Background
We sell a suite of iPadOS/macOS apps that share a single auto-renewable subscription using this architecture.
Per “Offering a Subscription Across Multiple Apps” we require users to sign in before purchasing so we can propagate the entitlement and avoid duplicate subscriptions across apps.
To enforce that sign-in step we plan to turn off Streamlined Purchasing in App Store Connect.
Question
We also want to distribute subscription offer codes (for promotion, retention, appeasing dissatisfied customers, etc.).
After Streamlined Purchasing is turned off, will customers still be able to redeem offer codes outside the app (App Store “Redeem Code” UI or redemption URL)?
If outside-app redemption remains possible, it bypasses our sign-in gate and could let the same customer buy the suite twice (once via each app).
Is there an approved method to limit offer-code redemption to the in-app flow only, or otherwise prevent such duplicate subscriptions?
If no such limitation exists, what best-practice workaround does Apple recommend for multi-app suites that must turn off Streamlined Purchasing yet still wish to use offer codes without duplication risk?
Environment
StoreKit 2; server-side receipt validation & cross-app entitlement propagation.
Apps support the in-app presentCodeRedemptionSheet flow.
We expect to use both one-time-use and custom offer codes.
StoreKit
RSS for tagSupport in-app purchases and interactions with the App Store using StoreKit.
Selecting any option will automatically load the page
Post
Replies
Boosts
Views
Created
Hello everyone!
We are observing a significant number of failures in the fetch of the products with StoreKit1, meaning that in a completely random way, some product identifiers are considered invalid in the response that we receive from Apple, and after some minutes these products are considered once again valid.
The issue started on Thursday 04/24 around 12.00 am (UTC + 02.00) and from our dashboard we can clearly see the trend of these failures has some spikes at precise times. I am attaching a view that we use for monitoring purposes showing this trend, considering the data of this week.
We are noticing this problem on multiple developer accounts and on multiple apps, which is leading us to think it could be an issue in the Apple backend processing the request.
In our case, the apps are not launched correctly until all the products are fetched, and therefore the impact of this problem is very high.
Is anyone experiencing something similar or do you have logs which allows you to identify such issues?
The issue happens only in production, while in debug and TestFlight environment everything works well.
Thank you for your support
I have been receiving beta software from the iPad App Store, despite not being enrolled in a beta program. Additionally, I do not have TestFlight or the Feedback app installed on my device. There are no certificates or profiles displayed either. I am using the App Store app that comes preinstalled on my device (note that I am not located in Europe).
My iPad has been experiencing significant bugs, including numerous screen glitches and periods of sluggishness. Furthermore, numerous applications have crashed frequently. I was able to confirm that I was receiving beta software because the crash reports include beta identifier numbers. According to Apple documentation regarding analytic reports, a beta identifier will only be visible for beta applications.
anyone know what could be going on or how to fix this?
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
StoreKit
StoreKit 2: jwsRepresentation Validation, Rate-Limit Relief, and Send Consumption Info Effectiveness
Hi everyone,
We operate an online game where all in-app assets are stored server-side and require a logged-in account (no device binding). I’d like guidance on four areas:
Do we really need deviceVerification / deviceVerificationNonce?
– Because every purchase is tied to an account and we enforce a global transactionId UNIQUE constraint, replay or cross-account reuse appears infeasible. Under these conditions, is omitting device verification acceptable, or are there situations where Apple still recommends it?
Permanent rate-limit increase for the App Store Server API
– During anniversary events we saw bursts of ~18 000 requests per hour, breaching the current hourly cap on the App Store Server API (verifyTransaction, getNotificationHistory, etc.). Is there a formal process to request a long-term rate-limit expansion (or an alternative tier) from Apple?
When is an App Store Server API call required for a StoreKit 2 jwsRepresentation?
Docs say “call the API if you’re unsure,” but there’s no clear cut-off. Because we fully validate the JWS signature plus the entire certificate chain (including CRL/OCSP checks) on our server, local cryptographic validation seems sufficient for consumables. For subscriptions we still plan to hit the API to fetch the latest status. Does this separation match Apple’s best practice?
