Can someone please explain why Mac app packaging is so farcically convoluted? Windows app packaging can be picked up in an hour or so. But I've spent longer trying to fathom how to package the Mac version than I did building the app. And it's not done with me yet. Every single line of code requires a deep dive into a new, unrelated skillset. So, it’s sidebar after sidebar. Kafka’s ‘The Trial’ comes to mind. Why does it have to be like this?

The notary service requires that all Mach-O images be linked against the macOS 10.9 SDK or later. This isn’t an arbitrary limitation. The hardened runtime, another notarisation requirement, relies on code signing features that were introduced along with macOS 10.9 and it uses the SDK version to check for their presence. Specifically, it checks the SDK version using the sdk field in the LC_BUILD_VERSION Mach-O load command (or the older LC_VERSION_MIN_MACOSX command). There are three common symptoms of this problem: When notarising your product, the notary service rejects a Mach-O image with the error The binary uses an SDK older than the 10.9 SDK. When loading a dynamic library, the system fails with the error mapped file has no cdhash, completely unsigned?. When displaying the code signature of a library, codesign prints this warning: % codesign -d vvv /path/to/your.dylib … Library validation warning=OS X SDK version before 10.9 does not support Library Validation … If you see any of these errors, read on… The best way to avoid this problem is to rebuild your code with modern tools. However, in some cases that’s not possible. Imagine if your app relies on the closed source libDodo.dylib library. That library’s vendor went out of business 10 years ago, and so the library hasn’t been updated since then. Indeed, the library was linked against the macOS 10.6 SDK. What can you do? The first thing to do is come up with a medium-term plan for breaking your dependency on libDodo.dylib. Relying on an unmaintained library is not something that’s sustainable in the long term. The history of the Mac is one of architecture transitions — 68K to PowerPC to Intel, 32- to 64-bit, and so on — and this unmaintained library will make it much harder to deal with the next transition. IMPORTANT I wrote the above prior to the announcement of the latest Apple architecture transition, Apple silicon. When you update your product to a universal binary, you might as well fix this problem on the Intel side as well. Do not delay that any further: While Apple silicon Macs are currently able to run Intel code using Rosetta 2, that’s not something you want to rely on in the long term. Heed this advice from About the Rosetta Translation Environment: Rosetta is meant to ease the transition to Apple silicon, giving you time to create a universal binary for your app. It is not a substitute for creating a native version of your app. But what about the short term? Historically I wasn’t able to offer any help on that front, but this has changed recently. Xcode 11 ships with a command-line tool, vtool, that can change the LC_BUILD_VERSION and LC_VERSION_MIN_MACOSX commands in a Mach-O. You can use this to change the sdk field of these commands, and thus make your Mach-O image ‘compatible’ with notarisation and the hardened runtime. Before doing this, consider these caveats: Any given Mach-O image has only a limited amount of space for load commands. When you use vtool to set or modify the SDK version, the Mach-O could run out of load command space. The tool will fail cleanly in this case but, if it that happens, this technique simply won’t work. Changing a Mach-O image’s load commands will break the seal on its code signature. If the image is signed, remove the signature before doing that. To do this run codesign with the --remove-signature argument. You must then re-sign the library as part of your normal development and distribution process. Remember that a Mach-O image might contain multiple architectures. All of the tools discussed here have an option to work with a specific architecture (usually -arch or --architecture). Keep in mind, however, that macOS 10.7 and later do not run on 32-bit Macs, so if your deployment target is 10.7 or later then it’s safe to drop any 32-bit code. If you’re dealing with a Mach-O image that includes 32-bit Intel code, or indeed PowerPC code, make your life simpler by removing it from the image. Use lipo for this; see its man page for details. It’s possible that changing a Mach-O image’s SDK version could break something. Indeed, many system components use the main executable’s SDK version as part of their backwards compatibility story. If you change a main executable’s SDK version, you might run into hard-to-debug compatibility problems. Test such a change extensively. It’s also possible, but much less likely, that changing the SDK version of a non-main executable Mach-O image might break something. Again, this is something you should test extensively. This list of caveats should make it clear that this is a technique of last resort. I strongly recommend that you build your code with modern tools, and work with your vendors to ensure that they do the same. Only use this technique as part of a short-term compatibility measure while you implement a proper solution in the medium term. For more details on vtool, read its man page. Also familiarise yourself with otool, and specifically the -l option which dumps a Mach-O image’s load commands. Read its man page for details. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Revision history: 2025-04-03 — Added a discussion of common symptoms. Made other minor editorial changes. 2022-05-09 — Updated with a note about Apple silicon. 2020-09-11 — First posted.

