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!

Hi, I am developing an app that checks if biometric authentication capabilities (Face ID and Touch ID) are available on a device. I have a few questions: Do I need to include a privacy string in my app to use the LAContext's canEvaluatePolicy function? This function checks if biometric authentication is available on the device, but does not actually trigger the authentication. From my testing, it seems like a privacy declaration is only required when using LAContext's evaluatePolicy function, which would trigger the biometric authentication. Can you confirm if this is the expected behavior across all iOS versions and iPhone models? When exactly does the biometric authentication permission pop-up appear for users - is it when calling canEvaluatePolicy or evaluatePolicy? I want to ensure my users have a seamless experience. Please let me know if you have any insights on these questions. I want to make sure I'm handling the biometric authentication functionality correctly in my app. Thank you!

Hi, I am creating a custom login window, so I am using SFAuthorizationpluginView, here I want to hide Submit Arrow botton which gets displayed beside username and password text feild , is there a way to hide this, please suggest.

I'm seeing some odd behavior which may be a bug. I've broken it down to a least common denominator to reproduce it. But maybe I'm doing something wrong. I am opening a file read-write. I'm then mapping the file read-only and private: void* pointer = mmap(NULL, 17, PROT_READ, MAP_FILE | MAP_PRIVATE, fd, 0); I then unmap the memory and close the file. After the close, eslogger shows me this: {"close":{"modified":false,[...],"was_mapped_writable":false}} Which makes sense. I then change the mmap statement to: void* pointer = mmap(NULL, 17, PROT_READ, MAP_FILE | MAP_SHARED, fd, 0); I run the new code and and the close looks like: {"close":{"modified":false, [....], "was_mapped_writable":true}} Which also makes sense. I then run the original again (ie, with MAP_PRIVATE vs. MAP_SHARED) and the close looks like: {"close":{"modified":false,"was_mapped_writable":true,[...]} Which doesn't appear to be correct. Now if I just open and close the file (again, read-write) and don't mmap anything the close still shows: {"close":{ [...], "was_mapped_writable":true,"modified":false}} And the same is true if I open the file read-only. It will remain that way until I delete the file. If I recreate the file and try again, everything is good until I map it MAP_SHARED. I tried this with macOS 13.6.7 and macOS 15.0.1.

Hello Experts, I am in need of your help with this feedback from the App Reviewer. Issue Description: One or more purpose strings in the app do not sufficiently explain the use of protected resources. Purpose strings must clearly and completely describe the app's use of data and, in most cases, provide an example of how the data will be used. Next Steps: Update the location purpose string to explain how the app will use the requested information and provide a specific example of how the data will be used. See the attached screenshot. Resources: Purpose strings must clearly describe how an app uses the ability, data, or resource. The following are hypothetical examples of unclear purpose strings that would not pass review: "App would like to access your Contacts" "App needs microphone access" Feedback #2 "Regarding 5.1.1, we understand why your app needs access to location. However, the permission request alert does not sufficiently explain this to your users before accessing the location. To resolve this issue, it would be appropriate to revise the location permission request, specify why your app needs access, and provide an example of how your app will use the user's data. To learn more about purpose string requirements, watch a video from App Review with tips for writing clear purpose strings. We look forward to reviewing your app once the appropriate changes have been made." May I know how can I update my purpose string? I appealed on the first feedback by explaining what is the purpose of it but got the Feedback #2. TYIA!!

