Prioritize user privacy and data security in your app. Discuss best practices for data handling, user consent, and security measures to protect user information.

All subtopics
Posts under Privacy & Security topic

Post

Replies

Boosts

Views

Activity

Clarification requested on Secure Enclave key usage across apps with shared keychain access group
During internal testing, we observed the following behavior and would appreciate clarification on whether it is expected and supported in production environments. When generating an elliptic-curve cryptographic key pair using "kSecAttrTokenIDSecureEnclave", and explicitly specifying a "kSecAttrAccessGroup", we found that cryptographic operations (specifically encryption and decryption) could be successfully performed using this key pair from two distinct applications. Both applications had the Keychain Sharing capability enabled and were signed with the same provisioning profile identity. Given the documented security properties of Secure Enclave, backed keys, namely that private key material is protected by hardware and access is strictly constrained by design, we would like to confirm whether the ability for multiple applications (sharing the same keychain access group and signing identity) to perform cryptographic operations with the same Secure Enclave–backed key is expected behavior on iOS. Specifically, we are seeking confirmation on: Whether this behavior is intentional and supported in production. Whether the Secure Enclave enforces access control primarily at the application-identifier (App ID) level rather than the individual app bundle level in this scenario. Whether there are any documented limitations or guarantees regarding cross-application usage of Secure Enclave keys when keychain sharing is configured. Any guidance or references to official documentation clarifying this behavior would be greatly appreciated.
2
2
426
4w
Discrepancy in Sign in with Apple Notification Type: account-deleted vs account-delete
Hi everyone, I am currently implementing Server-to-Server Notifications for Sign in with Apple. I’ve encountered a discrepancy between the official documentation and the actual payload I received, and I would like to clarify which one is correct. The Situation: I triggered an account deletion event via privacy.apple.com to test the notification flow. When my server received the notification, the type field in the JSON payload was account-deleted (past tense). The Issue: According to the official Apple documentation, the event type is listed as account-delete (present tense). Here is the discrepancy I am observing: Documentation: account-delete Actual Payload: account-deleted My Question: Is the documentation outdated, or is this a known inconsistency? Should I handle both strings (account-delete and account-deleted) in my backend logic to be safe, or is account-deleted the new standard? Any insights or confirmation from those who have implemented this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
2
0
363
4w
Title: MAS Sandbox Quarantine Flag Issue - Plugins Marked "Corrupt" by Host App
I've made my first app and encountered an unexpected (potentially existential) issue. The Manager app is designed to tag 3rd party "plugins" used by a DAW, storing metadata in a local SQLite database, and move them between Active and Inactive folders. This allows management of the plugin collection - the DAW only uses what's in the Active folder. Permissions are obtained via security-scoped bookmarks on first launch. The app functions as intended: plugin bundles move correctly and the database tracks everything. No information is written to the plugins themselves. The Problem:
When moving plugins using fs.rename() , the MAS sandbox automatically adds the com.apple.quarantine extended attribute to moved files. When the DAW subsequently rebuilds its plugin cache, it interprets quarantined plugins as "corrupt" or potentially malicious and refuses to load them. Technical Details: Moving files with NSFileManager or Node.js fs APIs within sandbox triggers quarantine Sandboxed apps cannot call xattr -d com.apple.quarantine or use removexattr() The entitlement com.apple.security.files.user-selected.read-write doesn't grant xattr removal rights User workaround: run xattr -cr /path/to/plugins in Terminal - not acceptable for professional users Question:
Is there any MAS-compliant way to move files without triggering quarantine, or to remove the quarantine attribute within the sandbox? The hardened-runtime DMG build works perfectly (no sandbox = no quarantine added). Any insight appreciated!
