Hi everyone, I'm looking for a way to configure Passkey on iOS so that authentication is only possible using FaceID or TouchID. Specifically, I want to disable the use of passcodes and QR codes for authentication. Additionally, is there a method to detect if the authentication was done using a passcode or QR code? Thanks for your help!

Hey everyone, I'm working on a password manager app for iOS and I'm trying to implement the new iOS 18 feature that lets users enable autofill directly from within the app. I know this exists because I've seen it in action in another app. They've clearly figured it out, but I'm struggling to find any documentation or info about the specific API. Has anyone else had any luck finding this? Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance!

I am working on a SDK which helps identify the device authenticity. I am in need of something which can confirm the firmware/Hardware/OS is signed by Apple and is authentic. There will be no tempering to device?

Quinn, in your post "App Groups: macOS vs iOS: Fight!", you mention that an app must meet at least one of four criteria to access an app group container without user intervention: Your app is deployed via the Mac App Store (A). Or via TestFlight when running on macOS 15.1 or later (B). Or the app group ID starts with your app’s Team ID (C). Or your app’s claim to the app group is authorised by a provisioning profile embedded in the app (D) [1]. Our app is distributed directly (Developer ID), so it doesn't meet the first two criteria. We already had the app group ID set up to match the iOS ID (without our Team ID) and changing it now would affect our users already-stored data, so criteria C isn't really an option either. That brings us to criteria D. We've added the App Groups Capability to our App ID on the Developer site and creating a Developer ID provisioning profile with this App ID. However, for some reason the App Group Capability is not included in the provisioning profile. How then do we go about satisfying criteria D ("your app’s claim to the app group is authorised by a provisioning profile embedded in the app (D)")? If this is impossible, how can we migrate our user's data away from the affected container?

iOS 18.2 (22C152) My phone is currently on lockdown mode and I have gotten alerts from Experian that my information is on the dark web as well as having to reset all my accounts. However this has not fixed the issue. Even if I hard factory reset settings etc the root makes its way very shortly after, if not immediately. Though I recently got these notifications and purchased the phone in Feb. 2024 the has been an ongoing issue for a few years. I can elaborate if needed. To make it short I have a reinstalled root on my phone. Apple nor Spectrum (who I have my phone with) have been able to assist with this issue. I have been able to clarify this ”hijacking” with the Geek Squad who didn’t want their legal team involved when asking for a report so the PD can do an internal cyber investigation. So, I’ve just lived with it. Let me know what your thoughts to resolve this issue would be before spending thousands to find a resolution on my own. Side note before asked: what I’ve been told may be it’s ”gateway” is via “DNS hijacking” with WiFi or internally hotspot. I can also elaborate if needed-I’m not a web developer, however I do know where this issue stems from whom has their masters in such industry as well as 30 years experience. It’s annoying and inconvenient at this point and I’m looking for clarity, resolution and if no justice for the criminal then liability. thank you! please refrain from saying “APpLe CaNt bE hiJaCked“ ..

I am currently working on Fraud System Detection that will be used by one of the financial institutions. Those tools are related to ensuring user security. Our goal is to identify features that can trigger an early warning system for attempted fraud. We have identified three uncertain variables: Whether the user is having a conversation while using our app, Whether the user has specific screen sharing apps on their phone, Whether the user has enabled VPN connection. Here my doubts appear: Can we check the presence of a telephone conversation if we are not a VOIP application? Can we check the presence of installed programs using Universal Link and canOpenUrl(_:) method? Can we read "SCOPED" key from CFNetworkCopySystemProxySettings() dictionary? I will be glad for any advice and help.