My high-level goal is to add support for Game Mode in a Java game, which launches via a macOS "launcher" app that runs the actual java game as a separate process (e.g. using the java command line tool). I asked this over in the Graphics & Games section and was told this, which is why I'm reposting this here. I'm uncertain how to speak to CLI tools and Java games launched from a macOS app. These sound like security and sandboxing questions which we recommend you ask about in those sections of the forums. The system seems to decide whether to enable Game Mode based on values in the Info.plist (e.g. for LSApplicationCategoryType and GCSupportsGameMode). However, the child process can't seem to see these values. Is there a way to change that? (The rest of this post is copied from my other forums post to provide additional context.) Imagine a native macOS app that acts as a "launcher" for a Java game.** For example, the "launcher" app might use the Swift Process API or a similar method to run the java command line tool (lets assume the user has installed Java themselves) to run the game. I have seen How to Enable Game Mode. If the native launcher app's Info.plist has the following keys set: LSApplicationCategoryType set to public.app-category.games LSSupportsGameMode set to true (for macOS 26+) GCSupportsGameMode set to true The launcher itself can cause Game Mode to activate if the launcher is fullscreened. However, if the launcher opens a Java process that opens a window, then the Java window is fullscreened, Game Mode doesn't seem to activate. In this case activating Game Mode for the launcher itself is unnecessary, but you'd expect Game Mode to activate when the actual game in the Java window is fullscreened. Is there a way to get Game Mode to activate in the latter case? ** The concrete case I'm thinking of is a third-party Minecraft Java Edition launcher, but the issue can also be demonstrated in a sample project (FB13786152). It seems like the official Minecraft launcher is able to do this, though it's not clear how. (Is its bundle identifier hardcoded in the OS to allow for this? Changing a sample app's bundle identifier to be the same as the official Minecraft launcher gets the behavior I want, but obviously this is not a practical solution.)

Trying to apply 'always trust' to certificate added to keychain using both SecItemAdd() and SecPKCS12Import() with SecTrustSettingsSetTrustSettings(). I created a launchdaemon for this purpose. AuthorizationDB is modified so that any process running in root can apply trust to certificate. let option = SecTrustSettingsResult.trustRoot.rawValue // SecTrustSettingsResult.trustAsRoot.rawValue for non-root certificates let status = SecTrustSettingsSetTrustSettings(secCertificate, SecTrustSettingsDomain.admin, [kSecTrustSettingsResult: NSNumber(value: option.rawValue)] as CFTypeRef). Above code is used to trust certificates and it was working on os upto 14.7.4. In 14.7.5 SecTrustSettingsSetTrustSettings() returns errAuthorizationInteractionNotAllowed. In 15.5 modifying authorization db with AuthorizationRightSet() itself is returning errAuthorizationDenied.Tried manually editing authorization db via terminal and same error occurred. Did apple update anything on Security framework? Any other way to trust certificates?

Hi, I am using CryptoKit in my app. I am getting an error sometimes with some users. I log the description to Firebase but I am not sure what is it exactly about.  CryptoKit.CryptoKitError error 2  CryptoKit.CryptoKitError error 3 I receive both of these errors. I also save debug prints to a log file and let users share them with me. Logs are line-by-line encrypted but after getting these errors in the app also decryption of log files doesn't work and it throws these errors too. I couldn't reproduce the same error by myself, and I can't reach the user's logs so I am a little blind about what triggers this. It would be helpful to understand what these errors mean. Thanks