2
0
477
4w
Submission Rejected: Guideline 5.1.1 - Legal - Privacy - Data Collection and Storage
Hi, I am in need of your help with publishing my game. I got the following explanation for the negative review of my app/game. 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 local network information 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" See examples of helpful, informative purpose strings. The problem is that they say my app asks to allow my app to find devices on local networks. And that this needs more explanation in the purpose strings. Totally valid to ask, but the problem is my app doesn't need local access to devices, and there shouldn't be code that asks this?? FYI the game is build with Unity. Would love some help on how to turn this off so that my app can get published.
1
0
333
4w
Prevent batch operations on Secure Enclave
Hi, I have an application that uses SecureEnclave keys to protect secrets. By passing an LAContext object to the Secure Enclave operations, authentication state can be preserved across decrypt operations, and you do not need to re-authenticate for doing different operations. However, for security reasons, I would like to avoid that it is possible to do operations in batch with certain keys generated by the Secure Enclave, by any application. This would avoid malicious binaries to batch-extract all the secrets that are protected by a key from my Secure Enclave, and force to re-authenticate on every operation. Is there a way to prevent batch operations without re-authenticating for Secure Enclave keys? thanks, Remko
1
0
595
4w
macOS 14.8 Keychain Import Fails for PKCS#12 Files Generated with OpenSSL 3.4.0
We recently upgraded OpenSSL from version 1.1.1 to 3.4.0. After this upgrade, we observed that PKCS#12 files generated using OpenSSL 3.4.0 fail to import into the macOS Keychain with the following error: Failed to import PKCS#12 data: -25264 (MAC verification failed during PKCS12 import (wrong password?)) This issue is reproducible on macOS 14.8.2. The same PKCS#12 files import successfully on other macOS versions, including 15.x and 26.x. Additionally, PKCS#12 files that fail to import on macOS 14.8 work correctly when copied and imported on other macOS versions without any errors. PKCS#12 Creation The PKCS#12 data is created using the following OpenSSL API: const char* platformPKCS12SecureKey = _platformSecureKey.has_value() ? _platformSecureKey.value().c_str() : NULL; PKCS12* p12 = PKCS12_create( platformPKCS12SecureKey, NULL, keys, _cert, NULL, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 ); if (!p12) { throw std::runtime_error("Failed to create PKCS#12 container"); } PKCS#12 Import The generated PKCS#12 data is imported into the macOS Keychain using the following code: NSString *certPassKey = [NSString stringWithUTF8String:getCertPassKey()]; NSDictionary *options = @{ (__bridge id)kSecImportExportPassphrase: certPassKey, (__bridge id)kSecAttrAccessible: (__bridge id)kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlockThisDeviceOnly, (__bridge id)kSecAttrIsExtractable: @YES, (__bridge id)kSecAttrIsPermanent: @YES, (__bridge id)kSecAttrAccessGroup: APP_GROUP }; CFArrayRef items = NULL; OSStatus status = SecPKCS12Import( (__bridge CFDataRef)pkcs12Data, (__bridge CFDictionaryRef)options, &items );
1
0
237
4w
Accessibility permission not granted for sandboxed macOS menu bar app (TestFlight & local builds)
Hello, I am developing a macOS menu bar window-management utility (similar in functionality to Magnet / Rectangle) that relies on the Accessibility (AXUIElement) API to move and resize windows and on global hotkeys. I am facing a consistent issue when App Sandbox is enabled. Summary: App Sandbox enabled Hardened Runtime enabled Apple Events entitlement enabled NSAccessibilityDescription present in Info.plist AXIsProcessTrustedWithOptions is called with prompt enabled Observed behavior: When App Sandbox is enabled, the Accessibility permission prompt never appears. The app cannot be manually added in System Settings → Privacy & Security → Accessibility. AXIsProcessTrusted always returns false. As a result, window snapping does not work. When App Sandbox is disabled: The Accessibility prompt appears correctly. The app functions as expected. This behavior occurs both: In local builds In TestFlight builds My questions: Is this expected behavior for sandboxed macOS apps that rely on Accessibility APIs? Are window-management utilities expected to ship without App Sandbox enabled? Is there any supported entitlement or configuration that allows a sandboxed app to request Accessibility permission? Thank you for any clarification.
