You can now easily request access to managed capabilities for your App IDs directly from the new Capability Requests tab in Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles > Identifiers. With this update, view available capabilities in one convenient location, check the status of your requested capabilities, and see any notes from Apple related to your requests. Learn more about capability requests.
Demystify code signing and its importance in app development. Get help troubleshooting code signing issues and ensure your app is properly signed for distribution.
Selecting any option will automatically load the page
Post
Replies
Boosts
Views
Activity
General:
Forums topic: Code Signing
Forums subtopics: Code Signing > General, Code Signing > Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles, Code Signing > Notarization, Code Signing > Entitlements
Forums tags: Code Signing, Signing Certificates, Provisioning Profiles, Entitlements
Developer Account Help — This document is good in general but, in particular, the Reference section is chock-full of useful information, including the names and purposes of all certificate types issued by Apple Developer web site, tables of which capabilities are supported by which distribution models on iOS and macOS, and information on how to use managed capabilities.
Developer > Support > Certificates covers some important policy issues
Bundle Resources > Entitlements documentation
TN3125 Inside Code Signing: Provisioning Profiles — This includes links to the other technotes in the Inside Code Signing series.
WWDC 2021 Session 10204 Distribute apps in Xcode with cloud signing
Certificate Signing Requests Explained forums post
--deep Considered Harmful forums post
Don’t Run App Store Distribution-Signed Code forums post
Resolving errSecInternalComponent errors during code signing forums post
Finding a Capability’s Distribution Restrictions forums post
Signing code with a hardware-based code-signing identity forums post
New Capabilities Request Tab in Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles forums post
Isolating Code Signing Problems from Build Problems forums post
Investigating Third-Party IDE Code-Signing Problems forums post
Determining if an entitlement is real forums post
Code Signing Identifiers Explained forums post
Mac code signing:
Forums tag: Developer ID
Creating distribution-signed code for macOS documentation
Packaging Mac software for distribution documentation
Placing Content in a Bundle documentation
Embedding nonstandard code structures in a bundle documentation
Embedding a command-line tool in a sandboxed app documentation
Signing a daemon with a restricted entitlement documentation
Defining launch environment and library constraints documentation
WWDC 2023 Session 10266 Protect your Mac app with environment constraints
TN2206 macOS Code Signing In Depth archived technote — This doc has mostly been replaced by the other resources linked to here but it still contains a few unique tidbits and it’s a great historical reference.
Manual Code Signing Example forums post
The Care and Feeding of Developer ID forums post
TestFlight, Provisioning Profiles, and the Mac App Store forums post
For problems with notarisation, see Notarisation Resources. For problems with the trusted execution system, including Gatekeeper, see Trusted Execution Resources.
Share and Enjoy
—
Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple
let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com"
Topic:
Code Signing
SubTopic:
General
Tags:
Entitlements
Provisioning Profiles
Signing Certificates
Code Signing
Hey everyone,
I was granted access to Family Controls (Distribution) for my main App ID
The entitlement is visible and enabled in the App ID configuration. I’ve successfully created and used a provisioning profile that injects com.apple.developer.family-controls for the main app. ✅
However, the issue is with an extension target under the same parent App ID and all others
Despite enabling the Family Controls (Development) capability in this extension’s App ID config, every new provisioning profile I generate for the extension fails to include the entitlement.
I’ve confirmed this by:
• Dumping the .mobileprovision with security cms -D → no sign of com.apple.developer.family-controls
• Recreating the profile multiple times (Development and Distribution)
• Ensuring the entitlement is toggled on in the portal
• Validating the parent app profile does include it
⸻
❗Question:
Is there a known issue where Family Controls doesn’t get injected into extension App IDs even after team approval?
Or is there an extra step I need to take to get this entitlement injected properly into provisioning profiles for app extensions?
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?
Topic:
Code Signing
SubTopic:
Notarization
So we are building a Tauri app and I have no been able to get our App to be Notarized using Developer ID.
We have a ticket open for 3 months now. Can anyone help me out here?
