically, these apps share a similar binary, metadata, and overall concept as apps already on the App Store, with only minor differences.

If you have questions about App Review's review of your app, we recommend requesting an appointment with App Review during the bi-weekly Meet with Apple event. Sign in with your Developer ID and select "App Review Appointment." A member of the App Review team will help you with your questions regarding the review process and the App Review Guidelines. Appointments are subject to availability during your local business hours on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

Thank you for your response. But your response constitutes slander. You have not provided a genuine reason for rejecting the publication. We ask you to conduct a manual, objective review of the appeal and state the actual reason.

We have provided objective evidence that the application is unique and does not constitute spam.

Our mesh VPN with smart L3 routing is a unique product on the market, without any analogs. Our entire codebase is proprietary and developed in-house.

Our app is architecturally different in several fundamental ways:

• A mesh network topology. Users connect to the nearest datacenter as an entry node, after which every request is routed across our private mesh network to the optimal exit datacenter.
• Our own infrastructure. Every node runs on self-hosted bare-metal Kubernetes clusters fully operated by our company.
• Per-request runtime routing - unique feature in the market. Instead of tunneling all traffic through a single fixed exit node, our platform dynamically selects the routing path and exit point for every individual request at runtime.
• A closed, proprietary transport protocol developed in-house.
• A custom UX/UI designed exclusively for our app and not derived from any existing VPN application.
• Our project and brand have been under continuous development since 2022.

These facts are sufficient to establish that the app is original. Your refusal is unjustified, and you have not provided a valid reason. An unfounded refusal is a subjective decision to block publication that causes financial loss to our company.

Lack of factual basis The rejection states that the application shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept with applications submitted by other developers. However, no specific application, binary, metadata, functionality, design element, or other factual basis has been identified. Without this information, we are unable to understand the alleged violation or take any corrective action.

We respectfully request that you either:

• identify the specific factual basis for the Guideline 4.3(a) determination, including the application(s) believed to be substantially similar; or
• approve the application if no such factual basis exists.

I hope you find a solution. I'm on the same page. Submitted my critical bug fix update v2.0.6 of my app and it was only 3 minutes in review before getting rejected out of nowhere for the same reason. No clarification at all. They rejected a bug fix for design spam. Since then no movement at all, it has become frustrating.