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.

General: Forums topic: Code Signing Forums subtopics: Code Signing > General, Code Signing > Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles, Code Signing > Notarization, Code Signing > Entitlements Forums tags: Code Signing, Signing Certificates, Provisioning Profiles, Entitlements Developer Account Help — This document is good in general but, in particular, the Reference section is chock-full of useful information, including the names and purposes of all certificate types issued by Apple Developer web site, tables of which capabilities are supported by which distribution models on iOS and macOS, and information on how to use managed capabilities. Developer > Support > Certificates covers some important policy issues Bundle Resources > Entitlements documentation TN3125 Inside Code Signing: Provisioning Profiles — This includes links to the other technotes in the Inside Code Signing series. WWDC 2021 Session 10204 Distribute apps in Xcode with cloud signing Certificate Signing Requests Explained forums post --deep Considered Harmful forums post Don’t Run App Store Distribution-Signed Code forums post Resolving errSecInternalComponent errors during code signing forums post Finding a Capability’s Distribution Restrictions forums post Signing code with a hardware-based code-signing identity forums post New Capabilities Request Tab in Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles forums post Isolating Code Signing Problems from Build Problems forums post Investigating Third-Party IDE Code-Signing Problems forums post Determining if an entitlement is real forums post Code Signing Identifiers Explained forums post Mac code signing: Forums tag: Developer ID Creating distribution-signed code for macOS documentation Packaging Mac software for distribution documentation Placing Content in a Bundle documentation Embedding nonstandard code structures in a bundle documentation Embedding a command-line tool in a sandboxed app documentation Signing a daemon with a restricted entitlement documentation Defining launch environment and library constraints documentation WWDC 2023 Session 10266 Protect your Mac app with environment constraints TN2206 macOS Code Signing In Depth archived technote — This doc has mostly been replaced by the other resources linked to here but it still contains a few unique tidbits and it’s a great historical reference. Manual Code Signing Example forums post The Care and Feeding of Developer ID forums post TestFlight, Provisioning Profiles, and the Mac App Store forums post For problems with notarisation, see Notarisation Resources. For problems with the trusted execution system, including Gatekeeper, see Trusted Execution Resources. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com"

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.

All of my notarization submissions have been stuck at "In Progress" for up to 10 days. I have 6 submissions spanning from March 4 to March 11, 2026, and none of them have completed or returned any errors. Affected submissions: dbf20b57-0073-444a-b09a-ac6747b7398e (submitted Mar 4) — In Progress d5886683-be64-455c-805d-cd8b12bbcd35 (submitted Mar 4) — In Progress 10bfa709-da17-49cf-9c89-63f93b5fb756 (submitted Mar 4) — In Progress e8d0866e-43f8-4a18-8129-64e6c5d3895a (submitted Mar 9) — In Progress f9526f25-5650-4c45-98ae-d778c58a2ffa (submitted Mar 9) — In Progress 82ec211f-9179-41fd-afe0-937c9b2c2750 (submitted Mar 11) — In Progress Running `notarytool log` returns "Submission log is not yet available." Team ID: CB4U5M6U9H It is an Electron-based app built with electron-builder. Steps taken to ensure compliance: Signed with a valid Developer ID Application certificate Hardened runtime enabled (hardenedRuntime: true) Proper entitlements configured (com.apple.security.cs.allow-jit, com.apple.security.cs.allow-unsigned-executable-memory, com.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation) Entitlements inherited for child processes via entitlements.mac.inherit.plist Electron Fuses configured to disable Node.js CLI flags in production (resetAdHocDarwinSignature enabled) App submitted as a zip archive via notarytool submit I've tried resubmitting multiple times across different builds, but all submissions remain stuck. I also have an open support case (102836201208) that was escalated to Senior Advisors on March 11, but have not received any update. Could someone from the notarization team please investigate?

Since 2026-03-17 09:06 UTC, all notarization submissions for one of our teams are stuck in "In Progress" indefinitely. Submission logs return "not yet available", indicating Apple's backend has not started processing. Sample submission IDs: 789d40c4-ff83-469f-9b9b-2ac93183125e 2d4685ed-56ac-49db-8e38-63f0b15650c1 5dc3f242-0add-4725-8386-bb32f8383240 18+ submissions affected. Hundreds of successful notarizations before this date with no issues. Please advise or check backend queue status.