{
"logFormatVersion": 1,
"jobId": "e2ec4d13-bb83-41d4-a497-ba80cf830af1",
"status": "Rejected",
"statusSummary": "Team is not yet configured for notarization. Please contact Developer Programs Support at developer.apple.com under the topic Development and Technical / Other Development or Technical Questions.",
"statusCode": 7000,
"archiveFilename": "HIDDEN",
"uploadDate": "2026-01-23T16:13:37.589Z",
"sha256": "fd52815d5edf14b66b25529e89c207b2acff2c41642261e1049a479f19f2b72f",
"ticketContents": null,
"issues": null
}
How do we escalate to engineering team?
Sincerely,
Nash Gadre
https://camouflagenetworks.com
Topic:
Code Signing
SubTopic:
Notarization
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.
Topic:
Code Signing
SubTopic:
Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles
I am trying to build/deploy app to my phone however I get this message:
"provisioning profile doesn't include the currently selected device"
My developer account is pretty old one and used to be one the paid-version one. My understanding is that I should be able to deploy apps using free account but I don't see where I can add or delete devices....stuck in the loop over here! :-)
I've created support request via email but I don't know if that is being worked or not...four days since I put it in. I suppose my other options are new apple-id or pay $99 and hope apple pays attention then?
Any other suggestions?
Hi support,
Currently we are in a process of migrating our Qt application for MAC OS - ventura -v13.4.
There is a specific feature in our application in which client tries to communicate with server (Socket communication) using Qt's QsslSocket Apis . To achieve this we are using self signed Ca certificate (.pem ) generated by using openSSl commands which uses IP address of the server.
We are manually installing the certificate inside MAC OS - keychain and trusting it manually as well after installing .
This is working fine in XCode environment in debug mode in MAC OS and client -server handshake is happening successfully. How ever after creating .dmg file (installer) the same handshake is not happening and we are getting error -Connection time out.
Upon investigating this online, we got to know there has to be codesigning (both app bundle and the dmg file )along with notarization of the .dmg file in order to access keychain of MAC OS at runtime to access the self signed certificate installed.
Now we have 2 queries here.
Is code signing mandatory if we want to verify our app through keychain with .dmg file ?
If yes, whats the best way to achieve this ?
We have tried 2 options without any luck.
option1 - Trying to build our specific target among 'ALL_BUILD' with signing key settings inside xcode where we are providing developer provisional certificate with apple team ID . After that we are trying to archive to generate dmg file which is code signed.
We are failing here as the signed dmg is not getting installed due to other app related dependencies are missing .
option 2- Code signing the dmg and the app bundle manually outside the environment of xcode with developer certificate and team ID.
We are failing here as notarization needs to be done it seems to access keychain for certificate verification
If Code signing is not mandatory then whats the best possible way to achieve this considering manually installation of certificate inside keychain with adding trust option is not working at the moment.
Please specify the best solution if possible.
Topic:
Code Signing
SubTopic:
General
My notarization submission been "In Progress" status for over 30 minutes now. I thought this process should be much faster.
To ship a product outside of the Mac App Store, you must notarise it. The notary service issues a notarised ticket, and the ultimate consumer of that ticket is Gatekeeper. However, Gatekeeper does not just check the ticket; it also applies a variety of other checks, and it’s possible for those checks to fail even if your notarised ticket is just fine. To avoid such problems showing up in the field, test your product’s compatibility with Gatekeeper before shipping it.
To do this:
Set up a fresh machine, one that’s never seen your product before. If your product supports macOS 10.15.x, x < 4, the best OS version to test with is 10.15.3 [1].
Download your product in a way that quarantines it (for example, using Safari).
Disconnect the machine from the network. It might make sense to skip this step. See the discussion below.
Install and use your product as your users would.
If the product is signed, notarised, and stapled correctly, everything should work. If not, you’ll need to investigate what’s making Gatekeeper unhappy, fix that, and then retest. For detailed advice on that topic, see Resolving Trusted Execution Problems.
Run this test on a fresh machine each time. This is necessary because Gatekeeper caches information about your product and it’s not easy to reset that cache. Your best option is to do this testing on a virtual machine (VM). Take a snapshot of the VM before the first test, and then restore to that snapshot when you want to retest.