1
0
364
4w
Not receiving Sign in with Apple Server-to-Server Notifications despite correct configuration
I received a notification stating that we need to register a server-to-server notification endpoint to handle the following three events: Changes in email forwarding preferences. Account deletions in your app. Permanent Apple Account deletions. However, even though we have registered the API endpoint under our Identifier configuration, it appears that we are not receiving any API calls when these events trigger. I honestly have no idea what’s going wrong. I’ve checked our WAF logs and there’s no trace of any incoming traffic at all. Is it possible that Apple hasn't started sending these notifications yet, or is there something I might be missing? I’m stuck and don’t know how to resolve this. I would really appreciate any help or insights you could share. Thank you.
0
0
221
Jan ’26
Not receiving Sign in with Apple Server-to-Server Notifications despite correct configuration
I received a notification stating that we need to register a server-to-server notification endpoint to handle the following three events: Changes in email forwarding preferences. Account deletions in your app. Permanent Apple Account deletions. However, even though we have registered the API endpoint under our Identifier configuration, it appears that we are not receiving any API calls when these events trigger. I honestly have no idea what’s going wrong. I’ve checked our WAF logs and there’s no trace of any incoming traffic at all. Is it possible that Apple hasn't started sending these notifications yet, or is there something I might be missing? I’m stuck and don’t know how to resolve this. I would really appreciate any help or insights you could share. Thank you.
0
0
150
Jan ’26
sshd-keygen-wrapper permissions problem
On macOS 26.1 (25B78) I can't give Full Disk Access to sshd-keygen-wrapper. Now my Jenkins jobs do not work because they do not have the permission to execute the necessary scripts. Until macOS 26.1 everything worked fine. I restarted the machine several times and tried to give access from Settings -> Privacy & Security -> Full Disk Access but it just does not work. I tried logging with ssh on the machine and executing a script but again nothing happened.
20
3
5.3k
Jan ’26
Control over "\(your_app) wants to open \(another_app)" Dialog
I can't find any information about why this is happening, nor can I reproduce the 'successful' state on this device. My team needs to understand this behavior, so any insight would be greatly appreciated! The expected behavior: If I delete both apps and reinstall them, attempting to open the second app from my app should trigger the system confirmation dialog. The specifics: I'm using the MSAL library. It navigates the user to the Microsoft Authenticator app and then returns to my app. However, even after resetting the phone and reinstalling both apps, the dialog never shows up (it just opens the app directly). Does anyone know the logic behind how iOS handles these prompts or why it might be persistent even after a reset? Thanks in advance!
0
0
150
Jan ’26
Apple Sign-In Fails with Mysterious 404 Error on Non-Existent /appleauth/auth/federate Endpoint
I'm implementing Apple Sign-In in my Next.js application with a NestJS backend. After the user authenticates with Apple, instead of redirecting to my configured callback URL, the browser makes a POST request to a mysterious endpoint /appleauth/auth/federate that doesn't exist in my codebase, resulting in a 404 error. Tech Stack Frontend: Next.js 16.0.10, React 19.2.0 Backend: NestJS with Passport (using @arendajaelu/nestjs-passport-apple) Frontend URL: https://myapp.example.com Backend URL: https://api.example.com Apple Developer Configuration Service ID: (configured correctly in Apple Developer Console) Return URL (only one configured): https://api.example.com/api/v1/auth/apple/callback Domains verified in Apple Developer Console: myapp.example.com api.example.com example.com Backend Configuration NestJS Controller (auth.controller.ts): typescript @Public() @Get('apple') @UseGuards(AuthGuard('apple')) async appleAuth() { // Initiates Apple OAuth flow } @Public() @Post('apple/callback') // Changed from @Get to @Post for form_post @UseGuards(AuthGuard('apple')) async appleAuthCallback(@Req() req: any, @Res() res: any) { const