Hi Apple Developer Community, I'm trying to resolve the following Xcode build error: *"Provisioning profile 'iOS Team Provisioning Profile: ' doesn't include the com.apple.developer.live-activities entitlement." To fix this, I understand I need to add the Live Activity capability to my App ID and ensure it’s included in the provisioning profile. However, when I go to Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles, select my App ID, and click Edit under "App ID Configuration," the Live Activity capability is not available in the list of capabilities. As a result, I can’t proceed with enabling the entitlement or regenerating a correct provisioning profile. I’ve confirmed: My App ID is explicit (not a wildcard). The app’s deployment target is set to iOS 16.1 or later. I’m signed in with the correct Apple Developer Team account. etc. Has anyone experienced this? Is there a prerequisite that I might be missing? Thanks in advance for your help! Best regards, David Winograd Rokfin, Inc.

Hi everyone, Has anyone seen notarization behave like this? We have one specific app (let’s call it App A) with a Network Extension system extension. Whenever we submit App A for notarization: • Its submission stays “In Progress” indefinitely • The provisioning profile for its system extension becomes Invalid on its own • All our other apps suddenly fail notarization • And the whole team immediately gets: StatusCode 7000 – “Team is not yet configured for notarization.” Apple Support restored notarization once(Case 102738171569), and we confirmed other apps notarize fine — until we submit App A again, which instantly triggers the same team-wide block. This cycle has repeated twice. We verified: • Hardened runtime • Proper system extension signing • No private API usage • No get-task-allow • No ATS violations What’s confusing is that this doesn’t look like a normal notarization rejection. Normal failures don’t invalidate provisioning profiles or disable notarization for the entire team. It feels more like an automated security heuristic or misclassification. My questions: 1. Can a single app or system extension trigger an automated team-wide notarization disable? 2. Can an entitlement or NE configuration issue cause StatusCode 7000 instead of a standard rejection? 3. If this could be a false positive, is there a specific team at Apple who can manually review/clear it? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

I've been trying to have an app I've built notarized by Apple. The processing hangs there for hours just waiting. I even tried with a tiny 1KB test file, it has been stuck for 25+ minutes, and I have 7 real submissions stuck for 24+ hours. Any Apple representative can help please? I need to publish and release my app asap.

I got an email with the subject "Action Needed: Developer ID Application Certificate Expires in 30 Days" But on the cert page it's not exactly clear to my how to renew the cert or generate a new one. Confused by the fact that I already have half a dozen ...somehow? Any help or guidance appreciated.

I have a free developer account, and I have been creating applications. When I tried to open one of them, it said that this app has been flagged as malware. It is not malware, so I don't know why it has been flagged as this. Not just this app, but suddenly a whole bunch of my apps have been flagged as malware as well! The app I have been developing is basically a windows Taskbar for my macbook air, and it has been working well until the latest update i made where it hides in full screen, suddenly it started taking up significant energy, so i reverted to an older version while i was fixing it. Then, when i try to open it another time, it starts to open, and it says "Malware Blocked and Moved to Bin" “Taskbar.app” was not opened because it contains malware. This action did not harm your Mac”. All versions of the taskbar now contain this message. I try opening some of my other apps, a shared storage client and a shared storage server (where i was testing with app groups), and they couldn't open either, the same malware message appeared. ProPermission couldn't open either (changes permissions on files for me so i don't have to use the terminal or finder). I can run these apps through the Xcode environment (attached process), but when I archieve it into an app bundle, the malware flag appears. Please note that I am certain that these apps do not contain malware, apparently XProtect has incorrectly flagged my apps as malware. Because I do not have the paid developer account, I cannot notarize my apps. I am using MacOS Tahoe 26.1 with Xcode 26.0, and I have tested it with a iMac Intel 2017 with MacOS Ventura.