Also, by using a VM you can disable networking in step 3 without disrupting other work on your machine.
The reason why you should disable networking in step 3 is to test that you’ve correctly stapled the notarised ticket on to your product. If, for some reason, you’re unable to do that stapling, it’s fine to skip step 3. However, be aware that this may cause problems for a user if they try to deploy your product to a Mac that does not have access to the wider Internet. For more background on this, see The Pros and Cons of Stapling.
[1] macOS 10.15.4 fixes a bug that made Gatekeeper unnecessarily strict (r. 57278824), so by testing on 10.15.3 you’re exercising the worst case.
The process described above is by far the best way to test your Gatekeeper compatibility because it accurately tests how your users run your product. However, you can also run a quick, albeit less accurate test, using various command-line tools. The exact process depends on the type of product you’re trying to check:
App — Run syspolicy_check like this:
% syspolicy_check distribution WaffleVarnish.app
This tool was introduced in macOS 14. On older systems, use the older spctl tool. Run it like this:
% spctl -a -t exec -vvv WaffleVarnish.app
Be aware, however, that this check is much less accurate.
Disk image — Run spctl like this:
% spctl -a -t open -vvv --context context:primary-signature WaffleVarnish.dmg
Installer package — Run spctl like this:
% spctl -a -t install -vvv WaffleVarnish.pkg
Other code — Run codesign like this:
% codesign -vvvv -R="notarized" --check-notarization WaffleVarnish.bundle
This command requires macOS 10.15 or later.
Share and Enjoy
—
Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple
let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com"
Revision history:
2024-12-05 Added instructions for using syspolicy_check. Made other minor editorial changes.
2023-10-20 Added links to Resolving Trusted Execution Problems and The Pros and Cons of Stapling. Made other minor editorial changes.
2021-02-26 Fixed the formatting.
2020-04-17 Added the section discussing spctl.
2020-03-25 First version.
Hi everyone,
I’m having trouble getting remote push notifications working on iOS for a production Flutter app, and it looks like it’s related to the provisioning profile / entitlements used during signing.
Context
Platform: Flutter
Push provider: OneSignal (backend is Supabase; Android push works fine)
CI: Codemagic
Target: iOS TestFlight / App Store builds
I’m on Windows, so I cannot open Xcode locally. All iOS builds happen via Codemagic.
Capabilities / entitlements
In the Apple Developer portal, my App ID for com.zachspizza.app has:
Push Notifications capability enabled
A separate Broadcast capability is listed but currently not checked.
In my repo,
ios/Runner/Runner.entitlements
contains:
xml
aps-environment
production
So the project is clearly requesting the push entitlement.
Codemagic signing setup
For my App Store workflow (ios_appstore_release in
codemagic.yaml
):
I use a combination of manual and automatic signing:
Environment variables can provide:
P12_BASE64 + P12_PASSWORD (distribution certificate)
MOBILEPROVISION_BASE64 (a .mobileprovision file)
A script in the workflow:
Creates a temporary keychain.
Imports the .p12 and installs the .mobileprovision into ~/Library/MobileDevice/Provisioning Profiles.
For the final export, I generate an exportOptions.plist that does:
If a profile name/UUID is provided via env (PROV_PROFILE_SPEC, PROV_PROFILE_UUID, PROVISIONING_PROFILE_SPECIFIER, PROVISIONING_PROFILE):
xml
signingStylemanual
provisioningProfiles
com.zachspizza.app[profile name or UUID]
Otherwise, it falls back to:
xml
signingStyleautomatic
After archiving and exporting, my script runs:
bash
codesign -d --entitlements :- "$ARCHIVE_PATH/Products/Applications/Runner.app"
...
and again on the signed Runner.app inside the exported IPA
codesign -d --entitlements :- "$SIGNED_APP"
In both cases, the effective entitlements output does not show aps-environment, even though:
The App ID has push enabled.
Runner.entitlements
includes aps-environment = production.
Observed behavior
iOS devices (TestFlight build) do not receive remote push notifications at all.
Android devices receive notifications as expected with the same backend payloads.
OneSignal configuration and backend are verified; this appears to be an APNs / signing / entitlements problem.