Hi, when creating a CryptoTokenKit extension according to https://developer.apple.com/documentation/cryptotokenkit/authenticating-users-with-a-cryptographic-token, it is neccessary to register it under the securityagent in order to make the CTK usable before login. i.e. we want to run sudo -u _securityagent /Applications/HostApp.app/Contents/MacOS/HostApp However, even with the empty application the command fails with illegal hardware instruction sudo -u _securityagent /Applications/HostApp.app/Contents/MacOS/HostApp I see that it always crashes when the HostApp is sandboxed, but it does not work even without sandboxing (i am sharing the error report message below). i actually noticed that when the HostApp is sandboxed and I run the above command, the extension starts to be usable even before login, even though i see the HostApp crash. The same does not happen without the sandbox So I am curious how to in fact properly register the CTK extension under security agent? Also am not sure how to unregister it from the _securityagent thank you for your help Version: 1.0 (1) Code Type: X86-64 (Native) Parent Process: Exited process [9395] Responsible: Terminal [399] User ID: 92 Date/Time: 2025-03-21 18:54:03.0684 +0100 OS Version: macOS 15.3.2 (24D81) Report Version: 12 Bridge OS Version: 9.3 (22P3060) Anonymous UUID: 41F9918C-5BCA-01C7-59C2-3E8CFC3F8653 Sleep/Wake UUID: 8AB66C75-3C32-41D4-9BD4-887B0FB468FE Time Awake Since Boot: 4300 seconds Time Since Wake: 1369 seconds System Integrity Protection: enabled Crashed Thread: 0 Dispatch queue: WMClientWindowManager Exception Type: EXC_BAD_INSTRUCTION (SIGILL) Exception Codes: 0x0000000000000001, 0x0000000000000000 Termination Reason: Namespace SIGNAL, Code 4 Illegal instruction: 4 Terminating Process: exc handler [9396] Application Specific Signatures: API Misuse Thread 0 Crashed:: Dispatch queue: WMClientWindowManager 0 libxpc.dylib 0x7ff80667b2bd _xpc_api_misuse + 113 1 libxpc.dylib 0x7ff80665f0e4 xpc_connection_set_target_uid + 187 2 WindowManagement 0x7ffd0b946693 -[WMClientWindowManager _createXPCConnection] + 1011 3 WindowManagement 0x7ffd0b947361 -[WMClientWindowManager _xpcConnection] + 65 4 WindowManagement 0x7ffd0b9447c9 __31-[WMClientWindowManager stages]_block_invoke + 41 5 libdispatch.dylib 0x7ff8067af7e2 _dispatch_client_callout + 8 6 libdispatch.dylib 0x7ff8067bca2c _dispatch_lane_barrier_sync_invoke_and_complete + 60 7 WindowManagement 0x7ffd0b9446fc -[WMClientWindowManager stages] + 268 8 AppKit 0x7ff80b1fd0b7 __54-[NSWMWindowCoordinator initializeStageFramesIfNeeded]_block_invoke + 30 9 libdispatch.dylib 0x7ff8067af7e2 _dispatch_client_callout + 8 10 libdispatch.dylib 0x7ff8067b0aa2 _dispatch_once_callout + 20 11 AppKit 0x7ff80b1fd060 -[NSWMWindowCoordinator