Hello, My project fails to build/run on a physical device or archive, due to a persistent provisioning error. Exact Error: Provisioning profile "iOS Team Provisioning Profile: com.huiwan.Ohra-Journal" doesn't include the BGTaskSchedulerPermittedIdentifiers entitlement. I have already performed extensive troubleshooting, and all local configurations appear to be correct: Capabilities: "Background Modes" with the "Background processing" option is enabled in the target's "Signing & Capabilities" tab. Info.plist: The Permitted background task scheduler identifiers key is present in the target's Info.plist, and it contains the correct task identifier (com.huiwan.ohra-journal.refresh). Entitlements File: The .entitlements file is correctly configured by Xcode. Full Reset: I have tried a complete reset procedure, including deleting ~/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData and ~/Library/MobileDevice/Provisioning Profiles/, restarting Xcode, and letting the automatic signing system regenerate the profile from scratch. The issue persists. Despite all these correct local settings, the provisioning profile automatically generated by Xcode is consistently missing the required entitlement. This strongly suggests a server-side issue with the provisioning service for my App ID (com.huiwan.Ohra-Journal). I filed a bug report on the Feedback Assistant (FB20268285) a week ago but have not received a response. This issue is completely blocking my development and ability to submit the app. Could you please investigate the status of my App ID and the provisioning services associated with it? Thank you.

Hello, I sent this in as a feedback several weeks ago about watchOS 26.2 beta 2 but since the issue is still active now that watchOS 26.2 is in production I'm reposting here for the community. I would also like to submit a DTS about this issue but honestly don't know the best way to go about it and would appreciate advice about that. There seems to be an issue with VPP distribution for our app on watchOS 26.2. When our watchOS companion app is launched after being installed through VPP to a supervised iPhone, it encounters a dyld error before main() or any application code is even called. The same app launches correctly in every other circumstance we could imagine and test: – Installed through VPP on supervised devices running watchOS 26.1. – Installed from the app store (using an apple id) on a supervised iPhone and paired watch running iOS 26.2 / watchOS 26.2. – Installed through Testflight on a supervised iPhone and paired watch running iOS 26.2 / watchOS 26.2. – Installed through the app store on unsupervised devices running watchOS 26.1 and 26.2. This strongly appears to be a VPP signing issue because we even did the following experiment: Install iPhone and Watch apps through the App Store on a supervised device pair running public iOS 26.2 beta 2 / watchOS 26.2 beta 2. Verify that both apps launch successfully. Use an MDM command to install from VPP over the existing installations Verify that the watch app fails to launch (the iOS app is unaffected) My feedback included some crash logs which I won't be reposting publicly here. Any feedback or ideas appreciated.