If Apple does recommend hitting the API for consumables as well, we’d like a concrete rule of thumb—e.g. “if the item price is USD 50 or higher, always use the API.” Is establishing such thresholds consistent with Apple’s intent?
Refund-risk reduction from Send Consumption Info
– Adapty reports a 40–60 % refund-rate drop for subscriptions when using Send Consumption Info (blog reference). Can we expect similar reduction for consumable IAP in social/online games? Any real-world results would be helpful.
Thanks in advance for any guidance!
Hi everyone,
We’ve encountered an issue in some of our games where IAP purchases made using UPI are going into a pending state. Since these purchases are for consumable items, the rewards are not granted at the time of purchase.
Even after the transactions are eventually confirmed, the rewards still aren't received.
We tested this with two separate UPI transactions, and both resulted in the same pending state issue.
Interestingly, when we tried making a purchase using Apple Wallet afterward, the transaction completed successfully on the first attempt, without any pending state.
This issue seems specific to UPI transactions.
Could anyone help us understand why this is happening or if there’s a recommended way to handle such cases?
Thanks in advance!
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
StoreKit
Currently, over the xcode environment to do the testing of product subscriptions through appstore are working correctly using the storeKit.
When deployed in testflight to do the testing over the integration environment, the store response times are being excessively high, in excess of 20 minutes.
This behavior is not replicated on Xcode, and is happening on recent versions uploaded to testflight, as earlier versions that were already tested and are currently in production.
In addition the communication between the appstore webhook and the BE is also failing in this environment.
It is being blocked to generate any test to be able to launch to production.
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
StoreKit
Tags:
Subscriptions
Developer Tools
App Store
StoreKit
代码块
让购买结果=尝试等待购买(产品,选项:[选项])
//处理支付结果
开关购买结果{
案例让.success(验证结果):
如果案例让.verified(交易)=验证结果{
await transaction.finish()case .userCancelled:
自我.取消回调?()
案例.pending:
/// 交易可能在未来成功,通过Transaction.updates进行通知。
打印(“苹果支付中待定”)
默认:
打破
}
} 抓住 {
自我失败回电话?(”产品购买失败:\(错误)")
打印(“产品购买失败:\(错误)”)
}
凭证相关信息如下:
transactionid:1230000065994257
appAccountToken:D613C126-4142-4BFF-9960-00AE3F5A6F83
"jwsInfo": ["header": "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", "payload": "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", "signature": "SXieZGabBt6xHoSaBsZ1k4AexqkNYzwZel0BEhGqc3mxrd4kzOR5wERRATXySqbqfT3WJzkDAsr9jmCdoz_7-g"], "status": "normal", "transactionId": "1230000065994257"]","Band_Phone_Num":"18653588566","Platform":"124","Oper_Time":"1745823519","verification_time":"1745823519115"},"ISP":"移动","OETM":"1745823519116","CLIENTID":"","CPURATE":"0.257","AMBERUDID":"1f72113ecc704ce4a4cc135e8af71ee6","ANAME":"","MEMRATE":"0.02346919","CITY":"北京","PROMOTION":"\\","CLIENTIP":"192.168.31.74","CLIENTIPV6":"fe80::4e3:40a8:51c3:dbf5","DB":"Apple","APN":"com.migu.cloudavp","ETM":"2025-04-28 14:58:39 116"}
请帮我查一下 是这个订单没关闭成功吗?为什么出现购买新的产品 返回的永远是这个支付凭证。
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
StoreKit
Hi All,
We are trying to integrate Promotional Offer in our app, We have a React Native app and are using react-native-iap for handling our in app purchases, as per the documentation we are generating signature in our BE and passing the proper details to the function as well, but for subscription request which have offer applied we are getting the apple pop up properly as well with offer details but when trying to subscribe it gives us SKErrroDomain: 12,
for subscription without applying offer the subscription goes through but when we apply the offer we get the above error.
Our app is currently in Development Stages and has not been sent for review sam for our subscription plans as well.
Please let me know what could be the probable cause for this and help us resolve the issue.