Hello, I'm seeking some clarification regarding the use of accessibility and input monitoring APIs in sandboxed apps that are distributed through the App Store. I understand that accessibility permissions are generally restricted for App Store apps. However, I've seen several recently released apps request these permissions directly upon first launch. I'm aware that apps submitted prior to 2012 may have legacy access to certain APIs, but the ones I'm referring to appear to be recent - within the past year. While it's possible these apps were approved despite the restrictions, I want to make sure I'm not overlooking something. I also came across a recent discussion on this topic, and one post in particular stood out: Link I’d really appreciate some clarification on what's officially allowed. Specifically: Are accessibility permissions ever allowed? If so, under what circumstances? Is input monitoring permitted for apps on the App Store? (The referenced post says yes, but since it's from 2022, I just want to confirm) The linked post suggests that event generation might be allowed on the App Store, though the author hadn’t explored that privilege in detail and recommended opening a DTS tech support incident. I’ve done that and have a support case open - would it be possible to take a closer look at this? For context, my app (currently distributed outside the App Store) uses CGEventPost and CGEventCreateMouseEvent to modify mouse behavior. Thank you

Please correct the following issues and upload a new binary to App Store Connect. ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest - Your app includes “Frameworks/FirebaseCoreDiagnostics.framework/FirebaseCoreDiagnostics”, which includes FirebaseCoreDiagnostics, an SDK that was identified in the documentation as a commonly used third-party SDK. If a new app includes a commonly used third-party SDK, or an app update adds a new commonly used third-party SDK, the SDK must include a privacy manifest file. Please contact the provider of the SDK that includes this file to get an updated SDK version with a privacy manifest. For more details about this policy, including a list of SDKs that are required to include signatures and manifests, visit: https://developer.apple.com/support/third-party-SDK-requirements. ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest - Your app includes “Frameworks/FBLPromises.framework/FBLPromises”, which includes FBLPromises, an SDK that was identified in the documentation as a commonly used third-party SDK. If a new app includes a commonly used third-party SDK, or an app update adds a new commonly used third-party SDK, the SDK must include a privacy manifest file. Please contact the provider of the SDK that includes this file to get an updated SDK version with a privacy manifest. For more details about this policy, including a list of SDKs that are required to include signatures and manifests, visit: https://developer.apple.com/support/third-party-SDK-requirements. ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest - Your app includes “Frameworks/GoogleDataTransport.framework/GoogleDataTransport”, which includes GoogleDataTransport, an SDK that was identified in the documentation as a commonly used third-party SDK. If a new app includes a commonly used third-party SDK, or an app update adds a new commonly used third-party SDK, the SDK must include a privacy manifest file. Please contact the provider of the SDK that includes this file to get an updated SDK version with a privacy manifest. For more details about this policy, including a list of SDKs that are required to include signatures and manifests, visit: https://developer.apple.com/support/third-party-SDK-requirements. our app is .NET MAUI app so we already addressed this by adding privacyinfo.xcprivacy privacy manifest under platform/ios/resources but still get flagged for this <!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd"> <plist version="1.0"> <dict> <key>NSPrivacyTracking</key> <false/> <key>NSPrivacyTrackingDomains</key> <array/> <key>NSPrivacyAccessedAPITypes</key> <array> <dict> <key>NSPrivacyAccessedAPIType</key> <string>NSPrivacyAccessedAPICategoryFileTimestamp</string> <key>NSPrivacyAccessedAPITypeReasons</key> <array> <string>C617.1</string> </array> </dict> <dict> <key>NSPrivacyAccessedAPIType</key> <string>NSPrivacyAccessedAPICategorySystemBootTime</string> <key>NSPrivacyAccessedAPITypeReasons</key> <array> <string>35F9.1</string> </array> </dict> <dict> <key>NSPrivacyAccessedAPIType</key> <string>NSPrivacyAccessedAPICategoryDiskSpace</string> <key>NSPrivacyAccessedAPITypeReasons</key> <array> <string>E174.1</string> </array> </dict> <dict> <key>NSPrivacyAccessedAPIType</key> <string>NSPrivacyAccessedAPICategoryUserDefaults</string> <key>NSPrivacyAccessedAPITypeReasons</key> <array> <string>CA92.1</string> </array> </dict> </array> <key>NSPrivacyCollectedDataTypes</key> <array/> </dict> </plist>

