Can you please give me a hand with importing certificates under MacOS?
I want to connect to Wi-Fi with 802.1X authentication (EAP-TLS) using a certificate that my homebrew application imported into my data protection keychain, but the imported certificate does not show up and I cannot select the certificate.
It also does not show up in the Keychain Access app.
One method I have tried is to import it into the data protection keychain by using the SecItemAdd function and setting kSecUseDataProtectionKeychain to true, but it does not work.
Is there a better way to do this?
ID:
for id in identities {
let identityParams: [String: Any] = [
kSecValueRef as String: id,
kSecReturnPersistentRef as String: true,
kSecUseDataProtectionKeychain as String: true
]
let addIdentityStatus = SecItemAdd(identityParams as CFDictionary, nil)
if addIdentityStatus == errSecSuccess {
print("Successfully added the ID.: \(addIdentityStatus)")
} else {
print("Failed to add the ID.: \(addIdentityStatus)")
}
}
Certificate:
for cert in certificates {
let certParams: [String: Any] = [
kSecValueRef as String: cert,
kSecReturnPersistentRef as String: true,
kSecUseDataProtectionKeychain as String: true
]
let addCertStatus = SecItemAdd(certParams as CFDictionary, nil)
if addCertStatus == errSecSuccess {
print("Successfully added the certificate.: (\(addCertStatus))")
} else {
print("Failed to add the certificate.: (\(addCertStatus))")
}
}
Private key:
for privateKey in keys {
let keyTag = UUID().uuidString.data(using: .utf8)!
let keyParams: [String: Any] = [
kSecAttrApplicationTag as String: keyTag,
kSecValueRef as String: privateKey,
kSecReturnPersistentRef as String: true,
kSecUseDataProtectionKeychain as String: true
]
let addKeyStatus = SecItemAdd(keyParams as CFDictionary, nil)
if addKeyStatus == errSecSuccess {
print("Successfully added the private key.: \(addKeyStatus)")
} else {
print("Failed to add the private key.: \(addKeyStatus)")
}
}
General
RSS for tagPrioritize user privacy and data security in your app. Discuss best practices for data handling, user consent, and security measures to protect user information.
Selecting any option will automatically load the page
Post
Replies
Boosts
Views
Activity
I was basically saving items into the Keychain with the following query dictionary:
let query: [String: Any] = [
kSecClass as String: kSecClassGenericPassword,
kSecAttrAccount as String: key,
kSecValueData as String: value,
kSecAttrAccessible as String: kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock
]
Where key is a String value and value is a Data that used to be a String.
I was getting the following error:
code: -25299
description: The specified item already exists in the keychain
After a lot of digging in I saw that I needed to add kSecAttrService to the dictionary and after that it all started working. The service value is a String value.
let query: [String: Any] = [
kSecClass as String: kSecClassGenericPassword,
kSecAttrService as String: service,
kSecAttrAccount as String: key,
kSecValueData as String: value,
kSecAttrAccessible as String: kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock
]
These were the articles that suggested adding the kSecAttrService parameter:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/11672200
https://stackoverflow.com/a/58233542
But in the same code base I found that other developers were saving using a dictionary similar to the one I first provided and it works:
var query: [String : Any] = [
kSecClass as String : kSecClassGenericPassword as String,
kSecAttrAccount as String : key,
kSecValueData as String : data
]
I don't know how to explain why my first implementation didn't work even though it was similar to what was already in the code base but the second approach worked well.