I am developing and distributing an XCFramework, and I want to ensure that it remains valid for as long as possible. I have some questions regarding certificate expiration and revocation: I understand that if an XCFramework is signed with a timestamp, it remains valid even after the signing certificate expires. However, if the signing certificate is revoked, the XCFramework immediately becomes unusable. As far as I know, Apple allows a maximum of two active distribution certificates at the same time. I assume that once a certificate expires, it will eventually need to be revoked in order to issue a third certificate. Is this correct? If an expired certificate is later revoked, will the XCFrameworks signed with that certificate also become invalid, even though they were timestamped? I want to ensure that released XCFrameworks remain valid for as long as possible. What is the best approach to achieve this? If anyone has insights or official documentation references on how to manage signing certificates for long-term XCFramework validity, I would appreciate your guidance. Thank you!

I am trying to sign a enterprise app with provisioning profile which shows the tap to pay entitlement on Dev portal, but when downloaded on Xcode, it says the profile is missing the tap to pay capability and entitlement The capability was enabled by apple already, it was working fine until the provisioning profile got renewed.

Hi everyone. Sorry if this is not an appropriate forum section for this question. I'm making a game engine and it doesn't launch on my colleague's MacBook, although it does launch on mine. There's an application file, let's say, Sample.app. And along with it in the same folder there's Engine.dylib. If we look at the app-file structure, the executable file's path is Contents/MacOS/Sample. So for the executable file the library is located at the path ../../../Engine.dylib. But when my colleague runs the Sample.app file, he gets an error "Library not loaded: @executable_path/../../../Engine.dylib". Although the path is correct and on my MacBook it works. Are there any ideas how to fix it?