Hi everyone, I’m working on an iOS app that uses biometric authentication to access secure keychain items and private keys stored in the Secure Enclave with some data encryption/decryption with those keys. My goal is to minimize the number of biometric prompts by reusing the authentication result within a short time window. I have the following setup: When writing the biometry-restricted keychain items and Secure Enclave keys, I use LAContext with the property LATouchIDAuthenticationMaximumAllowableReuseDuration = 1 minute, and I pass this context as the kSecUseAuthenticationContext field in the query. When retrieving these items later (in a synchronous sequence upon app launch), I pass the same instance of LAContext as the kSecUseAuthenticationContext field. The issue: If I unlock my device and the biometric reuse time has not expired (i.e., less than 1 minute), the first two actions (keychain item retrieval and Secure Enclave key retrieval) do not prompt for Face ID. However, when I attempt to decrypt data with the private key using SecKeyCreateDecryptedData, I’m prompted for Face ID even if the biometric reuse time is still valid. If the biometric reuse time has expired (more than 1 minute since last authentication), I get prompted for Face ID on the first action (keychain retrieval), and subsequent actions (including data decryption) reuse that biometric result. Question: Does this behavior mean that SecKeyCreateDecryptedData ignore the LATouchIDAuthenticationMaximumAllowableReuseDuration property of LAContext, causing an additional biometric prompt during decryption with the private key? Or is there another reason for this behavior? Is there a way to make the biometric result reusable across all these actions, including decryption? Thank you!

I’m having an issue with my Credential Provider Extension for passkey registration. On the browser I click on registration, in IOS i can select my App for passkey registration with a continue button. Wenn I click the continue button the prepareInterface(forPasskeyRegistration:) function is called but the MainInterface is not shown —it only appears when I click the continue button a second time. Here’s a simplified version of my prepareInterface method: override func prepareInterface(forPasskeyRegistration registrationRequest: ASCredentialRequest) { guard let request = registrationRequest as? ASPasskeyCredentialRequest, let identity = request.credentialIdentity as? ASPasskeyCredentialIdentity else { extensionContext.cancelRequest(withError: ASExtensionError(.failed)) return } self.identity = identity self.request = request log.info("prepareInterface called successfully") } In viewDidAppear, I trigger FaceID authentication and complete the registration process if register is true. However, the UI only shows after a second “Continue” tap. Has anyone encountered this behavior or have suggestions on how to ensure the UI appears immediately after prepareInterface is called? Could it be a timing or lifecycle issue with the extension context? Thanks for any insights!

Hi, Our App relies on a keychain to store certificates and key-value pairs. However, when we upgraded from an older XCode 15.2 (1 year old) app version to a newer version XCode 16.2 (with identical keychain-groups entitlement), we found that the newer ipa cannot see the older keychain group anymore... We tried Testflight builds, but limited to only generating newer versions, we tried using the older App's code, cast as a newer App version, and then upgraded to the newer code (with an even newer app version!). Surprisingly we were able to see the older keychain group. So it seems that there's something different between the packaging/profile of the older (1 year) and newer (current) App versions that seems to cause the new version to not see the old keychainGroup... Any ideas?