Regardless of the query dictionary, this is how I'm saving things:
static func save(value: Data, key: String, service: String) -> KeyChainOperationStatus {
logInfo("Save Value - started, key: \(key), service: \(service)")
let query: [String: Any] = [
kSecClass as String: kSecClassGenericPassword,
kSecAttrService as String: service,
kSecAttrAccount as String: key,
kSecValueData as String: value,
kSecAttrAccessible as String: kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock
]
// Remove any existing key
let cleanUpStatus = SecItemDelete(query as CFDictionary)
let cleanUpStatusDescription = SecCopyErrorMessageString(cleanUpStatus, nil)?.asString ?? "__cleanup_status_unavailable"
logInfo("Save Value - cleanup status: \(cleanUpStatus), description: \(cleanUpStatusDescription)")
guard cleanUpStatus == errSecSuccess || cleanUpStatus == errSecItemNotFound else {
logError("Save Value - Failed cleaning up KeyChain")
return .cleanupFailed(code: cleanUpStatus)
}
// Add the new key
let saveStatus = SecItemAdd(query as CFDictionary, nil)
let saveStatusDescription = SecCopyErrorMessageString(saveStatus, nil)?.asString ?? "__save_status_unavailable"
logInfo("Save Value - save status [\(saveStatus)] : \(saveStatusDescription)")
guard saveStatus == errSecSuccess else {
logError("Save Value - Failed saving new value into KeyChain")
return .savingFailed(code: saveStatus)
}
return .successs
}
Topic:
Privacy & Security
SubTopic:
General
We have a macOS app that has a Photos Extension, which shares documents with the app via an app group container. Historically we used to have an iOS-style group identifier (group.${TeamIdentifier}${groupName}), because we were lead by the web interface in the developer portal to believe this to be the right way to name groups.
Later with the first macOS 15 betas last year there was a bug with the operating system warning users, our app would access data from different apps, but it was our own app group container directory.
Therefore we added a macOS-style group identifier (${TeamIdentifier}${groupName}) and wrote a migration of documents to the new group container directory.
So basically we need to have access to these two app group containers for the foreseeable future.
Now with the introduction of iOS-style group identifiers for macOS, Xcode Cloud no longer archives our app for TestFlight or AppStore, because it complains:
ITMS-90286: Invalid code signing entitlements - Your application bundle’s signature contains code signing entitlements that aren’t supported on macOS. Specifically, the “[group.${TeamIdentifier}${groupName}, ${TeamIdentifier}${groupName}]” value for the com.apple.security.application-groups key in isn’t supported. This value should be a string or an array of strings, where each string is the “group” value or your Team ID, followed by a dot (“.”), followed by the group name. If you're using the “group” prefix, verify that the provisioning profile used to sign the app contains the com.apple.security.application-groups entitlement and its associated value(s).
We have included the iOS-style group identifier in the provisioning profile, generated automatically, but can't do the same for the macOS-style group identifier, because the web interface only accepts identifiers starting with "group".
How can we get Xcode Cloud to archive our app again using both group identifiers?
Thanks in advance
Hello,
I have an application which uses a helper[1] to download[2] files. When files download is a DMG and user mounts the image to run the application from this DMG it doesn't pass Gatekeeper. It presents the "Application XYZ.app can't be opened.".
Same file downloaded via Safari shows a different dialog, the "XYZ.app is an app downloaded from the internet. Are you sure you want to open it?"
In the system log I see this line:
exec of /Volumes/SampleApp/SampleApp.app/Contents/MacOS/SampleApp denied since it was quarantined by Download\x20Helper and created without user consent, qtn-flags was 0x00000187
The application is running sandboxed and hardened, the main application has com.apple.security.files.downloads.read-write entitlement. Everything is signed by DeveloperID and passes all checks[3].
I tried to check the responsible process[4] of the helper. Then trivial stuff like download folder access in System Settings/Privacy & Security/Files & Folders. Everything seems to be fine.
For what it worths the value of quarantine attribute is following:
com.apple.quarantine: 0087;6723b80e;My App;
The Safari downloaded one posses:
com.apple.quarantine: 0083;6723b9fa;Safari;02162070-2561-42BE-B30B-19A0E94FE7CA
Also tried a few more ways and got to 0081 with Edge and 0082 with a sample app with similar setup. Not sure if that has any meaning.
What could I be doing wrong that Gatekeeper right away refuses to run the application from DMG instead of showing the dialog like in other cases?
[1] The executable is in application bundle located in Contents/Helpers/DownloadHelper.app in the main application bundle.
[2] Nothing fancy, curl + regular POSIX file operations
[3] codesign, syspolicy_check, spctl
[4] launchctl procinfo pid
I requested permission to use the Family Controls entitlement two weeks ago, and I have not received a response or status update. I have been to that page where it says "Thank you! We'll get back to you soon!" so many times.
I’m implementing a custom Authorization right with the following rule:
<key>authenticate-user</key>
<true/>
<key>allow-root</key>
<true/>
<key>class</key>
<string>user</string>
<key>group</key>
<string>admin</string>
The currently logged-in user is a standard user, and I’ve created a hidden admin account, e.g. _hiddenadmin, which has UID≠0 but belongs to the admin group.
