I am receiving an entitlement error from stripe terminal SDK when integrating Tap to Pay from apple in the info.plist. Im hoping that someone can give me their input on my error output rather than diving into the stripe sdk to point me in the right direction of something I may have missed with entitlements. I have been approved for tap to pay entitlement and am following the instructions here from apple: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/proximityreader/setting-up-the-entitlement-for-tap-to-pay-on-iphone com.apple.developer.proximity-reader.tap-to-pay

Hi all, I’ve run into a signing/entitlements problem that shows up only on Big Sur (11.x). The very same .app launches perfectly on Monterey (12), Ventura (13), Sonoma (14 / 14.5) and Sequoia (15). Failure on macOS 11 com.apple.xpc.launchd[1] (application.app.myapp.exams.566312.566318[1602]): removing service since it exited with consistent failure – OS_REASON_CODESIGNING | When validating …/MyAppNameBlurred 3.13.1.app/Contents/MacOS/MyAppNameBlurred 3.13.1: Code has restricted entitlements, but the validation of its code signature failed. Unsatisfied Entitlements: Binary is improperly signed. Launching from Terminal: open -a "/Users/admin/Downloads/MyAppNameBlurred 3.13.1.app" kLSNoLaunchPermissionErr (-10826) | Launchd job spawn failed with error: 153 What I’ve already checked # signature itself codesign -dvvv "/Users/admin/Downloads/MyAppNameBlurred 3.13.1.app" # => valid, Authority = Developer ID Application, runtime enabled # full deep/strict verification codesign --verify --deep --strict -vvv "/Users/admin/Downloads/MyAppNameBlurred 3.13.1.app" # => “satisfies its Designated Requirement” # Gatekeeper assessment spctl --assess --type execute --verbose=4 "/Users/admin/Downloads/MyAppNameBlurred 3.13.1.app" # => accepted (override security disabled) # embedded provisioning profile matches bundle ID codesign -d --entitlements :- "/Users/admin/Downloads/MyAppNameBlurred 3.13.1.app" | plutil -p - security cms -D -i "/Users/admin/Downloads/MyAppNameBlurred 3.13.1.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile" \ | plutil -extract Entitlements xml1 -o - # => both show the AAC entitlement and everything looks in order # notarization ticket stapler validate "/Users/admin/Downloads/MyAppNameBlurred 3.13.1.app" # => “The validate action worked!” Deployment target: MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET = 11.0 Entitlement added: com.apple.developer.automatic-assessment-configuration = true Provisioning profile: generated this year via Developer ID, includes the assessment entitlement and nothing else unusual. Runtime code: we call AEAssessmentSession's network configuration part only on 12 + (guarded with @available(macOS 12.0, *)). Has anyone hit this mismatch on 11.x? Could Big Sur be expecting something older or idk? Any pointers appreciated! Thanks!