initializeStageFramesIfNeeded] + 296 12 AppKit 0x7ff80a3b3701 -[NSWindow _commonInitFrame:styleMask:backing:defer:] + 888 13 AppKit 0x7ff80a3b2f77 -[NSWindow _initContent:styleMask:backing:defer:contentView:] + 1222 14 AppKit 0x7ff80a3b2aa9 -[NSWindow initWithContentRect:styleMask:backing:defer:] + 42 15 SwiftUI 0x7ff917f321e0 0x7ff91776f000 + 8139232 16 SwiftUI 0x7ff917a8e2f2 0x7ff91776f000 + 3273458 17 SwiftUI 0x7ff917bccfba 0x7ff91776f000 + 4579258 18 SwiftUI 0x7ff917f2ca8e 0x7ff91776f000 + 8116878 19 SwiftUI 0x7ff917f24a65 0x7ff91776f000 + 8084069 20 SwiftUI 0x7ff917f21540 0x7ff91776f000 + 8070464 21 SwiftUI 0x7ff91849e9f1 0x7ff91776f000 + 13826545 22 SwiftUICore 0x7ffb13103ea5 0x7ffb12c81000 + 4730533 23 SwiftUICore 0x7ffb13102e0f 0x7ffb12c81000 + 4726287 24 SwiftUI 0x7ff91849e903 0x7ff91776f000 + 13826307 25 SwiftUI 0x7ff91849bc1c 0x7ff91776f000 + 13814812 26 AppKit 0x7ff80a54f191 -[NSApplication _doOpenUntitled] + 422 27 AppKit 0x7ff80a4efc59 __58-[NSApplication(NSAppleEventHandling) _handleAEOpenEvent:]_block_invoke + 237 28 AppKit 0x7ff80a963818 __102-[NSApplication _reopenWindowsAsNecessaryIncludingRestorableState:withFullFidelity:completionHandler:]_block_invoke + 101 29 AppKit 0x7ff80a4ef6fa __97-[NSDocumentController(NSInternal) _autoreopenDocumentsIgnoringExpendable:withCompletionHandler:]_block_invoke_3 + 148 30 AppKit 0x7ff80a4eee8f -[NSDocumentController(NSInternal) _autoreopenDocumentsIgnoringExpendable:withCompletionHandler:] + 635 31 AppKit 0x7ff80a96373d -[NSApplication _reopenWindowsAsNecessaryIncludingRestorableState:withFullFidelity:completionHandler:] + 269 32 AppKit 0x7ff80a3a6259 -[NSApplication(NSAppleEventHandling) _handleAEOpenEvent:] + 529 33 AppKit 0x7ff80a3a5eb9 -[NSApplication(NSAppleEventHandling) _handleCoreEvent:withReplyEvent:] + 679 34 Foundation 0x7ff807a4b471 -[NSAppleEventManager dispatchRawAppleEvent:withRawReply:handlerRefCon:] + 307 35 Foundation 0x7ff807a4b285 _NSAppleEventManagerGenericHandler + 80 36 AE 0x7ff80e0e4e95 0x7ff80e0da000 + 44693 37 AE 0x7ff80e0e4723 0x7ff80e0da000 + 42787 38 AE 0x7ff80e0de028 aeProcessAppleEvent + 409 39 HIToolbox 0x7ff81217b836 AEProcessAppleEvent + 55 40 AppKit 0x7ff80a39ee6a _DPSNextEvent + 1725 41 AppKit 0x7ff80adf38b8 -[NSApplication(NSEventRouting) _nextEventMatchingEventMask:untilDate:inMode:dequeue:] + 1290 42 AppKit 0x7ff80a38faa9 -[NSApplication run] + 610 43 AppKit 0x7ff80a362d34 NSApplicationMain + 823 44 SwiftUI 0x7ff9177a7da1 0x7ff91776f000 + 232865 45 SwiftUI 0x7ff917af0d40 0x7ff91776f000 + 3677504 46 SwiftUI 0x7ff917d8fef8 0x7ff91776f000 + 6426360 47 Crescendo CryptoTokenKit 0x10b1baf6e static HostApp.$main() + 30 48 Crescendo CryptoTokenKit 0x10b1bd2f9 main + 9 (HostApp.swift:24) 49 dyld 0x7ff8065c82cd start + 1805