Hello, I've developed an application using Electron with JAVACRIPT. I have managed to deploy to both Windows and the web but having trouble deploying the application to my Mac users. It's my first time deploying an application for Mac but feel like I'm stuck at the last hurdle and out of ideas so I'm reaching out for help. My application is successfully signing but during the build and when my Notarize.js is running it seems to get stuck indefinitely. I can check and see the status of the Notarize attempts but they seem to be stuck "In Progress". Here are the logs. Successfully received submission history. history -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-06T00:59:45.245Z id: 1dc39b5f-fdca-4bf2-a6f6-fa793de2786e name: Popcorn-1.0.0.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-04T08:01:36.168Z id: c575b015-edd6-4e09-8da5-7ae09f4f67db name: Popcorn-1.0.0.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-03T08:30:31.528Z id: 570ae540-8cce-4418-ab09-7f6be33dc245 name: Popcorn-1.0.0.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-03T07:57:56.701Z id: 42748de8-026a-4663-9fd2-88c7608588d3 name: Popcorn-1.0.0.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-03T06:30:19.569Z id: 5140caa0-df14-491a-b148-82015f9856da name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-03T05:56:28.916Z id: 535c6be1-4999-4b3e-9766-42512a8deb67 name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-03T02:51:04.893Z id: ead2268c-62b2-4b4b-8850-c1cdb5313d6a name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-03T01:50:51.954Z id: d0c44281-a788-4704-a057-4620d284516d name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-03T00:48:54.445Z id: 3d13727c-06a3-49d7-902b-4001522107c3 name: Popcorn-1.0.0.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T13:35:26.715Z id: 1823a550-a9ff-467a-8a60-dd3e42305258 name: Popcorn-1.0.0.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T13:23:41.894Z id: cbc341a2-9a51-43d6-83ae-713443c84fec name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T12:21:44.561Z id: 1af34419-655f-49b8-bea0-05b4232c46a7 name: Popcorn-1.0.0.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T11:34:03.732Z id: 8c4ab3b5-2ea9-4220-9667-94011bcf76fb name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T11:19:16.052Z id: 093dfb8a-9058-417d-acd3-8ea5d0bb654a name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T11:13:14.676Z id: 556b7c1c-d114-4717-b0f7-4f1614ada845 name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T10:52:36.834Z id: ce3d3c8a-d218-4978-8757-2ca9d12aad76 name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T09:27:13.535Z id: b65ec764-baab-444d-809b-e4242d70548b name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T09:27:01.176Z id: be228acc-e6a2-48f2-937b-5b2962275052 name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T09:19:19.182Z id: d99fc10b-c424-4d0c-a2aa-37a9e9165d91 name: Popcorn-1.0.0.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T08:55:43.064Z id: 2e7f8df7-9c0b-4dd0-8df7-8f3428c0bfa0 name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T08:19:48.676Z id: 678355da-e413-4b1a-92a8-776a6ff6a055 name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T07:58:48.278Z id: 8591f8d7-1d57-4e80-af90-d77190160a20 name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T07:54:41.193Z id: f029dfeb-3f14-4f65-83e2-d9356ef6ac00 name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T07:27:50.613Z id: 574f2563-d533-4885-947a-2f57170196af name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T07:09:54.203Z id: 589f7f3a-d231-4911-8ad6-9d2c15a61ac0 name: popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T05:39:02.574Z id: 9edd43de-6d14-4743-87fc-ab570bee7399 name: Popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T04:36:12.342Z id: ba02116d-1aad-4521-8667-ad086b14c1cb name: Popcorn.zip status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-02T03:22:49.185Z id: b8585c81-b7f5-4c35-9bd6-62157c6ce4bc name: Popcorn.zip status: In Progress