I've tried all kinds of ways to get a SecKeyRef from the .p8 file I downloaded from my App Store Connect account. The key itself looks OK, as openssl gives this result: openssl asn1parse -in 359UpAdminKey.p8 0:d=0 hl=3 l= 147 cons: SEQUENCE 3:d=1 hl=2 l= 1 prim: INTEGER :00 6:d=1 hl=2 l= 19 cons: SEQUENCE 8:d=2 hl=2 l= 7 prim: OBJECT :id-ecPublicKey 17:d=2 hl=2 l= 8 prim: OBJECT :prime256v1 27:d=1 hl=2 l= 121 prim: OCTET STRING [HEX DUMP]:30... My method for creating the key is: '- (SecKeyRef)privateKeyFromP8:(NSURL *)p8FileURL error:(NSError **)error { // Read the .p8 file NSData *p8Data = [NSData dataWithContentsOfURL:p8FileURL options:0 error:error]; if (!p8Data) { return NULL; } // Convert P8 to base64 string, removing header/footer NSString *p8String = [[NSString alloc] initWithData:p8Data encoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding]; NSArray *lines = [p8String componentsSeparatedByString:@"\n"]; NSMutableString *base64String = [NSMutableString string]; for (NSString *line in lines) { if (![line containsString:@"PRIVATE KEY"]) { [base64String appendString:line]; } } // Decode base64 to raw key data NSData *keyData = [[NSData alloc] initWithBase64EncodedString:base64String options:0]; if (!keyData) { if (error) { *error = [NSError errorWithDomain:@"P8ImportError" code:1 userInfo:@{NSLocalizedDescriptionKey: @"Failed to decode base64 data"}]; } return NULL; } // Set up key parameters NSDictionary *attributes = @{ (__bridge NSString *)kSecAttrKeyType: (__bridge NSString *)kSecAttrKeyTypeECSECPrimeRandom, (__bridge NSString *)kSecAttrKeyClass: (__bridge NSString *)kSecAttrKeyClassPrivate, (__bridge NSString *)kSecAttrKeySizeInBits: @256 }; // Create SecKeyRef from the raw key data CFErrorRef keyError = NULL; SecKeyRef privateKey = SecKeyCreateWithData((__bridge CFDataRef)p8Data, (__bridge CFDictionaryRef)attributes, &amp;keyError); if (!privateKey &amp;&amp; keyError) { *error = (__bridge_transfer NSError *)keyError; NSError *bridgeError = (__bridge NSError *)keyError; if (error) { *error = bridgeError; // Pass the bridged error back to the caller } NSLog(@"Key Error: %@", bridgeError.localizedDescription); } return privateKey; } ` I get this error from SecKeyCreateWithData The operation couldn’t be completed. (OSStatus error -50 - EC private key creation from data failed) Filed a DTS incident, but they won't be back until after the New Year. I've tried all kinds of things. Various AI chatbots, etc. Nothing seems to be working. I'm sure the problem is something elementary, but have spent hours on this with no luck. Help, please.

Hello everyone, I'm working on a project where I intend to use Secure Enclave-based, device-bound private keys within a Webauthn flow. I have the following question: Is it possible to generate private keys in the Secure Enclave with integrated attestation in order to reliably prove to a relying party the authenticity and uncompromised state of the key? If so, I would appreciate details on the implementation—specifically, any prerequisites, limitations, or particular API calls and configuration options that need to be considered. I look forward to any advice, best practices, or pointers to further documentation on this topic. Thank you in advance for your support! Best regards, Alex