result = await this.authService.socialLogin(req.user, ipAddress, userAgent); // Returns HTML with tokens that uses postMessage to send to opener window } Environment Variables: typescript APPLE_CLIENT_ID=<service_id> APPLE_TEAM_ID=<team_id> APPLE_KEY_ID=<key_id> APPLE_PRIVATE_KEY_PATH=./certs/AuthKey_XXX.p8 APPLE_CALLBACK_URL=https://api.example.com/api/v1/auth/apple/callback FRONTEND_URL=https://myapp.example.com The passport-apple strategy uses response_mode: 'form_post', so Apple POSTs the authorization response to the callback URL. Frontend Implementation Next.js API Route (/src/app/api/auth/apple/route.js): javascript export async function GET(request) { const backendUrl = new URL(`${API_URL}/auth/apple`); const response = await fetch(backendUrl.toString(), { method: "GET", headers: { "Content-Type": "application/json", }, }); const responseText = await response.text(); return new NextResponse(responseText, { status: response.status, headers: { "Content-Type": contentType || "text/html" }, }); } Frontend Auth Handler: javascript export const handleAppleLogin = (router, setApiError) => { const frontendUrl = window?.location?.origin; // Opens popup to /api/auth/apple window.open( `${frontendUrl}/api/auth/apple`, "appleLogin", "width=500,height=600" ); }; The Problem Expected Flow: User clicks "Login with Apple" Frontend opens popup → https://myapp.example.com/api/auth/apple Frontend proxies to → https://api.example.com/api/v1/auth/apple Backend redirects to Apple's authentication page User authenticates with Apple ID Apple POSTs back to → https://api.example.com/api/v1/auth/apple/callback Backend processes and returns success HTML Actual Behavior: After step 5 (user authentication with Apple), instead of Apple redirecting to my callback URL, the browser makes this unexpected request: POST https://myapp.example.com/appleauth/auth/federate?isRememberMeEnabled=false Status: 404 Not Found Request Payload: json { "accountName": "user@example.com", "rememberMe": false } Network Tab Analysis From Chrome DevTools, the call stack shows: send @ app.js:234 ajax @ app.js:234 (anonymous) @ app.js:10 Ee.isFederated @ app.js:666 _callAuthFederate @ app.js:666 The Ee.isFederated and _callAuthFederate functions appear to be minified library code, but I cannot identify which library. What I've Verified ✅ The /appleauth/auth/federate endpoint does not exist anywhere in my codebase: bash grep -r "appleauth" src/ # No results grep -r "federate" src/ # No results ✅ Apple Developer Console shows only ONE Return URL configured (verified multiple times) ✅ Changed callback route from @Get to @Post to handle form_post response mode ✅ Rebuilt frontend completely multiple times: bash rm -rf .next npm run build ✅ Tested in: Incognito/Private browsing mode Different browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Safari) Different devices After clearing all cache and cookies ✅ No service workers registered in the application ✅ No external <script> tags or CDN libraries loaded ✅ package.json contains no AWS Amplify, Auth0, Cognito, or similar federated auth libraries ✅ Checked layout.js and all root-level files - no external scripts Additional Context Google Sign-In works perfectly fine using the same approach The mysterious endpoint uses a different path structure (/appleauth/ vs /api/auth/) The call appears to originate from client-side JavaScript (based on the call stack) The app.js file with the mysterious functions is the built Next.js bundle Questions Where could this /appleauth/auth/federate endpoint be coming from? Why is the browser making this POST request instead of following Apple's redirect to my configured callback URL? Could this be related to the response_mode: 'form_post' in the Apple Passport strategy? Is there something in the Apple Developer Primary App ID configuration that could trigger this behavior? Could this be a Next.js build artifact or some hidden dependency? The mysterious call stack references (Ee.isFederated, _callAuthFederate) suggest some library is intercepting the Apple authentication flow, but I cannot identify what library or where it's being loaded from. The minified function names suggest federated authentication, but I have no such libraries in my dependencies. Has anyone encountered similar issues with Apple Sign-In where an unexpected endpoint is being called?