Hey devs, I have a really weird issue and at this point I cannot determine is it a Big Sur 11.1 or M1 issue or just some macOS settings issue. Short description programatically (from node, electron) I'd like to store x509 cert to keychain. I got the following error message: SecTrustSettingsSetTrustSettings: The authorization was denied since no user interaction was possible. (1) I could reproduce this issue on: a brand new mac mini with M1 chip and Big Sur 11.1 another brand new mac mini with M1 chip and Big Sur 11.1 a 2018 MacBook pro with Intel chip and Big Sur 11.1 I couldn't reproduce this issue on: 2020 MacBook pro with intel i9 chip and Big Sur 11.1 2020 MacBook pro with intel i9 chip and Big Sur 11.0 How am I trying to store the cert node test.js test.js const { exec } = require('child_process') exec( 	`osascript -e 'do shell script "security add-trusted-cert -d -r trustRoot -k /Library/Keychains/System.keychain /Users/kotapeter/ssl/testsite.local.crt" with prompt "Test APP wants to store SSL certification to keychain." with administrator privileges'`, 	(error, stdout, stderr) => { 		if (error) { 			console.log(error.stack) 			console.log(`Error code: ${error.code}`) 			console.log(`Signal received: ${error.signal}`) 		} 		console.log(`STDOUT: ${stdout}`) 		console.log(`STDERR: ${stderr}`) 		process.exit(1) 	} ) testsite.local.crt: ----BEGIN CERTIFICATE MIIDUzCCAjugAwIBAgIUD9xMnL73y7fuida5TXgmklLswsowDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEL BQAwGTEXMBUGA1UEAwwOdGVzdHNpdGUubG9jYWwwHhcNMjEwMTE3MTExODU1WhcN NDEwMTEyMTExODU1WjAZMRcwFQYDVQQDDA50ZXN0c2l0ZS5sb2NhbDCCASIwDQYJ KoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBANM08SDi06dvnyU1A6//BeEFd8mXsOpD QCbYEHX/Pz4jqaBYwVjD5pG7FkvDeUKZnEVyrsofjZ4Y1WAT8jxPMUi+jDlgNTiF jPVc4rA6hcGX6b70HjsCACmc8bZd+EU7gm4b5eL6exTsVzHc+lFz4eQFXgutYTL7 guDQE/gFHwqPkLvnfg3rgY31p3Hm/snL8NuD154iE9O1WuSxEjik65uOQaewZmJ9 ejJEuuEhMA8O9dXveJ71TMV5lqA//svDxBu3zXIxMqRy2LdzfROd+guLP6ZD3jUy cWi7GpF4yN0+rD/0aXFJVHzV6TpS9oqb14jynvn1AyVfBB9+VQVNwTsCAwEAAaOB kjCBjzAJBgNVHRMEAjAAMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIC9DA7BgNVHSUENDAyBggrBgEFBQcD AQYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMDBggrBgEFBQcDBAYIKwYBBQUHAwgwHQYDVR0O BBYEFDjAC2ObSbB59XyLW1YaD7bgY8ddMBkGA1UdEQQSMBCCDnRlc3RzaXRlLmxv Y2FsMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBCwUAA4IBAQBsU6OA4LrXQIZDXSIZPsDhtA7YZWzbrpqP ceXPwBd1k9Yd9T83EdA00N6eoOWFzwnQqwqKxtYdl3x9JQ7ewhY2huH9DRtCGjiT m/GVU/WnNm4tUTuGU4FyjSTRi8bNUxTSF5PZ0U2/vFZ0d7T43NbLQAiFSxyfC1r6 qjKQCYDL92XeU61zJxesxy5hxVNrbDpbPnCUZpx4hhL0RHgG+tZBOlBuW4eq249O 