Hello everyone, I'm encountering an issue while trying to publish an app on TestFlight. The app in question is Home Assistant, which I've compiled from the source. I am able to compile and install the app on my device without any problems. My company's developer account is properly configured, and I have set Xcode to automatically manage the provisioning profile. The archive is also created successfully, but when I attempt to upload it to Apple Store Connect for testing via TestFlight, I receive the following error: ERROR: [ContentDelivery.Uploader] Asset validation failed (90525) Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app/PlugIns/HomeAssistant-Extensions-PushProvider.appex' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'. (ID: ceac6dcc-9c76-412e-8ea7-f2d2845f8013) I've made several attempts to resolve this issue to no avail. For instance, if I add the missing capability manually, then I am informed that the provisioning profile is incorrect. However, checking the network extension settings on my company's dev account, I see nothing related to push notifications, which are located elsewhere. Thus, I am stuck in a loop where either the provisioning file is correct but the entitlement is missing, or if the entitlement is present, then the provisioning profile is deemed incorrect. URL:https://contentdelivery.itunes.apple.com status code: 409 (conflict) httpBody: { "errors" : [ { "id" : "ceac6dcc-9c76-412e-8ea7-f2d2845f8013", "status" : "409", "code" : "STATE_ERROR.VALIDATION_ERROR.90525", "title" : "Asset validation failed", "detail" : "Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app/PlugIns/HomeAssistant-Extensions-PushProvider.appex' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'." }, { "id" : "9ff2143b-3c00-4912-b59f-8342fa6fe5c0", "status" : "409", "code" : "STATE_ERROR.VALIDATION_ERROR.90525", "title" : "Asset validation failed", "detail" : "Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'." } ] } ======================================= 2024-01-10 23:19:35.506 ERROR: [ContentDelivery.Uploader] Asset validation failed (90525) Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app/PlugIns/HomeAssistant-Extensions-PushProvider.appex' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'. (ID: ceac6dcc-9c76-412e-8ea7-f2d2845f8013) 2024-01-10 23:19:35.506 DEBUG: [ContentDelivery.Uploader] Error Domain=ContentDelivery Code=90525 "Asset validation failed" UserInfo={NSLocalizedFailureReason=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app/PlugIns/HomeAssistant-Extensions-PushProvider.appex' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'. (ID: ceac6dcc-9c76-412e-8ea7-f2d2845f8013), NSUnderlyingError=0x6000022b6430 {Error Domain=IrisAPI Code=-19241 "Asset validation failed" UserInfo={status=409, detail=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app/PlugIns/HomeAssistant-Extensions-PushProvider.appex' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'., id=ceac6dcc-9c76-412e-8ea7-f2d2845f8013, code=STATE_ERROR.VALIDATION_ERROR.90525, title=Asset validation failed, NSLocalizedFailureReason=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app/PlugIns/HomeAssistant-Extensions-PushProvider.appex' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'., NSLocalizedDescription=Asset validation failed}}, iris-code=STATE_ERROR.VALIDATION_ERROR.90525, NSLocalizedDescription=Asset validation failed} 2024-01-10 23:19:35.507 ERROR: [ContentDelivery.Uploader] Asset validation failed (90525) Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'. (ID: 9ff2143b-3c00-4912-b59f-8342fa6fe5c0) 2024-01-10 23:19:35.507 DEBUG: [ContentDelivery.Uploader] Error Domain=ContentDelivery Code=90525 "Asset validation failed" UserInfo={NSLocalizedFailureReason=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'. (ID: 9ff2143b-3c00-4912-b59f-8342fa6fe5c0), NSUnderlyingError=0x6000022b6640 {Error Domain=IrisAPI Code=-19241 "Asset validation failed" UserInfo={status=409, detail=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'., id=9ff2143b-3c00-4912-b59f-8342fa6fe5c0, code=STATE_ERROR.VALIDATION_ERROR.90525, title=Asset validation failed, NSLocalizedFailureReason=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'., NSLocalizedDescription=Asset validation failed}}, iris-code=STATE_ERROR.VALIDATION_ERROR.90525, NSLocalizedDescription=Asset validation failed} 2024-01-10 23:19:35.507 DEBUG: [ContentDelivery.Uploader] swinfo errors: ( "Error Domain=ContentDelivery Code=90525 \"Asset validation failed\" UserInfo={NSLocalizedFailureReason=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app/PlugIns/HomeAssistant-Extensions-PushProvider.appex' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'. (ID: ceac6dcc-9c76-412e-8ea7-f2d2845f8013), NSUnderlyingError=0x6000022b6430 {Error Domain=IrisAPI Code=-19241 \"Asset validation failed\" UserInfo={status=409, detail=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app/PlugIns/HomeAssistant-Extensions-PushProvider.appex' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'., id=ceac6dcc-9c76-412e-8ea7-f2d2845f8013, code=STATE_ERROR.VALIDATION_ERROR.90525, title=Asset validation failed, NSLocalizedFailureReason=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app/PlugIns/HomeAssistant-Extensions-PushProvider.appex' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'., NSLocalizedDescription=Asset validation failed}}, iris-code=STATE_ERROR.VALIDATION_ERROR.90525, NSLocalizedDescription=Asset validation failed}", "Error Domain=ContentDelivery Code=90525 \"Asset validation failed\" UserInfo={NSLocalizedFailureReason=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'. (ID: 9ff2143b-3c00-4912-b59f-8342fa6fe5c0), NSUnderlyingError=0x6000022b6640 {Error Domain=IrisAPI Code=-19241 \"Asset validation failed\" UserInfo={status=409, detail=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'., id=9ff2143b-3c00-4912-b59f-8342fa6fe5c0, code=STATE_ERROR.VALIDATION_ERROR.90525, title=Asset validation failed, NSLocalizedFailureReason=Missing Entitlement. The bundle 'Home Assistant.app' is missing entitlement 'com.apple.developer.networking.networkextension'., NSLocalizedDescription=Asset validation failed}}, iris-code=STATE_ERROR.VALIDATION_ERROR.90525, NSLocalizedDescription=Asset validation failed}" )