I’m looking for guidance on a notarization submission that has been stuck in In Progress for over 24 hours. Details: Team ID: 94B7AVM73F Certificate: Developer ID Application: Bilal Ahmed Qureshi (94B7AVM73F) Tool: xcrun notarytool File: FlashcardGeneratorTrial-AppleSilicon.dmg Submission ID: 7817f9d0-32da-452f-9e2d-fff43478ccf6 Submission created: 2026-04-17T22:10:01.402Z Current status: xcrun notarytool info still reports In Progress This has now been ongoing for more than 24 hours The submission uploaded successfully and received a valid submission ID The Developer ID certificate is valid and correctly paired with the private key in Keychain security find-identity -v -p codesigning returns 1 valid identity Environment: First-time notarization on this developer account macOS direct distribution outside the Mac App Store DMG signed with Developer ID Application certificate Hardened runtime and timestamp enabled during signing I’ve seen some other recent reports of long notarization delays, especially for first-time submissions, so I’m trying to understand whether this is expected queueing / in-depth analysis, or whether there may be an issue with this specific submission. Questions: Is this normal for a first notarization on a new Developer ID account? Is there anything I should do besides wait? Can Apple check whether this submission is stuck in the queue? Thanks.

Hello, we are currently encountering a similar issue. We need to inject our capabilities into a third-party app by re-signing it (not a full re-signing process—just requiring the provisioning profile and certificate to match). However, this seems to affect the functionality of universal links. We've found that this issue only occurs on iOS 18. We noticed that when re-signing the app, the entitlements related to associated domains are changed to a wildcard: [Key] com.apple.developer.associated-domains [Value] [Array] [String] * However, this doesn’t cause any issues on iOS 17. Through further testing, we discovered that in order for universal links to work properly, we need to restore the original value of com.apple.developer.associated-domains and use a provisioning profile that matches the app's bundle ID. This means our previous re-signing approach using a certificate and provisioning profile from another bundle will no longer work. We’d like to ask: is this a new restriction introduced in iOS 18? If we manually restore the original com.apple.developer.associated-domains entitlement and use a provisioning profile that matches the app’s bundle ID, will universal links function correctly going forward?

Hi, I have two notarization submissions that have been stuck in "In Progress" status for several hours with no resolution. Submission IDs: 2158329b-8beb-400b-aa80-f8c2a5f30106 (submitted ~9 hours ago) 73174908-3ed9-4a85-afe0-a3c3b0722a61 (submitted ~3 hours ago) Both submissions show "In Progress" indefinitely and no log is available for either. The notarytool --wait --timeout 30m timed out on the second submission with exit code 124. The app is signed with a valid Developer ID Application certificate, all binaries including frameworks and dylibs are individually signed with --options runtime and --timestamp. A previous submission returned valid on disk / satisfies its Designated Requirement via spctl --assess. Could you please investigate whether these submissions are stuck on your end, and advise on next steps? Thank you.

I tried to create a new IOS provisioning profile and re-apply it to the app using Xcode to build it, but I got into trouble. The build is good, but it bounces when running the app. I would appreciate it if you could let me know what to do.

I'm distributing a macOS .pkg installer signed with Developer ID Installer and notarized via notarytool. On macOS 26.3 (Tahoe, Build 25D125), the package is rejected by Gatekeeper when downloaded from the internet. What works: pkgutil --check-signature → signed, Developer ID Installer, full chain (G2 intermediate + Apple Root CA) xcrun stapler validate → "The validate action worked!" xcrun notarytool info <id> → status: Accepted The .app inside the .pkg passes spctl -a -vvv → "accepted, source=Notarized Developer ID" What fails: spctl -a -vvv --type install mypackage.pkg → rejected, origin=Developer ID Installer Raw assessment: assessment:remote = true, assessment:verdict = false Double-clicking the downloaded .pkg shows only "Move to Trash" / "Done" (no "Open" option) syspolicyd log: meetsDeveloperIDLegacyAllowedPolicy = 0 (expected, since the cert is new), but no "notarized" match is logged Certificate details: Developer ID Installer, issued Feb 28, 2026, valid until 2031 OID 1.2.840.113635.100.6.1.14 (Developer ID Installer) — critical OID 1.2.840.113635.100.6.1.33 — timestamp 20260215000000Z Intermediate: Developer ID Certification Authority G2 (OID 1.2.840.113635.100.6.2.6) security verify-cert → certificate verification successful Build process: productbuild --distribution ... --sign <SHA1> (also tried productsign) Both produce: Warning: unable to build chain to self-signed root xcrun notarytool submit → Accepted xcrun stapler staple → worked Workaround: xattr -d com.apple.quarantine ~/Downloads/mypackage.pkg allows opening the installer. Question: Is spctl --type install assessment expected to work differently on macOS 26 Tahoe? The same signing and notarization workflow produces .app bundles that pass Gatekeeper, but .pkg installers are rejected. Is there a new requirement for .pkg distribution on macOS 26? Environment: macOS 26.3 (25D125), Xcode CLT 26.3

hey, trying to notarize my mac app rn. maybe servers are down. earlier today super fast but now slow and i need to ship. anyone having similar issue?

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.

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 &gt; Security &amp; Privacy &gt; Privacy &gt; 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.