0Ql+3ShcPom4hzfh975385bfwfUT2s/ovng67IuM9bLSWWe7U+6HbOEvzMIiqK94 YYPmOC62cdhOaZIJmro6lL7eFLqlYfLU4H52ICuntBxvOx0UBExn----END CERTIFICATE testsite.local.key: ----BEGIN RSA PRIVATE KEY MIIEpQIBAAKCAQEA0zTxIOLTp2+fJTUDr/8F4QV3yZew6kNAJtgQdf8/PiOpoFjB WMPmkbsWS8N5QpmcRXKuyh+NnhjVYBPyPE8xSL6MOWA1OIWM9VzisDqFwZfpvvQe OwIAKZzxtl34RTuCbhvl4vp7FOxXMdz6UXPh5AVeC61hMvuC4NAT+AUfCo+Qu+d+ DeuBjfWnceb+ycvw24PXniIT07Va5LESOKTrm45Bp7BmYn16MkS64SEwDw711e94 nvVMxXmWoD/+y8PEG7fNcjEypHLYt3N9E536C4s/pkPeNTJxaLsakXjI3T6sP/Rp cUlUfNXpOlL2ipvXiPKe+fUDJV8EH35VBU3BOwIDAQABAoIBAQDDGLJsiFqu3gMK IZCIcHCDzcM7Kq43l2uY9hkuhltrERJNle70CfHgSAtubOCETtT1qdwfxUnR8mqX 15T5dMW3xpxNG7vNvD/bHrQfyc9oZuV6iJGsPEreJaV5qg/+E9yFzatrIam0SCS7 YL6xovPU58hZzQxuRbo95LetcT2dSBY33+ttY7ayV/Lx7k6nh0xU6RmTPHyyr8m7 yHpoJoSxdT/xv5iBSZ8mM9/2Vzhr14SWipVuwVVhDSfbn8ngHpIoQDkaJLMpWr+m 4z3PqfftAwR6s6i96HnhYLnRir618TQh4B9IEngeEwCMn4XAzE3L+VTaKU1hg9el aMfXzPERAoGBAPa+sJ2p9eQsv0vCUUL8KeRWvwjDZRTd+YAIfpLMWrb0tMmrBM4V V0L2joF76kdDxt1SAlHoYCT/3Rn8EPmK0TN3MEskiXQ7v57iv+LZOZcpe0ppG/4A ZihF9+wUjFCDw4ymnRQD463535O6BgZV+rcZksFRD2AwvEjt1nYm93VXAoGBANsh AYM+FPmMnzebUMB0oGIkNkE9nVb9MPbQYZjEeOeHJqmt1Nl6xLuYBWTmWwCy7J4e QPtnuMCdO6C1kuOGjQPBFIpeyFMzll+E3hKzicumgCpt5U8nTZoKc/jZckRD7n3p lbYYgHOR3A/3GCDK5L3rwziWpSRAGMSCQylvkOC9AoGBAKLfZL3t/r3LO8rKTdGl mhF7oUYrlIGdtJ/q+4HzGr5B8URdeyJ9u8gb8B1Qqmi4OIDHLXjbpvtFWbFZTesq 0sTiHCK9z23GMsqyam9XbEh3vUZ082FK6iQTa3+OYMCU+XPSV0Vq+9NPaWGeHXP5 NTG/07t/wmKASQjq1fHP7vCpAoGBAK4254T4bqSYcF09Vk4savab46aq3dSzJ6KS uYVDbvxkLxDn6zmcqZybmG5H1kIP/p8XXoKCTBiW6Tk0IrxR1PsPHs2D3bCIax01 /XjQ1NTcYzlYdd8gWEoH1XwbJQWxHINummBTyowXguYOhVhM9t8n+eWbn1/atdZF 2i+vS3fhAoGAYKw6rkJfTSEswgBKlQFJImxVA+bgKsEwUti1aBaIA2vyIYWDeV10 G8hlUDlxvVkfwCJoy5zz6joGGO/REhqOkMbFRPseA50u2NQVuK5C+avUXdcILJHN zp0nC5eZpP1TC++uCboJxo5TIdbLL7GRwQfffgALRBpK12Vijs195cc=----END RSA PRIVATE KEY What I've already found If I run the following command from terminal It asks my password first in terminal and after that It asks my password again in OS password prompt. sudo security add-trusted-cert -d -r trustRoot -k /Library/Keychains/System.keychain /Users/kotapeter/ssl/testsite.local.crt It looks like I'm getting the above error message because osascript hides the second password asking dialog. The cert always gets stored in keychain but when I get the error message the cert "Trust" value is not "Always Trust". References StackOverflow question: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/65699160/electron-import-x509-cert-to-local-keychain-macos-the-authorization-was-deni opened issue on sudo-prompt electron package: https://github.com/jorangreef/sudo-prompt/issues/137