I have a custom NSWindow that I want to exclude from screen capture by setting its sharing state to kCGWindowSharingStateSharingNone. The goal is to prevent this window from appearing in the content captured by ScreenCaptureKit. [window setSharingType:NSWindowSharingType::NSWindowSharingNone]; However, on macOS 15.4+ (Sequoia), the window is still captured by ScreenCaptureKit and appears in the shared content. Does anyone know if kCGWindowSharingStateSharingNone is still effective with ScreenCaptureKit on macOS 15.4 and later?

Issue Summary I'm encountering a DCError.invalidInput error when calling DCAppAttestService.shared.generateAssertion() in my App Attest implementation. This issue affects only a small subset of users - the majority of users can successfully complete both attestation and assertion flows without any issues. According to Apple Engineer feedback, there might be a small implementation issue in my code. Key Observations Success Rate: ~95% of users complete the flow successfully Failure Pattern: The remaining ~5% consistently fail at assertion generation Key Length: Logs show key length of 44 characters for both successful and failing cases Consistency: Users who experience the error tend to experience it consistently Platform: Issue observed across different iOS versions and device types Environment iOS App Attest implementation Using DCAppAttestService for both attestation and assertion Custom relying party server communication Issue affects ~5% of users consistently Key Implementation Details 1. Attestation Flow (Working) The attestation process works correctly: // Generate key and attest (successful for all users) self.attestService.generateKey { keyId, keyIdError in guard keyIdError == nil, let keyId = keyId else { return completionHandler(.failure(.dcError(keyIdError as! DCError))) } // Note: keyId length is consistently 44 characters for both successful and failing users // Attest key with Apple servers self.attestKey(keyId, clientData: clientData) { result in // ... verification with RP server // Key is successfully stored for ALL users (including those who later fail at assertion) } } 2. Assertion Flow (Failing for ~5% of Users with invalidInput) The assertion generation fails for a consistent subset of users: // Get assertion data from RP server self.assertRelyingParty.getAssertionData(kid, with: data) { result in switch result { case .success(let receivedData): let session = receivedData.session let clientData = receivedData.clientData let hash = clientData.toSHA256() // SHA256 hash of client data // THIS CALL FAILS WITH invalidInput for ~5% of users // Same keyId (44 chars) that worked for attestation self.attestService.generateAssertion(kid, clientDataHash: hash) { assertion, err in guard err == nil, let assertion = assertion else { // Error: DCError.invalidInput if let err = err as? DCError, err.code == .invalidKey { return reattestAndAssert(.invalidKey, completionHandler) } else { return completionHandler(.failure(.dcError(err as! DCError))) } } // ... verification logic } } } 3. Client Data Structure Client data JSON structure (identical for successful and failing users): // For attestation (works for all users) let clientData = ["challenge": receivedData.challenge] // For assertion (fails for ~5% of users with same structure) var clientData = ["challenge": receivedData.challenge] if let data = data { // Additional data for assertion clientData["account"] = data["account"] clientData["amount"] = data["amount"] } 4. SHA256 Hash Implementation extension Data { public func toSHA256() -> Data { return Data(SHA256.hash(data: self)) } } 5. Key Storage Implementation Using UserDefaults for key storage (works consistently for all users): private let keyStorageTag = "app-attest-keyid" func setKey(_ keyId: String) -> Result<(), KeyStorageError> { UserDefaults.standard.set(keyId, forKey: keyStorageTag) return .success(()) } func getKey() -> Result<String?, KeyStorageError> { let keyId = UserDefaults.standard.string(forKey: keyStorageTag) return .success(keyId) } Questions User-Specific Factors: Since this affects only ~5% of users consistently, could there be device-specific, iOS version-specific, or account-specific factors that cause invalidInput? Key State Validation: Is there any way to validate the state of an attested key before calling generateAssertion()? The key length (44 chars) appears normal for both successful and failing cases. Keychain vs UserDefaults: Could the issue be related to using UserDefaults instead of Keychain for key storage? Though this works for 95% of users. Race Conditions: Could there be subtle race conditions or timing issues that only affect certain users/devices? Error Recovery: Is there a recommended way to handle this error? Should we attempt re-attestation for these users? Additional Context & Debugging Attempts Consistent Failure: Users who experience this error typically experience it on every attempt Key Validation: Both successful and failing users have identical key formats (44 character strings) Device Diversity: Issue observed across different device models and iOS versions Server Logs: Our server successfully provides challenges and processes attestation for all users Re-attestation: Forcing re-attestation sometimes resolves the issue temporarily, but it often recurs The fact that 95% of users succeed with identical code suggests there might be some environmental or device-specific factor that we're not accounting for. Any insights into what could cause invalidInput for a subset of users would be invaluable.