The Codemagic logs strongly suggest that the provisioning profile being used for signing does not carry aps-environment.
Questions
Under what conditions would a distribution provisioning profile (for an App ID with Push Notifications enabled) result in a signed app without aps-environment, even when:
The entitlements file in the project includes aps-environment, and
The App ID in the Developer portal has Push Notifications enabled?
Does using a CI flow like the above (custom .p12 + .mobileprovision installed via script, exportOptions with signingStyle=manual) increase the chances of:
Xcode ignoring the requested entitlements, or
Selecting a provisioning profile variant that does not include the push entitlement?
Is there a recommended way, from the Apple side, to verify that a given .mobileprovision (the one I’m base64-encoding and installing in CI) definitely includes the aps-environment entitlement for my bundle ID?
i.e., a canonical method to inspect the profile and confirm that APNs is included before using it in CI?
Are there any known edge cases where:
The project entitlements include aps-environment,
The App ID has Push Notifications enabled,
But the final signed app still has no aps-environment, due to profile mismatch or signing configuration?
Given that I’m on Windows and can’t open Xcode to manage signing directly, I’d really appreciate guidance on how to ensure that the correct push-enabled provisioning profile is being used in this CI/manual-signing setup, and how to debug why aps-environment is being stripped or not applied.
CodeMagic Signing/Export Step:
Signing / entitlements output from Codemagic
Dumping effective entitlements for Runner.app in archive...
/Users/builder/clone/build/ios/archive/Runner.xcarchive/Products/Applications/Runner.app: code object is not signed at all
Failed to dump entitlements
Exporting IPA with exportOptions.plist...
2025-11-20 22:25:00.111 xcodebuild[4627:42054] [MT] IDEDistribution: -[IDEDistributionLogging _createLoggingBundleAtPath:]: Created bundle at path "/var/folders/w2/rrf5p87d1bbfyphxc7jdnyvh0000gn/T/Runner_2025-11-20_22-25-00.110.xcdistributionlogs".
2025-11-20 22:25:00.222 xcodebuild[4627:42054] [MT] IDEDistribution: Command line name "app-store" is deprecated. Use "app-store-connect" instead.
▸ Export Succeeded
Dumping entitlements from signed Runner.app inside exported IPA...
Executable=/private/var/folders/w2/rrf5p87d1bbfyphxc7jdnyvh0000gn/T/tmp.LHkTK7Zar0/Payload/Runner.app/Runner
warning: Specifying ':' in the path is deprecated and will not work in a future release
application-identifier.com.zachspizza.app
beta-reports-active
com.apple.developer.team-identifier
get-task-allow
As you can see, the signed app’s entitlements do not contain aps-environment at all, even though
Runner.entitlements
in the project has aps-environmentproduction and the App ID has Push Notifications enabled.
Thanks in advance for any help and pointers.
My notary service has been stuck for more than 5 hours. Is it because i am a new user or there is an notary service outage.
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.
Xcode is prompting I enter a codesign login password when I am archiving my project. My password seems incorrect since there is no action after I enter my password and tap allow. what could be the problem?
Topic:
Code Signing
SubTopic:
General
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.
Topic:
Code Signing
SubTopic:
Entitlements
Hi, I have some doubts about certificates expiration given this "new" requirement around signing for some common third party SDKs:
https://developer.apple.com/support/third-party-SDK-requirements/
Use case:
I build an SDK that will be distributed as an XCFramework and will be used in AppStore apps from different people.
My SDK internally uses some other third party libraries that are integrated as binaries
Let's assume some of those third party libraries are from the list above and therefore seem to be required to be signed.
I distribute my SDK with all in order (third party SDKs from that list with valid signatures)
People using my SDK over the time provide an update to their apps on the AppStore but by then some of the third party libraries of my SDK has an expired certificate.
What would happen?
People using my SDK won't have any issues as far as my SDK has a valid signature (despite third party libraries from the list have expired signatures)
People using my SDK will get a warning about it but still will be able to submit to the AppStore. In that case, would AppStore Review process decline the update?
People using my SDK will get an error, not being able to submit to the AppStore and will require me an update version of the SDK with those third party libraries re-signed.