My app uses a Provisioning Profile (as it bundles up a Network System Extension). I do not use "Automatically manage signing" as its causes code signing/deployment issues 🤷‍♂️ In Xcode (version 26), if I enable " Enhanced Security" and check "Enable Hardware Memory Tagging", Xcode states: Provisioning profile "<>" doesn't include the com.apple.security.hardened-process.checked-allocations and com.apple.security.hardened-process.checked-allocations.soft-mode entitlements. Normally to resolve such errors one simply adds the Capability in "Edit your App ID Configuration" and then regenerates the Provisioning Profile. However, I don't see any such capability to would add these entitlements? (I thought "Hardened Process" would be the one - but alas, no). Clicking the "for more information" link in Xcode to view the relevant(?) "Apple Developer Documentation" generates another error 😵‍💫 Didn't see anything in: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/enabling-enhanced-security-for-your-app

Hey, Just recently I realized something I have been overlooking in my build pipelines. I thought that by adding the the "hardened runtime", I disable 3rd-party library injection (I do not have the disable-library-validation entitlement added). However, I was using some checks on my code and I noticed that the "library validation" code signature check fails on my applications (e.g. adding the .libraryValidation requirement via the LightweightCodeRequirements framework) - with codesign -dvvvv /path/to/app I can check it doesn't have the CS_REQUIRE_LV flag: [...] CodeDirectory v=20500 size=937 flags=0x10000(runtime) hashes=18+7 location=embedded [...] then I used in Xcode the "Other Code Signing Flags" setting and added the -o library option, which added the flag: [...] CodeDirectory v=20500 size=937 flags=0x12000(library-validation,runtime) hashes=18+7 location=embedded [...] Is this flag something I should be explicitly setting? Because I was under the impression enabling hardened runtime would be enough. Popular Developer ID distributed applications (e.g. Google Chrome, Parallels Desktop, Slack) all have this flag set.

Its just stuck in progress. $ xcrun notarytool history --keychain-profile X Successfully received submission history. history -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-07-21T16:46:13.233Z id: X name: X.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-07-20T18:44:35.683Z id: X name: X.dmg status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-07-20T11:24:20.319Z id: X name: X.dmg status: In Progress Its a go app; not simple but not very complicated. It is my first time notarising but even then should it take this long?? 3 days is ridiculous!

Hi - appreciate your help in advance! Building a simple habit tracking app. I got approval for FamilyControls distribution. After creating a new provisioning profile with those capabilities enabled, when I try and build in xcode (16.4) using that Profile I get an error stating: "Provisioning profile "CreateMoreFamilyControlsv2" doesn't include the com.apple.developer.deviceactivity and com.apple.developer.deviceactivity.reporting entitlements" I've confirmed bundle identifier matches, Team etc Similarly when i do automatic signing see 3rd screenshot. Not sure what to do at this point, I've heard deviceActivity is automatically applied when family controls is approved but still running into this issue.

Okay, I just pushed a release and notarized. Works great on my test laptop (macOS 26.2) and my test desktop (macOS 14.x) But it seems to fail for a friend who's running macOS 15. I've been using the same GitHub actions successfully for months. How can notarization work for macOS 14 and 26, but not for macOS 15? I think everything looks okay as far as the signing? I've checked codesign -dvv Executable=/Applications/Avogadro2.app/Contents/MacOS/Avogadro2 Identifier=cc.avogadro Format=app bundle with Mach-O thin (arm64) CodeDirectory v=20500 size=11607 flags=0x10000(runtime) hashes=352+7 location=embedded Signature size=8986 Authority=Developer ID Application: Geoffrey Hutchison (…..) Authority=Developer ID Certification Authority Authority=Apple Root CA Timestamp=Feb 5, 2026 at 8:47:21 PM Info.plist entries=24 TeamIdentifier=….. Runtime Version=15.5.0 Sealed Resources version=2 rules=13 files=3306 Internal requirements count=1 size=172 And from spctl -a -vv /Applications/Avogadro2.app: accepted source=Notarized Developer ID origin=Developer ID Application: Geoffrey Hutchison (….)

Team ID: MB9VR977ND We have changed apple developer account for the our application, after changing account we have submitted app for notarization multiple times but all showing in-progress without any logs. do we need to wait until this passed from apple side ? does submitting many request has any issue ? Submission id: 8c5ac51d-bcd3-4fc4-9b38-671e5ea2bf14

Hello, At work, we want to release a new version of our cross-platform desktop application this week. Unfortunately, I've had issues getting the dmg signed by the Apple notary service, which will delay the release until it's successful. However, I remade and successfully signed the previously released version (also dmg) with the same credentials, so I know it's not a problem with the file format or my account. I have tried the following to no avail: Lots of Googling Running xcrun notarytool submit with the -v option (verbose) to see more error messages Going to the URL given (appstoreconnect.apple.com/notary/v2/submissions/{submission_id}) and examining the file it downloaded (not much info, let alone helpful info) Contacting Apple developer support over the phone (they couldn't help with this particular issue, since it's "code-level support") The only big change we made this time was switching to Maven for our build tool and dependency management (we previously used Ant with manual dependency management). Does anyone here have any insight? Is there a list of known issues or dependencies that will cause a submission to be invalidated? Or, even better, any way to see why the submission is invalid? Thanks.