This is a continuation of my own old post that became inactive to regain traction. I am trying to resolve issues that arise when distributing a macOS app with a SysExt Network Extension (Packet Tunnel) outside the App Store using a Developer ID Certificate. To directly distribute the app, I start with exporting the .app via Archive in Xcode. After that, I create a new Developer ID provisioning profile for both the app and sysext and replace the embedded ones in the .app package. After I have replaced the provisioning profiles and the have the entitlements files ready, I start signing the frameworks, sysext and parent app. codesign --force --options runtime --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <name>"<app>.app/Contents/Library/SystemExtensions/<sysext>.systemextension/Contents/Frameworks/<fw>.framework/Versions/A/<fw> codesign --force --options runtime --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <name>" <app>.app/Contents/Frameworks/<fw>.framework/ codesign --force --options runtime --entitlements dist-vpn.entitlements --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <name>" <app>.app/Contents/Library/SystemExtensions/<sysext>.systemextension/Contents/MacOS/<sysext> codesign --force --options runtime --entitlements dist.entitlements --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <name>" <app>.app After validation is successful with codesign --verify --deep --strict --verbose=4 <app>.app I zip the package, notarize and staple it ditto -c -k --keepParent "<app>.app" "<app>..zip" xcrun notarytool submit <app>.zip --keychain-profile “”<credents> --wait xcrun stapler staple <app>.app After that I finish creating signed and notarized .dmg/.pkg. hdiutil create -volname “<app>” -srcfolder “<app>.app/" -ov -format UDZO ./<app>.dmg codesign --force --sign "Developer ID Application: <name>" <app>.dmg xcrun notarytool submit <app>.dmg --keychain-profile "<credentials>" --wait xcrun stapler staple <app>.dmg Then when I move the .dmg to a clean system, open the .dmg, move the .app to the Applications folder, the attempt to run it fails with “The application “” can’t be opened.”. When I look into the console, the gatekeeper disallows the launch job with the message:
 86127 debug ProvisioningProfiles taskgated-helper ConfigurationProfiles entitlements: { "com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension" = ( "packet-tunnel-provider-systemextension" ); "com.apple.developer.system-extension.install" = 1; "com.apple.developer.team-identifier" = <teamid>; "keychain-access-groups" = ( “<teamid>.<app>.AppGroup" ); } com.apple.ManagedClient
<app>: Unsatisfied entitlements: com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension, keychain-access-groups, com.apple.developer.system-extension.install, com.apple.developer.team-identifier LAUNCH: Runningboard launch of <app> <private> returned RBSRequestErrorFailed, error Error Domain=RBSRequestErrorDomain Code=5 "Launch failed." UserInfo={NSLocalizedFailureReason=Launch failed., NSUnderlyingError=0x600001a25830 {Error Domain=NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=153 "Unknown error: 153" UserInfo={NSLocalizedDescription=Launchd job spawn failed}}}, so returning -10810

 I went through all possible formats (macOS-Style and iOS-Style App Group IDs) and combinations of appgroups according to the post “App Groups: macOS vs iOS: Working Towards Harmony”. But none of those work for me. The weird part is that when I try the same steps on different developer account, I am able to get the app running. What can be wrong?

Hi all, I'm developing a simple Finder Sync Extension, using Xcode 16.3. When running in Debug with Xcode, everything works fine. Instead, when compiling in Release and launching the containing app (by double-clicking on it), the Extension is not recognized (neither loaded) by the system. The only difference between Debug and Release stands in Signing configuration: Debug: Release: As you can see, in Release I'm using a Provisiong Profile, configured with my company's Developer ID. I'm wondering if Capabilities and Entitlements are not what is needed by my app. Anyway, I have no idea what the issue is. Any suggestion will be appreciated. Thank you in advance _Alex

When building to macOS on GameMaker, I get the error "this identity cannot be used for signing code" when using the Developer ID Installer certificate. The certificate was neither expired nor revoked, but nonetheless I created new certificates to start fresh but am still getting that error. I don't get issues building to iOS via GameMaker, just to macOS. If it makes any difference, I only noticed this issue started happening after I converted my Apple Developer Program account from an individual account to an organizational account, although it was weeks to months before I built to macOS via GameMaker before then, so I don't know if it correlates with that.

We were recently approved for the "User Assigned Device Name" for a specific app Identifier. The "Additional Capabilities" tab isn't present on that App ID. I am an admin in the developer portal, and this does not appear for the account holder as well. Any help would be appreciated.

I’ve developed a macOS app, but I’ve had trouble using a script to fully codesign it and package it into a .dmg file. I was only able to complete codesigning using the third-party app itself—not via command-line scripts. Is it possible to write a script that automates the entire process of codesigning the app? To provide the best user experience for those downloading the app outside of the Mac App Store, is it correct to first package it as a .app and then wrap that into a .dmg file for distribution? Currently, the app is available on the web as a .dmg. When downloaded, it appears in a folder and can be double-clicked to launch. However, macOS displays a warning that it was downloaded from the internet. Can I use a script to remove that quarantine warning? If possible, I’d appreciate a step-by-step explanation and a sample command-line script to: Codesign the app properly Package it into a signed .dmg Remove the quarantine attribute for local testing or distribution Is the reason I was only able to codesign it inside the third-party app due to how that app was built, or can this always be done from the command line?