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"

Hey all, I’m experiencing a consistent issue with notarizing a signed .pkg file that contains a macOS screen saver (.saver) bundle. Nothing online so far except 1 thread on the form from the altool time pre-2023 so i thought it worth another update. Here is what I did: I signed the .saver bundle using my Developer ID Application certificate. I packaged it into a .pkg using pkgbuild with my Developer ID Installer certificate: I submitted the resulting .pkg via xcrun notarytool: xcrun notarytool submit saver-name.pkg --apple-id email@email.com --password [app-specific-password] --team-id xxxxxxxxx The submission appears to be accepted and uploads successfully. However, the notarization status remains stuck at “In Progress” for hours (over 12h), with no update. I also tried: Repackaging the .pkg with a new name using a zip Resubmitting it under a new submission ID All attempts are stuck in the same “In Progress” state indefinitely. Did anyone solve this yet?

I am trying to sign my Mac app to use Network Extensions capability. But every time I create a profile it displays that to me: on the other hand on the website it displays this to me:

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?

Some capabilities include distribution restriction. For example, you might be able to use the capability for day-to-day development but have to get additional approval to publish an app using that capability to the App Store. To tell if a capability has such a restriction: Go to Developer > Account. At the top right, make sure you’re logged in as the right team. Under Certificates, IDs & Profiles, click Identifiers. Find the App ID you’re working with and click it. IMPORTANT Some managed capabilities are granted on a per-App ID basis, so make sure you choose the right App ID here. This brings up the App ID editor. In the Capabilities tab, locate the capability you’re working with. Click the little info (i) button next to the capability. The resulting popover lists the supported platforms and distribution channels for that capability. For example, the following shows that the standard Family Controls (Development) capability, which authorises use of the com.apple.developer.family-controls entitlement, is only enabled for development on iOS and visionOS. In contrast, if you’ve been granted distribution access to this capability, you’ll see a different Family Controls (Distribution) capability. Its popover shows that you can use the capability for App Store Connect and Ad Hoc distribution, as well as day-to-day development, on both iOS and visionOS. In the Family Controls example the development-only capability is available to all developers. However, restrictions like this can apply to initially managed capabilities, that is, managed capabilities where you have to apply to use the capability just to get started with your development. For example, when you apply for the Endpoint Security capability, which authorises use of the com.apple.developer.endpoint-security.client entitlement, it’s typically granted for development only. If you want to distribute a product using that capability, you must re-apply for another capability that authorises Developer ID distribution [1]. Some folks encounter problems like this because their managed capability was incorrectly granted. For example, you might have applied for a managed capability from an Organization team but it was granted as if you were an Enterprise team. In this case the popover will show In House where you’d expect it to show App Store Connect. If you’ve believe that you were granted a managed capability for the wrong distribution channel, contact the folks who granted you that capability. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" [1] Endpoint Security clients must use independent distribution; they are not accepted in the Mac App Store. Revision History 2026-03-10 Updated to account for changes on the Apple Developer website. 2022-12-09 First posted.

We have 8 consecutive notarytool submit submissions for the same .dmg artifact all stuck In Progress with no movement and no logs available. Submission IDs (all Recall-0.3.6-arm64.dmg, Team ID: H9S7XRPUCA): Diagnostic evidence: notarytool log on all 8 returns exit 69 (log not available) — no rejection reason, no processing output The app bundle submitted as a ZIP (same binary, same signing, submission d21e9fea) was accepted in 41 seconds at 2026-03-27T02:15Z A separate probe submission of a small signed binary on the same team (fcf018c5) was accepted in ~5 minutes All prior Recall DMG builds (0.1.0–0.3.5) processed normally in ~8 minutes on this same team Normal processing time for this team/account is ~8 minutes Conclusion: Content and signing are clean. Account queue is healthy. The issue appears specific to the DMG submission path for this build. Requesting Apple investigate the stuck DMG submissions and advise on next steps.

All notarization submissions remain stuck "In Progress" and never complete. Tested both DMG and ZIP formats — same result. This has been consistent across 5+ attempts on March 29, 2026. App: Electron desktop app (arm64), signed with Developer ID Application, hardened runtime enabled, secure timestamp present. DMG submissions (all stuck): 568cc9c3-e711-41ba-99ce-6af5a1860ae9 (10 min timeout) e0a345c3-ddf8-4771-bdda-e0bc133ff723 (20 min timeout) 6757e5a9-d95b-45b3-95d5-41cb23384bea (20 min timeout) ZIP submission (.app bundle via ditto, ~207MB): Also stuck "In Progress" for 10+ minutes notarytool log returns "Submission log is not yet available" for all submissions. Developer ID Notary Service shows "Available" on System Status page. Environment: macOS GitHub Actions runner (macos-latest), latest Xcode, xcrun notarytool. Seeing similar reports from other developers this week. Is there a known service issue?

I am trying to notarize a simple app I made, but keep getting stuck on "In Progress". The app is a MacOS app, and I'm using XCode. I've tried all the steps listed in the links below: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/notarizing-macos-software-before-distribution https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/resolving-common-notarization-issues I've had the same issue with another app, which got rejected after multiple hours. Never got to resolve this.