I have developed a sample app following the example found Updating your app package installer to use the new Service Management API and referring this discussion on XPC Security. The app is working fine, I have used Swift NSXPCConnection in favour of xpc_connection_create_mach_service used in the example. (I am running app directly from Xcode) I am trying to set up security requirements for the client connection using setCodeSigningRequirement on the connection instance. But it fails for even basic requirement connection.setCodeSigningRequirement("anchor apple"). Error is as follows. cannot open file at line 46986 of [554764a6e7] os_unix.c:46986: (0) open(/private/var/db/DetachedSignatures) - Undefined error: 0 xpc_support_check_token: anchor apple error: Error Domain=NSOSStatusErrorDomain Code=-67050 "(null)" status: -67050 I have used codesign -d --verbose=4 /path/to/executable to check the attributes I do get them in the terminal. Other way round, I have tried XPC service provider sending back process id (pid) with each request, and I am probing this id to get attributes using this code which gives all the details. func inspectCodeSignature(ofPIDString pidString: String) { guard let pid = pid_t(pidString) else { print("Invalid PID string: \(pidString)") return } let attributes = [kSecGuestAttributePid: pid] as CFDictionary var codeRef: SecCode? let status = SecCodeCopyGuestWithAttributes(nil, attributes, [], &codeRef) guard status == errSecSuccess, let code = codeRef else { print("Failed to get SecCode for PID \(pid) (status: \(status))") return } var staticCode: SecStaticCode? let staticStatus = SecCodeCopyStaticCode(code, [], &staticCode) guard staticStatus == errSecSuccess, let staticCodeRef = staticCode else { print("Failed to get SecStaticCode (status: \(staticStatus))") return } var infoDict: CFDictionary? if SecCodeCopySigningInformation(staticCodeRef, SecCSFlags(rawValue: kSecCSSigningInformation), &infoDict) == errSecSuccess, let info = infoDict as? [String: Any] { print("🔍 Code Signing Info for PID \(pid):") print("• Identifier: \(info["identifier"] ?? "N/A")") print("• Team ID: \(info["teamid"] ?? "N/A")") if let entitlements = info["entitlements-dict"] as? [String: Any] { print("• Entitlements:") for (key, value) in entitlements { print(" - \(key): \(value)") } } } else { print("Failed to retrieve signing information.") } var requirement: SecRequirement? if SecRequirementCreateWithString("anchor apple" as CFString, [], &requirement) == errSecSuccess, let req = requirement { let result = SecStaticCodeCheckValidity(staticCodeRef, [], req) if result == errSecSuccess { print("Signature is trusted (anchor apple)") } else { print("Signature is NOT trusted by Apple (failed anchor check)") } } var infoDict1: CFDictionary? let signingStatus = SecCodeCopySigningInformation(staticCodeRef, SecCSFlags(rawValue: kSecCSSigningInformation), &infoDict1) guard signingStatus == errSecSuccess, let info = infoDict1 as? [String: Any] else { print("Failed to retrieve signing information.") return } print("🔍 Signing Info for PID \(pid):") for (key, value) in info.sorted(by: { $0.key < $1.key }) { print("• \(key): \(value)") } } If connection.setCodeSigningRequirement does not works I plan to use above logic as backup. Q: Please advise is there some setting required to be enabled or I have to sign code with some flags enabled. Note: My app is not running in a Sandbox or Hardened Runtime, which I want.

Hi! I am trying to run the demo app(SampleEndpointApp) from the WWDC2020 presentation(link). Here are the steps I followed in order to run the app: I submitted a request for the Endpoint Security entitlement and got the approval from the Apple Support team. Created an identifier and assigned Endpoint Security capability. Updated the Bundle Identifier in ViewController.m and in the Extension target. Built and copied the app bundle to /Application folder. Ran the app, clicked "Install Extension" and got the confirmation message that everything went well. Looking into the logs, I see the following : (libEndpointSecurity.dylib) Failed to open service: 0xe00002d8: Caller lacks TCC authorization for Full Disk Access I keep getting the same message even after granting SampleEndpointApp Full Disk Access in Privacy & Security. System : macOS Sequoia 15.1.1 Could you please assist me with this issue? Andrei