Hi there, We've discovered a problem with our iOS app. We've been attempting to add a Driverkit driver to it, but any time we run the app through Testflight, the driver installs fine, but when we go to enable the driver toggle in the app's settings, the toggle stays on, but in the device logs I can see: could not insert bundle at <private> into manager: <private> As you would expect - this means the driver is not actually enabled and does not respond to a device being connected to the iPad. This does not happen when building & running the app locally, nor does it happen when installing an Ad Hoc build. We also have a different app, not yet shipped. We are able to add the driver to that app without issue. It works after going through Testflight. What we have discovered now is that everything works fine even if we just create an entirely new app with it's own bundle IDs. I should point out that in all cases, we're keeping the capabilities the same for each of these apps/IDs - including the managed capabilities. The bundle IDs that have this problem are older (5 years old or more). It seems like any newer ID will work, but trying to add the driver (and the associated managed capabilities) to an older app/ID results in this vague error message, with no further details. If we inspect the resulting dexts, we can also see that the "Internal requirements code size" is different on the ones that fail. The failing ones have a size of 204 bytes, whereas the working ones all have a size of 220 bytes. Not sure if that's related but it's strikingly consistent. Does this mean there is an issue with older app IDs, and we need Apple to manually refresh them in some way before the driverkit capabilities will work after going through Testflight? We have two apps in this state, both are of the same vintage (~5 years+). We've been battling this issue for months on and off, so would appreciate some help.

Yesterday there were reported outages on the Developer ID Notary Service, but it was reported pretty late and we were able to notice the outages in real time. It says resolved now, however an error still persists: Error: HTTP status code: 403. A required agreement is missing or has expired. This request requires an in-effect agreement that has not been signed or has expired. Ensure your team has signed the necessary legal agreements and that they are not expired. Is there an ongoing outage at this moment that is not being reported again? Our pipelines have been working flawlessly for months without intervention nor changes until the most recent outages

Howdy, I thought this would be an easy question, but it turns out it's really not! In fact, it flies in the face of how the Apple ecosystem is set up. That said, I still need an answer to be able to inform our customers of what their app update options are. The question: Does app store provisioning ever expire? Based on the very limited information I can find, it either expires in one year, two years, or never. Anecdotal evidence seems to indicate that the answer could be never, but I need to confirm this. The use case: Some of our customers are very old school. They tend to find a technical solution and stick with it. As such, they do not update apps regularly on their field iPads. They generally only update when they are forced to. They use MDM to deploy the app, and would set the MDM not to pull updated apps from the app store when available, essentially keeping the same version of the app in use for as much as 3 years or more. If this were to happen, I need to know if the provisioning for the old version of the app will ever expire if they get it from the app store. I know with an enterprise deployment of .ipa files via MDM, the app provisioning/certificate will expire after 1 or 2 years (can't remember which atm), but I can't find an answer about app store provisioning. Hopefully someone can provide me with an answer on this forum. Thanks in advance, Mapguy

I am subscribed to an individual developer license. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/configuring-network-extensions "Network Extension" does not appear in the Capability section in Xcode. Below is my Xcode screenshot.

We've been creating iOS apps for a few years now, but when I tried last month, I got an error in my XCode that says: No profiles for 'com.os.hub.mth2' were found Xcode couldn't find any iOS App Development provisioning profiles matching 'xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx'. I'm not sure if it's the cause or not, but when I look at the signing certificates, the Developer ID Application Certificate says: Missing Private Key The weird part of that is that I see a private key with this name in my Keychain access, so I'm not sure what's wrong. There has been a significant time gap between now and the last time we created a mobile app, so I'm not sure if something changed in XCode/MacOS to cause this issue, or if something expired. I'd appreciate any advice.