I am trying to notarize my first macOS app for direct distribution outside the Mac App Store using Developer ID Application signing. Team ID: 32S6XVAQPY Environment: macOS app distributed via Developer ID notarytool with a saved keychain profile archive exported locally, app zipped with ditto What I already verified locally: The archived app is signed with: Developer ID Application: (32S6XVAQPY) codesign --verify --deep --strict passes spctl shows: source=Unnotarized Developer ID syspolicy_check distribution only reports the expected missing notary ticket Hardened runtime is enabled The app bundle and nested Sparkle executables were re-signed and now have valid Developer ID signatures with secure timestamps Important note: I previously had a real signing issue in nested Sparkle binaries, and Apple rejected that submission quickly as Invalid. I fixed those signatures, and now new submissions no longer fail quickly but remain stuck In Progress. Submission IDs currently stuck: bea6c4b3-b107-4c81-8042-6c58b1cf5087 5489e29c-d583-4779-a125-ca0fbd9cad0b Earlier invalid submission with a concrete Sparkle signing error: 10df648b-eca8-428f-98d6-4cb4096153ad Apple reported invalid Developer ID / missing secure timestamp on: Sparkle.framework/Versions/B/Updater.app/Contents/MacOS/Updater Sparkle.framework/Versions/B/Autoupdate Sparkle.framework/Versions/B/XPCServices/Downloader.xpc/Contents/MacOS/Downloader Sparkle.framework/Versions/B/XPCServices/Installer.xpc/Contents/MacOS/Installer That Sparkle issue has since been fixed locally and re-verified. Question: Is there currently a notarization backlog or any known issue affecting first-time macOS notarizations or Developer ID submissions? At this point the remaining submissions appear valid locally but sit In Progress for a very long time.

Hello We have a pkg installer whose signing certificate is expiring next month. It has a trusted timestamp on it. As per https://developer.apple.com/support/certificates/ it states Developer ID Installer Certificate (Mac applications) If your certificate expires, users can still install packages that were signed with this certificate as long as the package includes a trusted timestamp. Previously installed apps will continue to run. However, new installations won’t be possible until you have re-signed your installer package with a valid Developer ID Installer certificate. If your certificate is revoked, users will no longer be able to install applications that have been signed with this certificate. Wanted to check on behavior for new installations post expiration date. Since the installer has a trusted timestamp we would not need to release a new installer with new cert ?? Any guidance here would be much appreciated.

I've already submitted multiple cases about this issue. My Family Controls Distribution request was apparently approved (or I was told via Developer Support) for my Device Activity extension, but the Distribution option still does not appear in the identifier. This is blocking my ability to distribute via TestFlight. I need someone who can update the identifier capabilities or explain why the approved capability is not showing.

In the LightweightCodeRequirements framework, there is a LaunchCodeRequirement object which can be used as a requirement object for a Process for example. What I don't understand (I admit my macOS low-level knowledge is limited) is that how can this be used in a secure way that doesn't fall victim of a Time-of-Check/Time-of-Use issue. e.g. I specify a LaunchCodeRequirement via Process.launchRequirement for my process, let's say /usr/local/bin/mycommandlinetool. The LaunchCodeRequirement specifies my development team and a developer ID certificate. The process must be started in some form, before a SecCode/SecTask object can be created, rather than a SecStaticCode object (which only guarantees its validity checks to be intact as long as the file is not modified). But if the process was started, then I have no tools in my set to prevent it from executing its initialization code or similar. Then, by the time I'm able to check via SecCode/SecTask functions the LaunchCodeRequirement, I might have already ran malicious code - if mycommandlinetool was maliciously replaced. Or does the operating system use a daemon to copy the executable specified for Process to a secure location, then creates the SecStaticCode object, assesses the LaunchCodeRequirement and if passed, launches the executable from that trusted location (which would make sure it is immutable for replacement by malicious actors)? I have a hard time understanding how this works under the hood - if I remember correctly these are private APIs.