Hi Developer Community, I'm encountering persistent code signing failures on macOS Sonoma 15.3 with a valid Developer ID Application certificate. The error occurs consistently across multiple certificate regenerations and various troubleshooting approaches. Environment macOS Version: Sonoma 15.3 Developer Account Type: Developer ID Certificate Type: Developer ID Application Certificate Details: Developer ID Application certificate valid until 2027 Using SHA-256 with RSA Encryption Certificate shows as valid in Keychain Access with associated private key Error Message Warning: unable to build chain to self-signed root for signer "Developer ID Application: [my certificate]" [filename]: errSecInternalComponent Steps to Reproduce Install certificate chain in order: Apple Root CA (System keychain) Apple WWDR CA (System keychain) Developer ID CA (System keychain) Developer ID Application certificate (Login keychain) Verify certificate installation: security find-identity -v -p codesigning Result shows valid identity. Attempt code signing with any binary: codesign -s "Developer ID Application: [my certificate]" -f --timestamp --options runtime [filename] Results in errSecInternalComponent error Troubleshooting Already Attempted Regenerated Developer ID Application certificate multiple times from Developer Portal Completely removed and reinstalled entire certificate chain Verified trust settings on all certificates (set to "Always Trust" for code signing) Tried multiple codesign command variations including --no-strict flag Verified keychain integrity Installed latest Apple CA certificates from apple.com/certificateauthority Verified certificate chain is properly recognized by security verify-cert Additional Information All certificates show as valid in Keychain Access Private key is properly associated with Developer ID Application certificate Trust settings are correctly configured for all certificates in the chain Problem persists after clean certificate installations Error occurs with any binary I try to sign Has anyone else encountered this issue on Sonoma 15.3? Any suggestions for resolving this system-level certificate trust chain issue would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

Hi Everyone, Just a quick, and what is probably a really simple question. Do I require a 'Paid' Apple Developer account if I just wish to notarise my application for use on my local network. I don't see myself needing to use the App Store in the near future. I know I can manually add the app and authorise it, but I'd like to avoid this. Kindly Ryn

I'm working on an app that needs access to device activity. When I add device activity entitlement, I'm getting Provisioning profile "..." doesn't include the com.apple.developer.deviceactivity entitlement. This is failing for both, the main app and the extension, and both have entitlements added. It is not clear how to add it to the profile, the provisioning profile is created/managed by XCode. When I remove the entitlement, I can build my app but it won't be able to use device activity data I reached out to Developer Support, and they sent me here. What is the right way to add device activity entitlement? I'm also seeing another issue with XCode Cloud builds. When I remove device activity entitlement. I can build my app w/o any issue, and I can also install it directly on my iPhone. However, XCode Cloud builds fail wit Run command: 'xcodebuild -exportArchive -archivePath /Volumes/workspace/tmp/d41fc2f1-4f39-4906-8941-112488e75f6c.xcarchive -exportPath /Volumes/workspace/adhocexport -exportOptionsPlist /Volumes/workspace/ci/ad-hoc-exportoptions.plist '-DVTPortalRequest.Endpoint=http://172.16.68.193:8089' -DVTProvisioningIsManaged=YES -IDEDistributionLogDirectory=/Volumes/workspace/tmp/ad-hoc-export-archive-logs -DVTSkipCertificateValidityCheck=YES -DVTServicesLogLevel=3' I suspect that it could be related to my app having DeviceActivityExtension but no device activity entitlement is present. Thanks, Peter.

The capability associated with "FAMILY_CONTROLS" could not be determined. Please file a bug report at https://feedbackassistant.apple.com and include the Update Signing report from the Report navigator.

We notarize all of our apps as part of our nightly build. Every few weeks Apple changes something in the developer agreement, and therefore require the primary account holder to accept the new terms. However, this means our nightly builds break until the terms are accepted, which is a true pain in the ass. Is there some way to tell notarytool to force the notarization? Or tell the lawyers to chill tf out? This seems to happen every 2-4 weeks.