Is it possible to directly distribute a macOS app with a Developer ID Certificate that belongs to a different team? I am trying to resolve issues that arise when distributing a macOS app with a Network Extension (Packet Tunnel) outside the App Store using a Developer ID Certificate from a different team than the app’s provisioning profiles and entitlements. I started by attempting Direct Distribution in Xcode with automatic signing. However, it fails with the following message: Provisioning profile "Mac Team Direct Provisioning Profile: ” failed qualification checks: Profile doesn't match the entitlements file's value for the com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension entitlement. I suspect the issue is that the provisioning profile allows "packet-tunnel-provider-systemextension", whereas the entitlements generated by Xcode contain "packet-tunnel-provider". When I manually modify the .entitlements file to include the -systemextension suffix, the project fails to build because Xcode does not recognize the modified entitlement. If there is a workaround for this issue, please let me know. Due to these issues, I resorted to manually creating a signed and notarized app. My process is as follows: Export the .app from the Xcode archive. Since the exported .app does not contain the necessary entitlements or provisioning profile for direct distribution, I replace Contents/embedded.provisioningprofile in both the .app and the .appex network extension. Sign the app and its components in the following order: codesign --force --options runtime --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <name>" <app>.app/Contents/Frameworks/<fw>.framework/ codesign --force --options runtime --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <name>"<app>.app/Contents/PlugIns/<netext>.appex/Contents/Frameworks/<fw>.framework/Versions/A/<fw> codesign --force --options runtime --entitlements dist-vpn.entitlements --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <name>" <app>.app/Contents/PlugIns/<netext>.appex/ codesign --force --options runtime --entitlements dist.entitlements --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: <name>" <app>.app Verify the code signature: codesign --verify --deep --strict --verbose=4 <app>.app - <app>.app: valid on disk - <app>.app: satisfies its Designated Requirement Create a ZIP archive using: ditto -c -k --sequesterRsrc --keepParent <app>.app <app>.zip Notarize the app with notarytool and staple it. The notarization completes successfully with errors: nil. Package the notarized app into a DMG, notarize, and staple the DMG. The app runs successfully on the development machine. However, when moved to another machine and placed in /Applications, it fails to open. Inspecting Console.app reveals Gatekeeper is blocking the launch:
 taskgated-helper <bundleid>: Unsatisfied entitlements: com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension, com.apple.developer.team-identifier taskgated-helper entitlements: { "com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension" = ("packet-tunnel-provider-systemextension"); "com.apple.developer.team-identifier" = <teamid>; } As mentioned earlier, the Developer ID Certificate used for signing belongs to a different team. We are a third-party developer and do not have access to the Developer ID Certificate of the team assigned as the team-identifier. When I changed the bundle identifier (app ID), team, entitlements, and provisioning profiles to match the team associated with the Developer ID Certificate, the app worked. My question is:
 Is this failure caused by using a Developer ID Certificate from a different team, or should it still work if the provisioning profiles and entitlements are correctly set? Could there be an issue elsewhere in the provisioning profiles or entitlements for the original app ID?