Greetings, We are struggling to implement device binding according to your documentation. We are generation a nonce value in backend like this: public static String generateNonce(int byteLength) { byte[] randomBytes = new byte[byteLength]; new SecureRandom().nextBytes(randomBytes); return Base64.getUrlEncoder().withoutPadding().encodeToString(randomBytes); } And our mobile client implement the attestation flow like this: @implementation AppAttestModule - (NSData *)sha256FromString:(NSString *)input { const char *str = [input UTF8String]; unsigned char result[CC_SHA256_DIGEST_LENGTH]; CC_SHA256(str, (CC_LONG)strlen(str), result); return [NSData dataWithBytes:result length:CC_SHA256_DIGEST_LENGTH]; } RCT_EXPORT_MODULE(); RCT_EXPORT_METHOD(generateAttestation:(NSString *)nonce resolver:(RCTPromiseResolveBlock)resolve rejecter:(RCTPromiseRejectBlock)reject) { if (@available(iOS 14.0, *)) { DCAppAttestService *service = [DCAppAttestService sharedService]; if (![service isSupported]) { reject(@"not_supported", @"App Attest is not supported on this device.", nil); return; } NSData *nonceData = [self sha256FromString:nonce]; NSUserDefaults *defaults = [NSUserDefaults standardUserDefaults]; NSString *savedKeyId = [defaults stringForKey:@"AppAttestKeyId"]; NSString *savedAttestation = [defaults stringForKey:@"AppAttestAttestationData"]; void (^resolveWithValues)(NSString *keyId, NSData *assertion, NSString *attestationB64) = ^(NSString *keyId, NSData *assertion, NSString *attestationB64) { NSString *assertionB64 = [assertion base64EncodedStringWithOptions:0]; resolve(@{ @"nonce": nonce, @"signature": assertionB64, @"deviceType": @"IOS", @"attestationData": attestationB64 ?: @"", @"keyId": keyId }); }; void (^handleAssertion)(NSString *keyId, NSString *attestationB64) = ^(NSString *keyId, NSString *attestationB64) { [service generateAssertion:keyId clientDataHash:nonceData completionHandler:^(NSData *assertion, NSError *assertError) { if (!assertion) { reject(@"assertion_error", @"Failed to generate assertion", assertError); return; } resolveWithValues(keyId, assertion, attestationB64); }]; }; if (savedKeyId && savedAttestation) { handleAssertion(savedKeyId, savedAttestation); } else { [service generateKeyWithCompletionHandler:^(NSString *keyId, NSError *keyError) { if (!keyId) { reject(@"keygen_error", @"Failed to generate key", keyError); return; } [service attestKey:keyId clientDataHash:nonceData completionHandler:^(NSData *attestation, NSError *attestError) { if (!attestation) { reject(@"attestation_error", @"Failed to generate attestation", attestError); return; } NSString *attestationB64 = [attestation base64EncodedStringWithOptions:0]; [defaults setObject:keyId forKey:@"AppAttestKeyId"]; [defaults setObject:attestationB64 forKey:@"AppAttestAttestationData"]; [defaults synchronize]; handleAssertion(keyId, attestationB64); }]; }]; } } else { reject(@"ios_version", @"App Attest requires iOS 14+", nil); } } @end For validation we are extracting the nonce from the certificate like this: private static byte[] extractNonceFromAttestationCert(X509Certificate certificate) throws IOException { byte[] extensionValue = certificate.getExtensionValue("1.2.840.113635.100.8.2"); if (Objects.isNull(extensionValue)) { throw new IllegalArgumentException("Apple App Attest nonce extension not found in certificate."); } ASN1Primitive extensionPrimitive = ASN1Primitive.fromByteArray(extensionValue); ASN1OctetString outerOctet = ASN1OctetString.getInstance(extensionPrimitive); ASN1Sequence sequence = (ASN1Sequence) ASN1Primitive.fromByteArray(outerOctet.getOctets()); ASN1TaggedObject taggedObject = (ASN1TaggedObject) sequence.getObjectAt(0); ASN1OctetString nonceOctet = ASN1OctetString.getInstance(taggedObject.getObject()); return nonceOctet.getOctets(); } And for the verification we are using this method: private OptionalMethodResult<Void> verifyNonce(X509Certificate certificate, String expectedNonce, byte[] authData) { byte[] expectedNonceHash; try { byte[] nonceBytes = MessageDigest.getInstance("SHA-256").digest(expectedNonce.getBytes()); byte[] combined = ByteBuffer.allocate(authData.length + nonceBytes.length).put(authData).put(nonceBytes).array(); expectedNonceHash = MessageDigest.getInstance("SHA-256").digest(combined); } catch (NoSuchAlgorithmException e) { log.error("Error while validations iOS attestation: {}", e.getMessage(), e); return OptionalMethodResult.ofError(deviceBindError.getChallengeNotMatchedError()); } byte[] actualNonceFromCert; try { actualNonceFromCert = extractNonceFromAttestationCert(certificate); } catch (Exception e) { log.error("Error while extracting nonce from certificate: {}", e.getMessage(), e); return OptionalMethodResult.ofError(deviceBindError.getChallengeNotMatchedError()); } if (!Arrays.equals(expectedNonceHash, actualNonceFromCert)) { return OptionalMethodResult.ofError(deviceBindError.getChallengeNotMatchedError()); } return OptionalMethodResult.empty(); } But the values did not matched. What are we doing wrong here? Thanks.