I am using the CryptoKit SecureEnclave enum to generate Secure Enclave keys. I've got a couple of questions: What is the lifetime of these keys? When I don't store them somewhere, how does the Secure Enclave know they are gone? Do backups impact these keys? I.e. can I lose access to the key when I restore a backup? Do these keys count to the total storage capacity of the Secure Enclave? If I recall correctly, the Secure Enclave has a limited storage capacity. Do the SecureEnclave key instances count towards this storage capacity? What is the dataRepresentation and how can I use this? I'd like to store the Secure Enclave (preferably not in the Keychain due to its limitations). Is it "okay" to store this elsewhere, for instance in a file or in the UserDefaults? Can the dataRepresentation be used in other apps? If I had the capability of extracting the dataRepresentation as an attacker, could I then rebuild that key in my malicious app, as the key can be rebuilt with the Secure Enclave on the same device, or are there measures in place to prevent this (sandbox, bundle id, etc.)

I have been trying to find a way to be able to sign some data with private key of an identity in login keychain without raising any prompts. I am able to do this with system keychain (obviously with correct permissions and checks) but not with login keychain. It always ends up asking user for their login password. Here is how the code looks, roughly, NSDictionary *query = @{ (__bridge id)kSecClass: (__bridge id)kSecClassIdentity, (__bridge id)kSecReturnRef: @YES, (__bridge id)kSecMatchLimit: (__bridge id)kSecMatchLimitAll }; CFTypeRef result = NULL; OSStatus status = SecItemCopyMatching((__bridge CFDictionaryRef)query, (CFTypeRef *)&amp;amp;result); NSArray *identities = ( NSArray *)result; SecIdentityRef identity = NULL; for (id _ident in identities) { // pick one as required } SecKeyRef privateKey = NULL; OSStatus status = SecIdentityCopyPrivateKey(identity, &amp;amp;privateKey); NSData *strData = [string dataUsingEncoding:NSUTF8StringEncoding]; unsigned char hash[CC_SHA256_DIGEST_LENGTH]; CC_SHA256(strData.bytes, (CC_LONG)strData.length, hash); NSData *digestData = [NSData dataWithBytes:hash length:CC_SHA256_DIGEST_LENGTH]; CFErrorRef cfError = NULL; NSData *signature = (__bridge_transfer NSData *)SecKeyCreateSignature(privateKey, kSecKeyAlgorithmRSASignatureDigestPKCS1v15SHA256, (__bridge CFDataRef)digestData, &amp;amp;cfError); Above code raises these system logs in console default 08:44:52.781024+0000 securityd client is valid, proceeding default 08:44:52.781172+0000 securityd code requirement check failed (-67050), client is not Apple-signed default 08:44:52.781233+0000 securityd displaying keychain prompt for /Applications/Demo.app(81692) If the key is in login keychain, is there any way to do SecKeyCreateSignature without raising prompts? What does client is not Apple-signed mean? PS: Identities are pre-installed either manually or via some device management solution, the application is not installing them.

I have a sandboxed Mac app which I can grant access to a folder using an NSOpenPanel. Once it’s been granted access it can enumerate the contents of the folder just fine. If I rename the folder while the app is open and then make the app enumerate the folder’s contents again, though, it seems to have lost access. What’s the recommended way to have an app’s sandbox “track” files as they’re moved around the filesystem? (NSDocument handles this for you, from what I can tell.) I’ve managed to hack something together with a combination of Dispatch sources and security-scoped bookmarks, but it feels like there must be an easier solution …