0
0
447
Jan ’26
ASAuthorizationPlatformPublicKeyCredentialAssertion.signature algorithm
Hello everyone. Hope this one finds you well) I have an issue with integrating a FIDO2 server with ASAuthorizationController. I have managed to register a user with passkey successfully, however when authenticating, the request for authentication response fails. The server can't validate signature field. I can see 2 possible causes for the issue: ASAuthorizationPlatformPublicKeyCredentialAssertion.rawAuthenticatorData contains invalid algorithm information (the server tries ES256, which ultimately fails with false response), or I have messed up Base64URL encoding for the signature property (which is unlikely, since all other fields also require Base64URL, and the server consumes them with no issues). So the question is, what encryption algorithm does ASAuthorizationController use? Maybe someone has other ideas regarding where to look into? Please help. Thanks)
1
0
921
Dec ’25
iOS 26.1 iPhone 15 pro max 偶现冷启动,文件系统挂载失败?
冷启动后我们读文件,发现:"error_msg":"未能打开文件“FinishTasks.plist”,因为你没有查看它的权限。 是否有这些问题: 「iOS 26 iPhone 16,2 cold launch file access failure」) 核心内容:多名开发者反馈 iPhone 15 Pro(iOS 26.0/26.1)冷启动时读取 Documents 目录下的 plist 文件提示权限拒绝,切后台再切前台恢复,苹果员工回复「建议延迟文件操作至 applicationDidBecomeActive 后」。
0
0
245
Dec ’25
Issue: Plain Executables Do Not Appear Under “Screen & System Audio Recording” on macOS 26.1 (Tahoe)
Summary I am investigating a change in macOS 26.1 (Tahoe) where plain (non-bundled) executables that request screen recording access no longer appear under: System Settings → Privacy & Security → Screen & System Audio Recording This behavior differs from macOS Sequoia, where these executables did appear in the list and could be managed through the UI. Tahoe still prompts for permission and still allows the executable to capture the screen once permission is granted, but the executable never shows up in the UI list. This breaks user expectations and removes UI-based permission management. To confirm the behavior, I created a small reproduction project with both: a plain executable, and an identical executable packaged inside an .app bundle. Only the bundled version appears in System Settings. Observed Behaviour 1. Plain Executable (from my reproduction project) When running a plain executable that captures the screen: macOS displays the normal screen-recording permission prompt. Before granting permission: screenshots show only the desktop background. After granting permission: screenshots capture the full display. The executable does not appear under “Screen & System Audio Recording”. Even when permission is granted manually (e.g., dragging the executable into the pane), the executable still does not appear, which prevents the user from modifying or revoking the permission through the UI. If the executable is launched from inside another app (e.g., VS Code, Terminal), the parent app appears in the list instead, not the executable itself. 2. Bundled App Version (from the reproduction project) I packaged the same code into a simple .app bundle (ScreenCaptureApp.app). When running the app: The same permission prompt appears. Pre-permission screenshots show the desktop background. Post-permission screenshots capture the full display. The app does appear under “Screen & System Audio Recording”. This bundle uses the same underlying executable — the only difference is packaging. Hypothesis macOS 26.1 (Tahoe) appears to require app bundles for an item to be shown in the Screen Recording privacy UI. Plain executables: still request and receive permission, still function correctly after permission is granted, but do not appear in the System Settings list. This may be an intentional change, undocumented behavior, or a regression. Reproduction Project The reproduction project includes: screen_capture.go A simple Go program that captures screenshots in a loop. screen_capture_executable Plain executable built from the Go source. ScreenCaptureApp.app/ App bundle containing the same executable. build.sh Builds both the plain executable and the app bundle. Permission reset and TCC testing scripts. The project demonstrates the behavior consistently. Steps to Reproduce Plain Executable Build: ./build.sh Reset screen capture permissions: sudo tccutil reset ScreenCapture Run: ./screen_capture_executable Before granting: screenshots show desktop only. Grant permission when prompted. After granting: full screenshots. Executable does not appear in “Screen & System Audio Recording”. Bundled App Build (if not already built): ./build.sh Reset permissions (optional): sudo tccutil reset ScreenCapture Run: open ScreenCaptureApp.app Before granting: screenshots show desktop. After granting: full screenshots. App bundle appears in the System Settings list. Additional Check I also tested launching the plain executable as a child process