This is the code snippet of ours for the front end :
export const buySubscription = async (subscriptionData: any) => {
try {
if (subscriptionData.offer_id) {
const response = await getSubscriptionSignature(
subscriptionData.productId,
subscriptionData.offer_id,
);
const offerData = response?.data;
const offer = {
identifier: offerData?.offer_id,
keyIdentifier: offerData?.key_id,
nonce: offerData?.nonce,
signature: offerData?.signature,
timestamp: Number(offerData?.timestamp),
};
await requestSubscription({
sku: subscriptionData.productId,
withOffer: offer,
});
} else {
await requestSubscription({ sku: subscriptionData.productId });
}
} catch (err) {
logger.error('Subscription error: ' + JSON.stringify(err));
throw err;
}
};
and
from my python Backend which generates the signature:
def generate_signature(self, product_id: str, offer_id: str) -> dict:
"""
Generate signature for Apple StoreKit promotional offers.
Args:
product_id: The product identifier from App Store Connect
offer_id: The promotional offer identifier
Returns:
dict: Contains signature and required metadata
Reference: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/storekit/in-app_purchase/original_api_for_in-app_purchase/subscriptions_and_offers/implementing_promotional_offers_in_your_app
"""
try:
# Generate UUID without dashes and use as nonce
nonce = str(uuid.uuid4())
timestamp = get_current_time_ms() # milliseconds
# Create the payload string in exact order required by Apple
payload_components = [
self.bundle_id, # App Bundle ID
self.key_id, # Key ID from App Store Connect
product_id, # Product identifier
offer_id, # Promotional offer identifier
nonce, # UUID without dashes
str(timestamp) # Current timestamp in milliseconds
]
payload_str = "\u2063".join(payload_components) # Use Unicode separator
logger.debug(f"Signing payload: {payload_str}")
# Create SHA256 hash of the payload
digest = hashes.Hash(hashes.SHA256())
digest.update(payload_str.encode('utf-8'))
payload_hash = digest.finalize()
# Sign the hash using ES256 (ECDSA with SHA-256)
signature = self.private_key.sign(
data=payload_hash,
signature_algorithm=ec.ECDSA(hashes.SHA256())
)
# Encode signature in base64
signature_b64 = base64.b64encode(signature).decode('utf-8')
logger.info(f"Generated signature for product {product_id} and offer {offer_id}")
return {
"key_id": self.key_id, # Changed to match Apple's naming
"nonce": nonce, # UUID without dashes
"timestamp": timestamp, # As integer
"signature": signature_b64, # Base64 encoded signature
"product_id": product_id, # Changed to match Apple's naming
"offer_id": offer_id # Changed to match Apple's naming
}
except Exception as e:
logger.error(f"Failed to generate signature: {str(e)}")
raise HTTPException(
status_code=500,
detail=f"Failed to generate signature: {str(e)}"
)
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
StoreKit
Tags:
Subscriptions
StoreKit
App Store Connect
Advanced Commerce API
We are currently integrating In-App Purchases for our app and have configured App Store Server Notifications (v2) in the Sandbox environment.
During testing, we observed the following issue:
When a transaction is cancelled, declined, or pending (e.g., Ask to Buy flows or authorization pending),
No App Store Server Notification is sent to our webhook endpoint.
We only receive webhook events where the status is "purchased".
This becomes a critical problem for us because our backend must accurately track transaction states including failed and pending purchases, especially for wallet top-up use cases.
Additionally, we tried mocking failed transactions (via Xcode local environment and turning off In-App Purchases from Developer Settings) to simulate a technical failure scenario.
Even in these cases, no webhook notification was received when the purchase failed server-side.
Is it expected behavior in Sandbox that only successful transactions ("purchased") trigger webhooks?
Are failed or pending transactions suppressed in Sandbox intentionally?
Will webhook behavior be different in Production (i.e., will we receive webhook notifications for failures there)?
Is there any extra configuration or entitlement needed to fully test failure scenarios via webhooks in Sandbox?
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
StoreKit
Tags:
StoreKit
In-App Purchase
App Store Server Notifications
We are currently integrating In-App Purchases for our app and have configured App Store Server Notifications (v2) in the Sandbox environment.
During testing, we observed the following issue:
When a transaction is cancelled, declined, or pending (e.g., Ask to Buy flows or authorization pending),
No App Store Server Notification is sent to our webhook endpoint.