We’ve noticed an unexpected behavior in our production iOS app where the UIDevice.current.identifierForVendor value occasionally changes, even though: The app is distributed via the App Store (not TestFlight or Xcode builds) We do not switch provisioning profiles or developer accounts No App Clips, App Thinning, or other advanced features are in use There’s no manual reinstall or device reset in the scenarios observed (as per user feedback) Any insights or confirmations would be much appreciated. Thanks!

I'm a bit confused about if using App Attest is possible in enterprise builds. It shows up under identifiers in the apple dev portal and I can add it to my provisioning file and entitlements file. But if I go to keys I cannot create a key for it. This page implies it can be used for enterprise builds: After distributing your app through TestFlight, the App Store, or the Apple Developer Enterprise Program, your app ignores the entitlement you set and uses the production environment.

I'm looking for confirmation on the security aspects of fdesetup authrestart when used on a FileVault-enabled Mac. As I understand it, this command temporarily stores the decryption key in memory to allow the system to restart without requiring manual entry of the FileVault password. However, I have a few security-related concerns: Storage of the Decryption Key: Where exactly is the key stored during an authenticated restart? Is it protected within the Secure Enclave (for Apple Silicon Macs) or the T2 Security Chip on Intel Macs? Key Lifetime &amp; Wiping: At what point is the decryption key erased from memory? Does it persist in any form after the system has fully rebooted? Protection Against Physical Attacks: If an attacker gains physical access to the machine before the restart completes, is there any possibility that they could extract the decryption key from memory? Cold Boot Attack Resistance: Is there any risk that advanced forensic techniques (such as freezing RAM to retain data) could be used to recover the decryption key after issuing an authenticated restart? Malware Resistance: Could a compromised system (e.g., root access by an attacker) intercept or misuse the decryption key before the restart? I understand that on Apple Silicon and T2-equipped Macs, FileVault keys are tied to hardware-based encryption, making unauthorized access difficult. However, I'd like to confirm whether Authenticated Restart introduces any new risks compared to a standard FileVault-enabled boot process.