Greetings! I've notarized my app but it spends always over 1 hour. I think it's because the app size is about 30GB, but is there any way to reduce it?

Hi, Since about 2 weeks notarytool is not very reliable on our CI/CD server. The tool either exists without printing any reason (killed by a signal; not caused by timeout - we have 6h timeouts and the tool gets killed after about 30 mins) or the process takes a very long time e.g. 2h to complete. We use the same pipeline since at least 2 years and we did not have this problem before. Some problematic calls: createdDate: 2025-01-15T14:50:22.545Z id: ca0faad3-789a-4842-a8c9-14aa7c2297a9 name: xxxxxx status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-15T14:33:06.813Z id: 22df0da8-70de-4dd9-935d-a26055242014 name: xxxxxx status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-15T14:18:36.436Z id: 5729b836-69f0-4526-b1d2-7743bd4d57a6 name: xxxxxx status: In Progress -------------------------------------------------- createdDate: 2025-01-15T14:18:31.716Z id: 58f3c7a1-96bd-4f5d-8a3c-6860f925659e name: xxxxxx status: In Progress Can anyone check why the tool is taking now way more time than before to process a submission? The app that we are notarizing did not change that much.

Error in application:didFailToRegisterForRemoteNotificationsWithError: no valid aps-environment entitlement string found for application have tried out the below commands % codesign -d --entitlements - /path/to/your.app % security cms -D -i /path/to/your.app/embedded.mobileprovision and it seems both are working fine, Im currently developing react native app with expo and firebase for notifications this works fine when im running it via installing the app from testflight, but the issue occurs when i test in testflight or while the apple team reviewing my app My entitlements file <dict> <key>aps-environment</key> <string>production</string> </dict> </plist>

Im trying to compile a free app from GitHub for personal use but i cant sign it since everytime im getting the same error "0 identities found". I have added my Apple ID to Xcode accounts, but in manage certificates, it shows "status not in keychain". On keychain access > login, it doesn’t show any Apple dev certificate obviously, and when I run security find-identity in terminal, I get a 0 identities found, 0 valid identities found. I don’t know where to begin, every tutorial I find requires downloading a certificate from Apples Dev website but my account is a free developer, not paid. A few months ago I was able to compile this same app so I know I don’t need a paid dev account. Any help appreciated.

Hello, I had a successful attempt at notarization earlier today in my build pipeline. I've been using the same system for building my macOS application for over a year now. However, subsequent builds seemed to fail. I found a couple similar topics which makes this seem not not an isolated incident: https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/782950 https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/783347 https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/783283 In my case I use the following command to submit the notarization: xcrun notarytool submit FilePath.dmg --apple-id "myappleid@gmail.com" --password "redacted_obviously" --team-id "my-team-id" --wait I left a previous run go for over an hour and the "Current status: In Progress.................. etc" filled the whole terminal. I manually checked the progress of the submissions using the command below: xcrun notarytool log --apple-id "myappleid@gmail.com" --password "redacted_obviously_again" --team-id "my-team-id" [run id] And they all result in the following output: Submission log is not yet available or submissionId does not exist Is anyone else experiencing this? Are there any possible solutions?