Hello! I've just recently discovered LaunchCodeRequirement API and I'm exploring how it works compared to existing alternatives available for macOS versions below 14.4. Some questions I have with regards to safety of older and newer APIs examining the given example: func runProcess(executableURL: URL) throws { let process = Process() process.executableURL = executableURL if #available(macOS 14.4, *) { process.launchRequirement = try LaunchCodeRequirement.allOf { ValidationCategory(.developerID) SigningIdentifier("some-signing-identifier") TeamIdentifier("some-team-identifier") } } else { try secStaticCodeCheckValidity(executableURL) // Point #1 } do { try process.run() // Point #2 if #available(macOS 14.4, *) { // process.launchRequirement should take care of the process // and kill it if launchRequirement constraint is not satisfied } else { try secCodeCheckValidity(process.processIdentifier) // Point #3 } process.waitUntilExit() } catch { process.terminate() throw error } // Point #4 guard process.terminationReason == .exit else { throw SomeError() } } let requirement = """ anchor apple generic and identifier = "some-signing-identifier" and certificate 1[field.1.2.840.113635.100.6.2.6] and certificate leaf[field.1.2.840.113635.100.6.1.13] and certificate leaf [subject.OU] = "some-team-identifier" """ func secStaticCodeCheckValidity(_ executableURL: URL) throws { // Init SecStaticCode from `executableURL` // Init SecRequirement from `requirement` let flags = SecCSFlags(rawValue: kSecCSBasicValidateOnly) guard SecStaticCodeCheckValidityWithErrors(code, flags, secRequirement, nil) == errSecSuccess else { throw CodeSignError() } } func secCodeCheckValidity(_ processIdentifier: Int32) { // Init SecCode from `processIdentifier` // Init SecRequirement from `requirement` guard SecCodeCheckValidityWithErrors(code, [], secRequirement, nil) == errSecSuccess else { throw CodeSignError() } } Before macOS 14.4+ flow There's still a small chance that between checking executable binary codesign requirement (Point #1) and launched process' one (Point #3) the binary could be replaced with something malicious and even get some CPU between Points #2 and #3 so technically it can't be 100% safe. Is that a correct statement? Any advices on making it safer? macOS 14.4+ flow Now let's see how launchRequirement is better. I guess initialized launchRequirement gets evaluated on running the process (Point #2). What does it exactly check? Executable at URL before launching the process (as OnDiskConstraint) or launched process (as ProcessConstraint)? Is there any chance the process gets some CPU before it's killed in case of failed codesign check? Any way to distinguish between codesign requirement termination and other reasons at point #4? It returns SIGKILL (9) as terminationStatus but it's not precise enough to be sure it was killed due to failed requirement check. I guess newer SecStaticCodeCheckValidityWithOnDiskRequirement & SecCodeCheckValidityWithProcessRequirement are the same as SecStaticCodeCheckValidityWithErrors & SecCodeCheckValidityWithErrors but a little simpler and can't be used as a 'more secure' way of validating codesign requirement. Thanks, Pavel

I've signed an app, zipped it, and uploaded it to github. When I download it on another Mac, I get "it can't be opened because it could not be verified for malware". But on that computer, I can verify it with codesign, and it appears to be correct (as far as I can tell). I can copy/paste the app from my other Mac, and that copy will run without problem. sys_policy, however, gives: Notary Ticket Missing File: ReView.app Severity: Fatal Full Error: A Notarization ticket is not stapled to this application. Type: Distribution Error This is the same for the copy that runs, and the copy that doesn't. The difference between them appears to be a quarantine xattr. I can delete this, and the app launches without incident. Is this expected? Why should a signed app be quarantined just because it's been downloaded? The whole point of paying the fee is to avoid the security obstacles...! ;-)

Yes, this is very likely the completely wrong way to do things but I would like to ask regardless. Currently with windows/linux I can perform an in-situ upgrade of an application by performing a download of the binary 'foo' and then doing a rename-and-replace and subsequently requesting the licencee to restart the program and all is good. With macOS, as the binary is within the foo.app ( Contents/macOS/foo ) I imagine I cannot perform a similar operation without breaking the signing of the foo.app itself? ....or, can I individually sign the binary foo for macOS and perform the same type of operation? Download new foo as foo.new rename current foo.app/Content/macOS/foo -> foo.old rename foo.new -> foo Restart application Again, I know this is very likely an un-macOS way of performing the task but as you can imagine with supporting cross-platform development it's usually easier to maintain a consistent method even if it's "not ideal".

Thanks in advance for any hint to solve the following account problem: I tried to store credentials for notarizing. Presumably with the wrong combination of entries (similar to signing) – using the name of my university instead of my Apple Account. xcrun notarytool store-credentials "notarytool-password" --apple-id "Berliner Hochschule fuer Technik" --team-id "8YAW3HL2QP" --password "my Apple-Account-pw" .. retried assuming a syntax error (like missing "). Got the error message: This process stores your credentials securely in the Keychain. You reference these credentials later using a profile name. Validating your credentials... `Error: HTTP status code: 401. Your Apple ID has been locked. Visit iForgot to reset your account (https://iforgot.apple.com), then generate a new app-specific password. Ensure that all authentication arguments are correct.` Happy to see: Signing is not affected and I still an can log in to my account on developer.apple.com. So notarizing “only” seems to be affected. But how to reset the account to resolve the issue? The iforgot.apple.com link does not help - I provided my iPhone-number but did not receive further messages – neither on the iPhone nor on my “developer” macbook. Many thanks in advance All the best Florian