Hi, We use the iOS Keychain in our mobile app to securely store and retrieve data, which is tightly coupled with the initialization of some app features within the application. This issue is encountered during app launch We retrieve during Splash Screen UI controller at viewDidApper() The logic we use to access the Keychain is as follows: NSDate *NSDate_CD; NSString *account = [NSString stringWithUTF8String:@"SOME_KEY_ACCOUNT"]; NSString *attrgen = [NSString stringWithUTF8String:@"SOME_KEY"]; NSMutableDictionary *query = [[NSMutableDictionary alloc] init]; [query setObject:(__bridge id)(kSecClassGenericPassword) forKey:(__bridge id&lt;NSCopying&gt;)(kSecClass)]; [query setObject:attrgen forKey:(__bridge id&lt;NSCopying&gt;)(kSecAttrGeneric)]; [query setObject:(__bridge id)(kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlockThisDeviceOnly) forKey:(__bridge id&lt;NSCopying&gt;)(kSecAttrAccessible)]; [query setObject: [NSBundle mainBundle].bundleIdentifier forKey:(__bridge id&lt;NSCopying&gt;)(kSecAttrService)]; [query setObject:account forKey:(__bridge id&lt;NSCopying&gt;)(kSecAttrAccount)]; [query setObject:@YES forKey:(__bridge id&lt;NSCopying&gt;)(kSecReturnAttributes)]; [query setObject:@YES forKey:(__bridge id&lt;NSCopying&gt;)(kSecReturnData)]; CFDictionaryRef valueAttributes = NULL; OSStatus status = SecItemCopyMatching((__bridge CFDictionaryRef)query, (CFTypeRef *)&amp;valueAttributes); NSDictionary *attributes = (__bridge_transfer NSDictionary *)valueAttributes; if(status==errSecSuccess) { NSDate_CD = [attributes objectForKey:(__bridge id)kSecAttrCreationDate]; } else { NSLog(@"Key chain query failed"); } However, some users have reported intermittent failures during app launch. Upon investigation, we discovered that these failures are caused by exceptions thrown by the iOS Keychain, which the app is currently not handling. Unfortunately, we do not log the exception or the Keychain error code in the app logs at the moment, but we plan to implement this logging feature in the near future. For now, we are trying to better understand the nature of these errors. Could you help clarify the following Keychain errors, which might be encountered from the code above? errSecServiceNotAvailable (-25307) errSecAllocate (-108) errSecNotAvailable (-25291) If these errors are encountered, are they typically persistent or are they temporary states that could resolve on their own? Your insights would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Hello -- I am developing an Authentication Plug-in for the purpose of invoking login with no user interaction (headless). There seems to be sufficient documentation and sample code on how to implement a plug-in and mechanism, and debug the same, which is great. What I am trying to understand is exactly how to modify the login right (system.login.console) in order to accomplish my goal. Question 1: I had the idea of installing my mechanism as the first mechanism of the login right, and when invoked to set the username and password into the engine’s context, in the belief that this would negate the system from needing to display the login screen. I didn’t modify or remove any other mechanisms. This did not work, in the sense that the login screen was still shown. Should this work in theory? Question 2: I then tried modifying the login right to remove anything that interacted with the user, leaving only the following: <array> <string>builtin:prelogin</string> <string>builtin:login-begin</string> <string>builtin:forward-login,privileged</string> <string>builtin:auto-login,privileged</string> <string>MyAuthPlugin:customauth,privileged</string> <string>PKINITMechanism:auth,privileged</string> <string>builtin:login-success</string> <string>HomeDirMechanism:login,privileged</string> <string>HomeDirMechanism:status</string> <string>MCXMechanism:login</string> <string>CryptoTokenKit:login</string> </array> The mechanisms I removed were: <string>builtin:policy-banner</string> <string>loginwindow:login</string> <string>builtin:reset-password,privileged</string> <string>loginwindow:FDESupport,privileged</string> <string>builtin:authenticate,privileged</string> <string>loginwindow:success</string> <string>loginwindow:done</string> In place of builtin:authenticate I supplied my own mechanism to verify the user’s password using OD and then set the username and password in the context. This attempt appears to have failed quite badly, as authd reported an error almost immediately (I believe it was related to the AuthEngine failing to init). There’s very little information to go on as to what each of these mechanisms do, and which are required, etc. Am I on the wrong track in attempting this? What would be the correct approach?

I’m considering storing some sensitive information in the userID field of a passkey, as described in the createCredentialRegistrationRequest method.(link to method). I'm aware of the largeBlob extension introduced in iOS 17+, but it doesn't meet my needs since I want to create a cross-platform passkey that can be used across various devices — and currently, not many devices support the largeBlob extension. According to W3C documentation, the userID field is not considered private information and can be displayed to the user without requiring a verification process. Based on my understanding, it's also not encrypted, which means it might be accessible with physical access to the device. So here are my questions: How do Apple devices (especially iPhones) handle the userID field in their authenticators? Is it possible to access the userID without user verification, as permitted by the W3C specification? Are there any alternative methods to access the userID value stored in a passkey on Apple devices?