From time to time I see folks run into error 65 when stapling a ticket to their notarised Mac software. This post explains the two common causes of that error. If you have questions or comments, start a new thread here on the forums. Put it in the Code Signing > Notarization topic area so that I see it. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Resolving Error 65 When Stapling If you directly distribute Mac software, you must sign and notarise your product so that it passes Gatekeeper. For information on how to do this, see: Notarizing macOS software before distribution, if you use Xcode Creating distribution-signed code for macOS, Packaging Mac software for distribution, and Customizing the notarization workflow otherwise The last step of that process is to staple a ticket to your notarised product. This can fail with error 65. There are two common causes of that failure: No appropriate ticket Trust issues The following sections explain how to recognise and resolve these issues. Note You are not absolutely required to staple your product. See The Pros and Cons of Stapling for more on that topic. No Appropriate Ticket Consider the following stapling error: % stapler staple "TestError65.dmg" Processing: /Users/quinn/Desktop/TestError65 2025-03-03 22-12-47/TestError65.dmg CloudKit query for TestError65.dmg (2/d812985247c75e94fd603f026991f96144a031af) failed due to "Record not found". Could not find base64 encoded ticket in response for 2/d812985247c75e94fd603f026991f96144a031af The staple and validate action failed! Error 65. Note the Record not found message. This indicates that the stapling operation failed because there’s no appropriate ticket. To investigate this, look at the notary log: % notarytool-log b53042b6-4cbb-4cef-ade4-dae034a69947 { … "status": "Accepted", … "sha256": "f012735a6d53b17082c088627da4249c9988111d17e7a90c49aa64ebc6bae22e", "ticketContents": [ { "path": "TestError65.dmg/TestError65.app", "digestAlgorithm": "SHA-256", "cdhash": "abc27b0f2daee77b9316de3c6844fbd9e234621c", "arch": "x86_64" }, { "path": "TestError65.dmg/TestError65.app", "digestAlgorithm": "SHA-256", "cdhash": "9627c72e53d44ae77513613e2ce33314bd5ef41e", "arch": "arm64" }, { "path": "TestError65.dmg/TestError65.app/Contents/MacOS/TestError65", "digestAlgorithm": "SHA-256", "cdhash": "abc27b0f2daee77b9316de3c6844fbd9e234621c", "arch": "x86_64" }, { "path": "TestError65.dmg/TestError65.app/Contents/MacOS/TestError65", "digestAlgorithm": "SHA-256", "cdhash": "9627c72e53d44ae77513613e2ce33314bd5ef41e", "arch": "arm64" }, { "path": "TestError65.dmg", "digestAlgorithm": "SHA-256", "cdhash": "01a553c91ee389764971767f5082ab8c7dcece02" } ], "issues": null } First, make sure that the status field is Accepted. If there’s some other value, the notary service didn’t generate a ticket at all! To understand why, look at the rest of the notary log for errors and warnings. Assuming that your notarisation request was successful, look through the log for cdhash values. These represent the contents of the ticket generated by the notary service. Compare that list to the cdhash values of the code being signed: % hdiutil attach "TestError65.dmg" … … /Volumes/Install TestError65 % codesign -d -vvv --arch arm64 "/Volumes/Install TestError65/TestError65.app" … CDHash=9627c72e53d44ae77513613e2ce33314bd5ef41e … % codesign -d -vvv --arch x86_64 "/Volumes/Install TestError65/TestError65.app" … CDHash=abc27b0f2daee77b9316de3c6844fbd9e234621c … Those are all present in the ticket. However, consider the cdhash of the disk image itself: % codesign -d -vvv "TestError65.dmg" … CDHash=d812985247c75e94fd603f026991f96144a031af … That’s the cdhash that stapler is looking for: CloudKit query for TestError65.dmg (2/d812985247c75e94fd603f026991f96144a031af) failed due to "Record not found". But it’s not present in the notarised ticket. Note The term cdhash stands for code directory hash. If you’re curious what that’s about, see TN3126 Inside Code Signing: Hashes and the Notarisation Fundamentals DevForums post. What happened here is: I built the app. I signed it with my Developer ID code-signing identity. I created a disk image from that app. I signed that with my Developer ID code-signing identity. I notarised that. I then re-signed the disk image. This changes the cdhash in the code signature. Now the disk image’s cdhash doesn’t match the cdhash in the ticket, so stapling fails. To resolve this problem, make sure you’re stapling exactly the file that you submitted to the notary service. One good option is to compare the SHA-256 hash of the file you’re working on with the sha256 field in the notary log. Trust Issues Now consider this stapling error: % stapler staple "TestError65.dmg" Processing: /Users/quinn/TestError65.dmg Could not validate ticket for /Users/quinn/TestError65.dmg The staple and validate action failed! Error 65. Note how it’s different from the previous one. Rather than saying that the ticket was not found, it says Could not validate ticket. So, stapler found the ticket for the file and then tried to validate it before doing the staple operation. That validation failed, and thus this error. The most common cause of this problem is folks messing around with trust settings. Consider this: % security dump-trust-settings SecTrustSettingsCopyCertificates: No Trust Settings were found. % security dump-trust-settings -d SecTrustSettingsCopyCertificates: No Trust Settings were found. Contrast it with this: % security dump-trust-settings SecTrustSettingsCopyCertificates: No Trust Settings were found. % security dump-trust-settings -d Number of trusted certs = 1 Cert 0: Apple Root CA - G3 Number of trust settings : 10 … Someone has tweaked the trust settings for the Apple Root CA - G3 anchor. In fact, I used Keychain Access to mark the certificate as Always Trust. You’d think that’d avoid problems, but you’d be wrong. Our code signing machinery expects Apple’s anchor and intermediate certificates to have the default trust settings. IMPORTANT Some trust settings overrides are fine. For example, on my main work Mac there are trust settings overrides for Apple internal anchors. This problem occurs when there are trust settings overrides for Apple’s standard anchor and intermediate certificates. To fix this: In Terminal, run the dump-trust-settings commands shown above and build a list of Apple certificates with trust settings overrides. In Keychain Access, find the first problematic certificate in your list. Note that there may be multiple instances of the certificate in different keychains. If that’s the case, follow these steps for each copy of the certificate. Double click the certificate to open it in a window. If the Trust section is collapsed, expand it. Ensure that all the popups are set to their default values (Use System Defaults for the first, “no value specified” for the rest). If they are, close the window and move on to step 8. If not, set the popups to the default values and close the window. Closing the window may require authentication to save the trust settings. Repeat steps until 2 through 7 for each of the problematic certificates you found in step 1. When you’re done, run the dump-trust-settings commands again to confirm that your changes took effect.