We only receive webhook events where the status is "purchased".
This becomes a critical problem for us because our backend must accurately track transaction states including failed and pending purchases, especially for wallet top-up use cases.
Additionally, we tried mocking failed transactions (via Xcode local environment and turning off In-App Purchases from Developer Settings) to simulate a technical failure scenario.
Even in these cases, no webhook notification was received when the purchase failed server-side.
Is it expected behavior in Sandbox that only successful transactions ("purchased") trigger webhooks?
Are failed or pending transactions suppressed in Sandbox intentionally?
Will webhook behavior be different in Production (i.e., will we receive webhook notifications for failures there)?
Is there any extra configuration or entitlement needed to fully test failure scenarios via webhooks in Sandbox?
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
StoreKit
Tags:
In-App Purchase
App Store Server Notifications
How can I get the region region currently used in the macOS App Store? Preferably via Swift libraries, but any command / function will suffice.
The following StoreKit property seems to always return the region for the Apple Account associated with my macOS user.
await Storefront.current?.countryCode
See the Apple docs.
My macOS Apple Account region is US; in the App Store, when I sign into a different Apple Account whose region is GB (UK), Storefront.current?.countryCode continues to return US, not GB (or UK).
I correctly see prices in pounds instead of in dollars, British spelling instead of American spelling, apps listed in my purchased tab for the UK (not the US) Apple Account, and, in the Account Settings dialog, the UK Apple Account email address, billing address & Country/Region set to United Kingdom.
I didn't get any relevant results from the following command lines:
defaults find GB
defaults find UK
defaults find uk-apple-id@example.com
defaults find uk-apple-id
The following didn't change after I signed into the UK Apple Account in the App Store:
$ defaults read com.apple.AppStoreComponents
{
ASCLocaleID = "en-US@calendar=gregorian";
}
Maybe Storefront.current?.countryCode only specifies the country code for the Storefront that will be used for in-app purchases, instead of for purchasing new apps from the App Store; maybe the former is tied to the Apple Account for the macOS user, instead of to the Apple Account for the App Store. If that's the case, what other mechanism can I use to obtain the country code for the App Store storefront?
I'm currently still on StoreKit 1, and am testing the paymentQueueShouldShowPriceConsent delegate function.
In my local .storekit file, I have a renewable subscription set up with a promotional offer.
My test flow is as follows:
User subscribes to renewable subscription
Let subscription auto-renew once or twice
User subscribes to renewable subscription with promotional offer with significant price reduction
Promotional offer lapses and price increases to normal
Expect paymentQueueShouldShowPriceConsent delegate function to trigger
However, #5 never does get invoked, despite re-trying the subscription and promotional offers in various configurations. Manually triggering the Request Price Increase Consent option in the Xcode StoreKit transactions list does invoke the delegate function, but letting the promotional offer lapse does not.
My storefront is set to Korea, and my simulator region is set to Korea as well. According to the documentation here and here, consent is required for all price increases in Korea.
Is there some way I could check if things are working as intended?
Our app server has subscription feature and processes purchase life cycles based on App Store Server Notification v1.
Last year, when users purchased subscriptions during the following timeframe, we received "INITIAL_BUY" notifications with "unified_receipt.Latest_receipt_info.purchase_date" set to future date(approx. 1 hour after the actual purchase).
2024-11-03 08:00:00 - 2024-11-03 09:00:00 Etc/GMT (UTC)
For example, we received the following v1 notification at 2024-11-03 08:36:33 Etc/GMT.
"notification_type": "INITIAL_BUY"
"unified_receipt.latest_receipt_info[].purchase_date": "2024-11-03 09:36:02 Etc/GMT"
Our server grants subscription entitlement based on "purchase_date" so the users had to wait 1 hour before the subscription features became available.
The timeframe coincided with the end of daylight saving time in the U.S., so we assume that it affected the behavior, but our country doesn't adopt daylight saving time.
We have some questions regarding this behavior.
In countries without daylight saving time, how should we handle such notifications with future purchase date in order to properly grant subscription entitlement?