My understanding is that all would work as far as my SDK has a valid signature (after all is the one taking responsibility of the code inside), independently of what happens with the signature of those libraries themselves, am I correct?.
Topic:
Code Signing
SubTopic:
Certificates, Identifiers & Profiles
Tags:
App Store
Frameworks
App Review
Xcode
Hi All,
Really weird one here...
I have two bundle ids with the same reverse dns name...
com.company.app1
com.company.app2
app1 was installed on the device a year ago.
app2 was also installed on the device a year ago but I released a new updated version and pushed it to the device via Microsoft InTunes.
A year ago the vendor Id's matched as the bundle id's were on the same domain of com.company.
Now for some reason the new build of app2 or any new app I build isn't being recognised as on the same domain as app1 even though the bundle id should make it so and so the Vendor Id's do not match and it is causing me major problems as I rely on the Vendor Id to exchange data between the apps on a certain device.
In an enterprise environment, does anyone know of any other reason or things that could affect the Vendor Id?
According to Apple docs, it seems that only the bundle name affects the vendor id but it isn't following those rules in this instance.
IMPORTANT The underlying issue here (FB8830007) was fixed in macOS 11.3, so the advice in this post is irrelevant if you’re building on that release or later.
Note This content is a repost of info from another thread because that thread is not world readable (it’s tied to the DTK programme).
A number of folks have reported problems where:
They have a product that supports older versions of macOS (anything prior to 10.11).
If they build their product on Intel, everything works.
If they build their product on Apple Silicon, it fails on those older versions of macOS.
A developer filed a bug about this (FB8830007) and, based on the diagnosis of that bug, I have some info to share as to what’s going wrong and how you can prevent it. Let’s start with some background.
macOS’s code signing architecture supports two different hash formats:
sha1, the original hash format, which is now deprecated
sha256, the new format, support for which was added in macOS 10.11
codesign should choose the signing format based on the deployment target:
If your deployment target is 10.11 or later, you get sha256.
If your deployment target is earlier, you get both sha1 and sha256.
This problem crops up because, when building for both Intel and Apple Silicon, your deployment targets are different. You might set the deployment target to 10.9 but, on Apple Silicon, that’s raised to the minimum Apple Silicon system, 11.0. So, which deployment target does it choose?
Well, the full answer to that is complex but the executive summary is that it chooses the deployment target of the current architecture, that is, Intel if you’re building on Intel and Apple Silicon if you’re building on Apple Silicon. For example:
intel% codesign -d --arch x86_64 -vvv Test664892.app
…
Hash choices=sha1,sha256
…
intel% codesign -d --arch arm64 -vvv Test664892.app
…
Hash choices=sha1,sha256
…
arm% codesign -d --arch x86_64 -vvv Test664892.app
…
Hash choices=sha256
…
arm% codesign -d --arch arm64 -vvv Test664892.app
…
Hash choices=sha256
…
The upshot is that you have problems if your deployment target is less than 10.11 and you sign on Apple Silicon. When you run on, say, macOS 10.10, the system looks for a sha1 hash, doesn’t find it, and complains.
The workaround is to supply the --digest-algorithm=sha1,sha256, which overrides the hash choice logic in codesign and causes it to include both hashes:
arm% codesign -s - --digest-algorithm=sha1,sha256 Test664892.app
arm% codesign -d --arch x86_64 -vvv Test664892.app
…
Hash choices=sha1,sha256
…
% codesign -d --arch arm64 -vvv Test664892.app
…
Hash choices=sha1,sha256
…
Share and Enjoy
—
Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple
let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com"
I am trying to sign my Mac app to use Network Extensions capability. But every time I create a profile it displays that to me:
on the other hand on the website it displays this to me:
I have recently enrolled in the Apple Developer to get my app notarized, and submitted an Archive for notarization, but it is taking forever. It has almost been a whole day, but the status is still in progress, whereas I have seen other developers say that the same takes 10-15 mins to an hour for them. Am I doing anything wrong? Please guide me through this.
Topic:
Code Signing
SubTopic:
Notarization
Notarization submission has been stuck in "In Progress" status for over 15 hours with no resolution.