From my Authorization Plug-in, I would like to programmatically satisfy this right using _hiddenadmin’s credentials, even though _hiddenadmin is not the logged-in user.
My question:
Is there a way to programmatically satisfy an authenticate-user right from an Authorization Plug-in using credentials of another (non-session) user?
First, I do not publish my application to the AppStore, but I need to customize a sandbox environment. It seems that sandbox-exec cannot configure entitlements, so I have used some other APIs, such as sandbox_compile_entitlements and sandbox_apply_container. When encountering the entitlement "com.apple.security.files.user-selected.read-only", I am unsure how to correctly write sandbox profile to implement this. Can anyone help me?
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
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 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.)
Hi,is there an option to mark the file or folder or item stored in user defaults ... not to be backed up when doing unencrypted backup in iTunes?We are developing iOS app that contains sensitive data. But even if we enable Data Protection for the iOS app it can be backed up on mac unencrypted using iTunes. Is there a way to allow backing up content only if the backup is encrypted?
Having trouble decrypting a string using an encryption key and an IV.
var key: String
var iv: String
func decryptData(_ encryptedText: String) -> String?
{
if let textData = Data(base64Encoded: iv + encryptedText) {
do {
let sealedBox = try AES.GCM.SealedBox(combined: textData)
let key = SymmetricKey(data: key.data(using: .utf8)!)
let decryptedData = try AES.GCM.open(sealedBox, using: key)
return String(data: decryptedData, encoding: .utf8)
} catch {
print("Decryption failed: \(error)")
return nil
}
}
return nil
}
Proper coding choices aside (I'm just trying anything at this point,) the main problem is opening the SealedBox. If I go to an online decryption site, I can paste in my encrypted text, the encryption key, and the IV as plain text and I can encrypt and decrypt just fine.
But I can't seem to get the right combo in my Swift code. I don't have a "tag" even though I'm using the combined option. How can I make this work when all I will be receiving is the encrypted text, the encryption key, and the IV. (the encryption key is 256 bits)
Try an AES site with a key of 32 digits and an IV of 16 digits and text of your choice. Use the encrypted version of the text and then the key and IV in my code and you'll see the problem. I can make the SealedBox but I can't open it to get the decrypted data. So I'm not combining the right things the right way. Anyone notice the problem?
Topic:
Privacy & Security
SubTopic:
General
Problem Description:
In our App, When we launch the web login part using ASWebAuthentication + Universal Links with callback scheme as "https", we are not receiving callback.
Note:
We are using "SwiftUIWebAuthentication" Swift Package Manager to display page in ASWebAuth.
But when we use custom url scheme instead of Universal link, app able to receive call back every time.
We use ".onOpenURL" to receive universal link callback scheme.
In some crashlog files, there are additional pieces of information related to codesigning.
I can understand what most of themcorresponds to (ID, TeamID, Flags, Validation Category). But there is one I have some doubt about: Trust Level.
As far as I can tell (or at least what Google and other search engines say), this is an unsigned 32 bit integer that defines the trust level with -1 being untrusted, 0, being basically an Apple executable and other potential bigger values corresponding to App Store binaries, Developer ID signature, etc.
Yet, I'm not able to find a corresponding detailed documentation about this on Apple's developer website.
I also had a look at the LightweightCodeRequirements "include" file and there does not seem to be such a field available.
[Q] Is there any official documentation listing the different values for this trust level value and providing a clear description of what it corresponds to?
Hi,
I’d like to confirm something regarding the hosting of the apple-app-site-association (AASA) file.
We have a server that publicly hosts the AASA file and is accessible globally. However, this server sits behind an additional security layer (a security server/reverse proxy).
My question is:
Will this security layer affect Apple’s ability to access and validate the AASA file for Universal Links or App Clips?
Are there specific requirements (e.g. headers, redirects, TLS versions, etc.) that we need to ensure the security server does not block or modify?
Any guidance or best practices would be appreciated.
Hello!
I do know apple does not support electron, but I do not think this is an electron related issue, rather something I am doing wrong. I'd be curious to find out why the keychain login is happenning after my app has been signed with the bundleid, entitlements, and provision profile.
Before using the provision profile I did not have this issue, but it is needed for assessments feature.