of another executable, similar to how some software architectures work. Result: Permission prompt appears Permission can be granted Executable still does not appear in the UI, even though TCC tracks it internally → consistent with the plain-executable behaviour. This reinforces that only app bundles are listed. Questions for Apple Is the removal of plain executables from “Screen & System Audio Recording” an intentional change in macOS Tahoe? If so, does Apple now require all screen-recording capable binaries to be packaged as .app bundles for the UI to display them? Is there a supported method for making a plain executable (launched by a parent process) appear in the list? If this is not intentional, what is the recommended path for reporting this as a regression? Files Unfortunately, I have discovered the zip file that contains my reproduction project can't be directly uploaded here. Here is a Google Drive link instead: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1sXsr3Q0g6_UzlOIL54P5wbS7yBkpMJ7A/view?usp=sharing Thank you for taking the time to review this. Any insight into whether this change is intentional or a regression would be very helpful.
3
0
980
Dec ’25
Binary executable requires Accessibility Permissions in Tahoe
I have a binary executable which needs to be given Accessibility Permissions so it can inject keypresses and mouse moves. This was always possible up to macOS 15 - when the first keypress arrived the Accessibility Permissions window would open and allow me to add the executable. However this no longer works in macOS 26: the window still opens, I navigate to the executable file and select it but it doesn't appear in the list. No error message appears. I'm guessing that this may be due to some tightening of security in Tahoe but I need to figure out what to change with my executable to allow it to work.
5
2
918
Dec ’25
Missing Documentation for Email Based One-Time Codes
The One-time codes documentation details how to enable autofill for SMS based codes. However, there is no details about how to correctly implement autofill for email based codes. I am observing the email based autofill works inconsistently when using email based OTC. In my application: There is latency of 10-15 seconds from when the email arrives to when it is available for autofill. After the autofill feature is used, the OTC email is not being deleted from the inbox automatically. Without documentation, it's unclear to me what I might be doing wrong that is causing these side effects. I found an ietf proposal for how autofill with email based codes might work, but it’s unclear if this is how Apple has implemented the feature: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-wells-origin-bound-one-time-codes-00.html#name-email Existing docs for Autofill using SMS: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/enabling-autofill-for-domain-bound-sms-codes
0
0
62
Dec ’25
Unexpected errSecInteractionNotAllowed (-25308) When Reading Keychain Item with kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock in Background
Hi everyone, I’m encountering an unexpected Keychain behavior in a production environment and would like to confirm whether this is expected or if I’m missing something. In my app, I store a deviceId in the Keychain based on the classic KeychainItemWrapper implementation. I extended it by explicitly setting: kSecAttrAccessible = kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock My understanding is that kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock should allow Keychain access while the app is running in the background, as long as the device has been unlocked at least once after reboot. However, after the app went live, I observed that when the app performs background execution (e.g., triggered by background tasks / silent push), Keychain read attempts intermittently fail with: errSecInteractionNotAllowed (-25308) This seems inconsistent with the documented behavior of kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock. Additional context: The issue never occurs in foreground. The issue does not appear on development devices. User devices are not freshly rebooted when this happens. The Keychain item is created successfully; only background reads fail. Setting the accessibility to kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlockThisDeviceOnly produces the same result. Questions: Under what circumstances can kSecAttrAccessibleAfterFirstUnlock still cause a -25308 error? Is there any known restriction when accessing Keychain while the app is running in background execution contexts? Could certain system states (Low Power Mode, Background App Refresh conditions, device lock state, etc.) cause Keychain reads to be blocked unexpectedly? Any insights or similar experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!
3
0
620
Dec ’25