In App Store Server Notification v2, could purchase date be set to future date at the end of daylight saving time in the U.S., just as in v1 notifications?
JWSTransactionDecodedPayload.purchaseDate
We are experiencing an issue with StoreKit in the sandbox environment. When performing an SKProductsRequest, some or all of the product identifiers we provide are returning in invalidProductIdentifiers of SKProductsResponse, even though all of them are valid and approved.
This issue started occurring today and seems intermittent—occasionally, a previously failing product identifier works after one or two retries without any changes on our end.
We have verified that:
All product identifiers are correctly configured and approved in App Store Connect.
There are no recent changes to our product configuration.
The same identifiers have worked previously without issue.
Could you please assist us in identifying the cause of this behavior or let us know if there is an ongoing issue affecting StoreKit sandbox services?
Thank you for your support.
Looking for assistance in managing subscription upgrades for TestFlight users.
I have a few monthly subscriptions, 30days, each with a different set of available features, 1 with all, and 1 with fewer. (All are in proper order and grouped in App Store connection subscriptions)
subscribing seems to be working fine, and purchasing an upgrade is going ok.
what is not: reflecting the upgraded plan in app (currently reflects it will start in 30days when current subscription expires)
I’m lead to believe this will be resolved with a live app in App Store, that will then handle prorating, terminate the old plan and immediately start the new one.
looking for help getting TestFlight to show immediate upgrades.
We were facing the same error yesterday and tried many different solutions, but none of them worked. However, today the issue resolved itself and everything is working properly now.
The issue we were facing was:
#1. not getting any product in didReceive method of storekit.
#2. it was working sometimes (i.e. if we try 3 times then 1 time we were getting the product
Hi Friends,
I have an iOS app, which uses around 500 in app purchases for various modules. I am using StoreKit for in app purchase, now trying to migrate this to StoreKit 2.
I am using Product.products(for:) method to fetch all the products by sending identifiers of all the 500 In app purchases.
In response, I am getting details of only 160 products, the method is not returning remaining in app purchases.
What could be the reason for this behaviour, how to get rid of the issue?
May be is this the issue will happen only on TestFlight? If someone from Apple assures about it, we have plan to submit the app.
Please advise, Thank you.
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
StoreKit
There is an issue with StoreKit. The line let products = try await StoreKit.Product.products(for: ids) doesn't always work correctly. Sometimes it returns an array with the correct data, and sometimes it returns an empty array. I'm passing the correct ids to products(for:).
This problem only occurs when using the sandbox environment (in TestFlight builds). In the App Store version, everything works fine.
StoreKit configuration is none. All IAPs are approved.
Everything was working fine before this. The problem was discovered on May 1, 2025.
Hello,
I'm encountering an issue when trying to use the subscriptionGroupLookups endpoint in the App Store Connect API.
Despite having the correct setup, I continue to receive a 404 NOT FOUND error when making requests to:
GET https://api.appstoreconnect.apple.com/v1/subscriptionGroupLookups
Here is the current state of my environment:
I am the Account Holder of the App Store Connect account
The App Store Connect API key has been successfully created
I have the correct Key ID, Issuer ID, and .p8 private key
I can authenticate and access the apps and subscriptionGroups endpoints
However, the subscriptionGroupLookups endpoint always returns:
{
"errors": [
{
"status": "404",
"code": "NOT_FOUND",
"title": "The specified resource does not exist"
}
]
}
I suspect that LookUp Keys (UUIDs) have not been assigned to our subscription groups, even though they were created and are active in App Store Connect.
There is no “Request Access” button visible under the Integrations tab (as mentioned in Apple support instructions), and my keys appear under “App Store Connect API” > “Keys” as active.
Questions:
How can I ensure that LookUp Keys are assigned to my subscription groups?
Is there a way to trigger this manually or via support?
Has anyone successfully resolved this?
Any advice or experience would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you!
In my understanding, with the latest court ruling in the US, iOS apps may decide to support web-based payments for subscriptions and in-app purchases. However, are we allowed to exclusively support web-based payments and not implement StoreKit at all?
Topic:
App & System Services
SubTopic:
StoreKit
Tags:
Subscriptions
StoreKit
App Store Connect
In-App Purchase