Hi there, I am trying to roll out distribution to paid users who are unable to receive anything from me for quite some time now, and I've read that notarization is quick. But I've found myself to be under quite a delay. Wondering if I could please get some help.
Submission Details:
ID: e3dff14c-16ab-41a7-a81c-0d1774c66588
Submitted: 2026-02-08T16:42:07.377Z
File: Resonant-0.1.0-arm64.dmg (~200MB)
Status: In Progress (stuck)
Evidence:
Upload completed successfully within minutes
Delay is entirely server-side processing
Same app structure notarized successfully on Feb 5 (submission f5f4c241)
Multiple other submissions stuck since Feb 5 (see history below)
Stuck Submissions (all "In Progress" for days):
e3dff14c (Feb 8, 16:42 UTC) - 15+ hours
3e6bdcb5 (Feb 8, 16:11 UTC) - 16+ hours
37fd1b9f (Feb 8, 12:53 UTC) - 20+ hours
f21a1d9b (Feb 8, 12:31 UTC) - 20+ hours (different app, Clippa.zip)
417244e8 (Feb 8, 06:18 UTC) - 26+ hours
891f370f (Feb 7, 11:44 UTC) - 2+ days
1debba51 (Feb 7, 05:44 UTC) - 2+ days
6a06b87f (Feb 6, 14:16 UTC) - 3+ days
9867261c (Feb 6, 13:44 UTC) - 3+ days
1a7c3967 (Feb 6, 12:58 UTC) - 3+ days
Last Successful Notarization:
f5f4c241 (Feb 5, 18:24 UTC) - Accepted in normal timeframe
Impact:
Unable to distribute production release. This is blocking critical bug fixes from reaching users.
Expected Behavior:
Notarization should complete within 2-10 minutes as documented and as experienced prior to Feb 5.
Request:
Please investigate why submissions are not being processed and either:
Clear the backlog and process pending submissions
Provide guidance on how to proceed with distribution
I regularly see folks run into problems with their Developer ID signing identities. Historically I pointed them to my posts on this thread, but I’ve decided to collect these ideas together in one place.
If you have questions or comments, start a new thread here on DevForums and tag it with Developer ID so that I see it.
IMPORTANT Nothing I write here on DevForums is considered official documentation. It’s just my personal ramblings based on hard-won experience. There is a bunch of official documentation that covers the topics I touch on here, including:
Xcode documentation
Xcode Help
Developer Account Help
Developer > Support > Certificates
For a lot more information about code signing, see the Code Signing Resources pinned post.
Share and Enjoy
—
Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple
let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com"
The Care and Feeding of Developer ID
Most Apple signing assets are replaceable. For example, if you accidentally lose access to your Apple Development signing identity, it’s a minor inconvenience. Just use the Developer website to revoke your previous certificate and create a replacement. Or have Xcode do that for you.
IMPORTANT If you don’t understand the difference between a certificate and a digital identity, and hence signing identity, read Certificate Signing Requests Explained before reading this post.
Some signing assets are precious. Losing access to such assets has significant consequences.
Foremost amongst those are Developer ID signing identities. These allow you to sign Mac products that ship independently. Anyone with access to your Developer ID signing identity can sign code as you. This has a number of consequences, both for you and for your relationship with Apple.
Identify a Developer ID Signing Identity
A Developer ID signing identity consists of two parts: the certificate and the private key. There are two different flavours, identifiable by the subject name in the certificate:
Developer ID Application — This is named Developer ID Application: TTT, where TTT identifies your team. Use this to sign code and disk images.
Developer ID Installer — This is named Developer ID Installer: TTT, where TTT identifies your team. Use this to sign installer packages.
Note If you do KEXT development, there’s a third flavour, namely a KEXT-enabled Developer ID Application signing identity. For more details, see KEXT Code Signing Problems.
This post focuses on traditional signing identities, where you manage the private key. Xcode Cloud introduced cloud signing, where signing identities are “stored securely in the cloud”. These identities have the Managed suffix in Certificates, Identifiers, and Profiles. For example, Developer ID Application Managed is the cloud signing equivalent of Developer ID Application. To learn more about cloud signing, watch WWDC 2021 Session 10204 Distribute apps in Xcode with cloud signing. To identify these certificates ‘in the wild’, see Identifying a Cloud Managed Signing Certificate.