I'm trying to ship an Electron / macOS desktop app that must run inside Automatic Assessment Configuration. The build signs and notarizes successfully, and assessment mode itself starts on Apple-arm64 machines, but every single launch shows the system dialog that asks to allow access to the "login" keychain. The dialog appears on totally fresh user accounts, so it's not tied to anything I store there.
It has happened ever since I have added the provision profile to the electron builder to finally test assessment out.
entitlements.inherit.plist keys
<key>com.apple.security.cs.allow-jit</key> <true/>
<key>com.apple.security.cs.allow-unsigned-executable-memory</key> <true/>
entitlements.plist keys:
<key>com.apple.security.cs.allow-jit</key> <true/>
<key>com.apple.security.cs.allow-unsigned-executable-memory</key> <true/>
<key>com.apple.developer.automatic-assessment-configuration</key> <true/>
I'm honestly not sure whether the keychain is expected, but I have tried a lot of entitlement combinations to get rid of It. Electron builder is doing the signing, and we manually use the notary tool to notarize but probably irrelevant.
mac: {
notarize: false,
target: 'dir',
entitlements: 'buildResources/entitlements.mac.plist',
provisioningProfile: 'buildResources/xyu.provisionprofile',
entitlementsInherit: 'buildResources/entitlements.mac.inherit.plist',
Any lead is welcome!
Topic:
Privacy & Security
SubTopic:
General
Tags:
Automatic Assessment Configuration
Assessment
Security
Entitlements
Hello, I want to access the Docker socket API from inside the macOS App Sandbox. The method queries the API using curl with --unix-socket. However, the Sandbox blocks the request, as shown by the log: curl(22299) deny(1) network-outbound /Users/user/.docker/run/docker.sock Outgoing network traffic is generally allowed, but access to the Docker Unix socket is denied.
Here’s the code I’m using:
private func executeDockerAPI() -> String {
let process = Process()
let pipe = Pipe()
process.executableURL = URL(fileURLWithPath: "/usr/bin/curl")
process.arguments = [
"--unix-socket", "/Users/user/.docker/run/docker.sock",
"http://127.0.0.1/containers/json"
]
process.standardOutput = pipe
process.standardError = pipe
do {
try process.run()
process.waitUntilExit()
let data = pipe.fileHandleForReading.readDataToEndOfFile()
if let output = String(data: data, encoding: .utf8) {
return output
} else {
return "Error while decoding"
}
} catch {
return "Error running command: \(error.localizedDescription)"
}
}
Is there any entitlement or sandbox configuration I’m missing to allow access to /Users/user/.docker/run/docker.sock from inside the sandbox?
Hi,
I have a certificate, how can I display the certificate content in my Mac app just like Keychain Access app does. Can I popup the certificate content dialog just like Keychain Access app?
Hi everyone,
I’d like to clarify something regarding the behavior of Team IDs after an app transfer between Apple Developer accounts.
I have an app update that enforces a force update for all users. My plan is to release this update under the current developer account, and then proceed with transferring the app to a different developer account shortly afterward.
My concern is: once the transfer is complete, will users who download the same app version (released before the transfer) be logged out due to a change in Team ID? Specifically, does the transferred app continue to use the original Team ID (used to sign the last submitted build), or does the Team ID change immediately upon transfer — affecting Keychain access?
Any insights or confirmation on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Topic:
Privacy & Security
SubTopic:
General
Hi. We're writing Authorization Plugin and started with NullAuthPlugin compilation. When tried to run it on VM (Sonoma 14.6, SIP enabled), we're going into the following issue:
`2025-03-08 13:38:20.699503-0800 0xdcb0 Error 0x0 0 0 kernel: (AppleMobileFileIntegrity) [com.apple.MobileFileIntegrity:library_validation_failure] Library Validation failed: Rejecting '/Library/Security/SecurityAgentPlugins/NullAuthPlugin.bundle/Contents/MacOS/NullAuthPlugin' (Team ID: ABCD12EF34, platform: no) for process 'SecurityAgentHel(2094)' (Team ID: N/A, platform: yes), reason: mapping process is a platform binary, but mapped file is not'
As I understand, the platform binary is the one signed with Apple signature, which indeed is unavailable for us.
How can we avoid this issue and run the plugin? Perhaps we're missing some build setting requirement?