Hey everyone, I’m wondering if anyone has run into any issues with this. Before I uploaded, I guess maybe 20 assets of 1080 x 720, my notarization was taking around 2-3 minutes almost instant. Now I’m looking at 30 minutes. I have no idea when the notarization is going to end. I’m wondering if asset size has any impact on notarization speed, and if so, is this going to be a one-time thing or is this going to happen with all my following builds? Let me know if anyone has run into anything similar or if the notarization service is just down right now. ⁠

When I try to archive an app in order to submit it to the App Store I receive the following errors I do not know how to fix: error: Framework /Users/fbartolom/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData/Virtual_Tags-apzduassdiglhcapscsllvzbfgid/Build/Intermediates.noindex/ArchiveIntermediates/Virtual Tags/InstallationBuildProductsLocation/Applications/VirtualTags.app/Frameworks/StoreKit.framework did not contain an Info.plist (in target 'VirtualTags' from project 'Virtual Tags') error: Framework /Users/fbartolom/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData/Virtual_Tags-apzduassdiglhcapscsllvzbfgid/Build/Intermediates.noindex/ArchiveIntermediates/Virtual Tags/InstallationBuildProductsLocation/Applications/VirtualTags.app/Frameworks/Security.framework did not contain an Info.plist (in target 'VirtualTags' from project 'Virtual Tags') error: Framework /Users/fbartolom/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData/Virtual_Tags-apzduassdiglhcapscsllvzbfgid/Build/Intermediates.noindex/ArchiveIntermediates/Virtual Tags/InstallationBuildProductsLocation/Applications/VirtualTags.app/Frameworks/CloudKit.framework did not contain an Info.plist (in target 'VirtualTags' from project 'Virtual Tags') MacBook Pro M5, Tahoe 26.1, Xcode 26.1.1

I am trying to make a driver release, but failing (I think) because the manually generated distribution profiles are for the MacOS platform only, rather than MacOS and iOS together. As far as I can tell, everything is correct in the manual profiles apart from the platform. The necessary entitlements appear to be correct. In contrast, Xcode generated profiles list both MacOS and iOS as the platform and work fine for development and to generate a release archive. But Archives 'Distribute Content' gives only 'Custom' as a distribution mechanism, and no option for notarization. So, the question is: is this a problem with my developer account (and if so, what is the appropriate channel to fix it!), or is this something subtle in the project configuration?