Hi everyone, I’ve been working on storing keys and passwords in the macOS Keychain using the Keychain Services API. Specifically, I’m leveraging SecAccessControlCreateWithFlags to bind items to access control flags, and overall, it’s been working smoothly. I have a question regarding the .applicationPassword flag of SecAccessControlCreateWithFlags. While it successfully prompts the user to input a password, there are no apparent password rules, even a simple “1” is accepted. My questions are: Is there a way to enforce strong password requirements when using the .applicationPassword flag? If enforcing strong passwords isn’t possible, is there an alternative approach to provide a predefined strong password during the creation process, bypassing the need for user input? With SecAccessControlCreateWithFlags, I noticed the item isn’t stored in the traditional file-based Keychain but in an iOS-style Keychain, is there a way to store it in a file-based Keychain while marking it as unexportable? I appreciate any insights or suggestions. Thank you! Neil

Before device Reboot: Here no issue from keychain. 2025-06-17 11:18:17.956334 +0530 WAVE PTX [DB_ENCRYPTION] Key successfully retrieved from the Keychain default When device is in reboot and locked (Keychain access is set to FirstUnlock) App got woken up in background SEEMS(NOT SURE) DEVICE STILL IN LOCKED STARE IF YES THEN WHICH IS EXPECTED 2025-06-17 12:12:30.036184 +0530 WAVE PTX <ALA_ERROR>: [OS-CCF] [DB_ENCRYPTION] Error while retriving Private key -25308 default 2025-06-17 12:15:28.914700 +0530 WAVE PTX <ALA_ERROR> [DB_ENCRYPTION] Error retrieving key from the Keychain: -25300 default —————————————————— And as per logs, here user has launch the application post unlock and application never got the keychain access here also. HERE STILL HAS ISSUE WITH KEYCHAIN ACCESS. 2025-06-17 12:52:55.640976 +0530 WAVE PTX DEBUG : willFinishLaunchingWithOptions default 2025-06-17 12:52:55.651371 +0530 WAVE PTX <ALA_ERROR> [DB_ENCRYPTION] Error retrieving key from the Keychain: -25300 default

I am developing an Authorisation Plugin which talks to Launch daemons over XPC. Above is working neat, now I have to decide on how to get it installed on a machine. Installation requires. Plugin Installation Launch Daemon Installation Both require Moving binary and text (.plist) file into privileged system managed directory. Firing install/load commands as root (sudo). I have referred this post BSD Privilege Escalation on macOS, but I am still not clear how to approach this. Q: My requirement is: I can use .pkg builder and install via script, however I have some initialisation task that needs to be performed. User will enter some details talk to a remote server and get some keys, all goes well restarts the system and my authorisation plugin will welcome him and get him started. If I cannot perform initialisation I will have to do it post restart on login screen which I want to avoid if possible. I tried unconventional way of using AppleScript from a SwiftUI application to run privileged commands, I am fine if it prompts for admin credentials, but it did not work. I don't want that I do something and when approving it from Apple it gets rejected. Basically, how can I provide some GUI to do initialisation during installation or may be an app which helps in this. Q: Please also guide if I am doing elevated actions, how will it affect app distribution mechanism. In Read Me for EvenBetterAuthorizationSample I read it does. Thanks.

In the macOS 14.0 SDK, environment and library constraints were introduced, which made defense against common attack vectors relatively simple (especially with the LightWeightCodeRequirements framework added in 14.4). Now, the application I'm working on must support macOS 13.0 too, so I was looking into alternatives that do work for those operating systems as well. What I found myself is that the SecCode/SecStaticCode APIs in the Security Framework do offer very similar fashion checks as the LightWeightCodeRequirements framework does: SecCodeCopySigningInformation can return values like signing identifier, team identifier, code requirement string and so on. SecStaticCodeCreateWithPath can return a SecStaticCode object to an executable/app bundle on the file system. Let's say, I would want to protect myself against launchd executable swap. From macOS 14.0 onward, I would use a Spawn Constraint for this, directly in the launchd.plist file. Before macOS 14.0, I would create a SecStaticCode object for the executable path found in the launchd.plist, and then examine its SecCodeCopySigningInformation dictionary. If the expectations are met, only then would I execute the launchd.plist-defined executable or connect to it via XPC. Are these two equivalent? If not, what are the differences?