I'm developing an app using Electron Builder for a potential port to Windows in the future. I've had a heck of a time getting credentials to work and felt like I was in some sort of time loop doing the same things over and over again to no avail. I finally was able to sign my app, sign the .dmg and start the notarization process. That was last night and it still says "In Progress". If anyone is able to push it through, that would be awesome! (id: 2520e724-7069-408a-9ea4-60b23e8435a7) I saw another thread on here where people stated it was taking forever, I'm not sure if this is just because its my first time, but I was hoping to get a beta out to testers this weekend. I just need a version that doesn't get flagged as "Malware" by Gatekeeper. This is just for a standalone macOS application, not the App Store. Is there a reason that this process takes an absurd amount of time? Will it always be like this or is this just a fluke and it was a bad time to try?

We have a Mac app that uses some restricted macOS entitlements, thus to test it we embed a development provisioning profile, that needs to contain the correct provisioning UDID. Typically, for test VMs, we extract the provisioning and UDID and add it to the developer portal and then re-generate the provisioning profiles. However when we try to do this in our newly created VM (Apple Silicon), our executable won't run, and macOS logs that the provisioning profile doesn't allow the device: 2025-06-12 12:37:52.168 E taskgated-helper[27489:e97da] [com.apple.ManagedClient:ProvisioningProfiles] embedded provisioning profile not valid: file:///Applications/foo.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile error: Error Domain=CPProfileManager Code=-212 "Provisioning profile does not allow this device." UserInfo={NSLocalizedDescription=Provisioning profile does not allow this device.} 2025-06-12 12:37:52.169 E taskgated-helper[27489:e97da] [com.apple.ManagedClient:ProvisioningProfiles] Disallowing com.company.foo because no eligible provisioning profiles found 2025-06-12 12:37:52.169 Df amfid[112:e99b0] [com.apple.xpc:connection] [0xb34c74a00] invalidated because the current process cancelled the connection by calling xpc_connection_cancel() 2025-06-12 12:37:52.169 Df taskgated-helper[27489:e97da] [com.apple.xpc:connection] [0x839144000] invalidated because the client process (pid 112) either cancelled the connection or exited 2025-06-12 12:37:52.169 E amfid[112:e91ac] [com.apple.MobileFileIntegrity.framework:default] Failure validating against provisioning profiles: &lt;private&gt; 2025-06-12 12:37:52.169 E amfid[112:e91ac] [com.apple.MobileFileIntegrity.framework:default] Restricted entitlements not validated, bailing out. Error: Error Domain=AppleMobileFileIntegrityError Code=-413 "No matching profile found" UserInfo={NSURL=&lt;private&gt;, NSLocalizedDescription=No matching profile found} 2025-06-12 12:37:52.169 Df amfid[112:e91ac] /Applications/foo.app/Contents/MacOS/foo not valid: Error Domain=AppleMobileFileIntegrityError Code=-413 "No matching profile found" UserInfo={NSURL=file:///Applications/foo.app/, NSLocalizedDescription=No matching profile found} The UDID for this VM does look weird, in System Profiler: But I can verify that this UDID string is present in the provisioning profile embedded in the app bundle: $ security cms -D -i /Applications/foo.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile | grep -i 7cd9234e9aa4fa8ba528ee417f857b2c993a20a3 &lt;string&gt;7CD9234E9AA4FA8BA528EE417F857B2C993A20A3&lt;/string&gt; I also tried deleting the manually added device from the Developer portal and installing Xcode on the VM and letting Xcode register the device, but I end up in the same situation there. Even after letting Xcode itself register the device, it says that "this device not registered to your account" and then when I click "Register device" it changes into " already exists". Has anyone else managed to get Mac development provisioning profiles to work in a VM?

It's been over 24h and it's still in progress. Is there a timeout for a failed notarization? or do we just wait for days.. weeks.. moths? Successfully received submission info createdDate: 2025-06-25T09:52:03.153Z id: 2ae713a5-c2e3-432f-84ee-e5d3d4aed621 name: slideshow-city-1.1.0-arm64.dmg status: In Progress