Limit Access to Developer ID
Anyone with your Developer ID signing identity can sign code as you. Given that, be careful to limit access to these signing identities. This is true both for large organisations and small developers.
In a large organisation, ensure that only folks authorised to ship code on behalf of your organisation have access to your Developer ID signing identities. Most organisations have some sort of release process that they use to build, test, and authorise a release. This often involves a continuous integration (CI) system. Restrict CI access to only those folks involved in the release process.
Even if you’re a small developer with no formal release process, you can still take steps to restrict access to Developer ID signing identities. See Don’t Leak Your Private Key, below.
In all cases, don’t use your Developer ID signing identities for day-to-day development. That’s what Apple Development signing identities are for.
Create Developer ID Signing Identities as the Account Holder
Because Developer ID signing identities are precious, the Developer website will only let the Account Holder create them. For instructions on how to do this, see Developer Account Help > Create certificates > Create Developer ID certificates. For more information about programme roles, see Developer > Support > Program Roles.
IMPORTANT In an Organization team it’s common for the Account Holder to be non-technical. They may need help getting this done. For hints and tips on how to avoid problems while doing this, see Don’t Lose Your Private Key and Don’t Leak Your Private Key, both below.
Limit the Number of Developer ID Signing Identities You Create
Don’t create Developer ID signing identities unnecessarily. Most folks only need to create one. Well, one Developer ID Application and maybe one Developer ID Installer. A large organisation might need more, perhaps one for each sub-unit, but that’s it.
There are two reasons why this is important:
The more you have, the more likely it is for one to get into the wrong hands. Remember that anyone with your Developer ID signing identity can sign code as you.
The Developer website limits you to 5 Developer ID certificates.
Note I can never remember where this limit is actually documented, so here’s the exact quote from this page:
You can create up to five Developer ID Application certificates and up to five Developer ID Installer certificates using either your developer account or Xcode.
Don’t Lose Your Private Key
There are two standard processes for creating a Developer ID signing identity:
Developer website — See Developer Account Help > Create certificates > Create Developer ID certificates.
Xcode — See Xcode Help > Maintaining signing assets > Manage signing certificates.
Both processes implicitly create a private key in your login keychain. This makes it easy to lose your private key. For example:
If you do this on one Mac and then get a new Mac, you might forget to move the private key to the new Mac.
If you’re helping your Organization team’s Account Holder to create a Developer ID signing identity, you might forget to export the private key from their login keychain.
It also makes it easy to accidentally leave a copy of the private key on a machine that doesn’t need it; see Don’t Leak Your Private Key, below, for specific advice on that front.
Every time you create a Developer ID signing identity, it’s a good idea to make an independent backup of it. For advice on how to do that, see Back Up Your Signing Identities, below.
That technique is also useful if you need to copy the signing identity to a continuous integration system.
If you think you’ve lost the private key for a Developer ID signing identity, do a proper search for it. Finding it will save you a bunch of grief. You might be able to find it on your old Mac, in a backup, in a backup for your old Mac, and so on. For instructions on how to extract your private key from a general backup, see Recover a Signing Identity from a Mac Backup.
If you’re absolutely sure that you previous private key is lost, use the Developer website to create a replacement signing identity.
If the Developer website won’t let you create any more because you’ve hit the limit discussed above, talk to Developer Programs Support. Go to Apple > Developer > Contact Us and follow the path Development and Technical > Certificates, Identifiers, and Provisioning Profiles.
Don’t Leak Your Private Key
Anyone with your Developer ID signing identity can sign code as you. Thus, it’s important to take steps to prevent its private key from leaking.
A critical first step is to limit access to your Developer ID signing identities. For advice on that front, see Limit Access to Developer ID, above.
In an Organization team, only the Account Holder can create Developer ID signing identities. When they do this, a copy of the identity’s private key will most likely end up in their login keychain. Once you’ve exported the signing identity, and confirmed that everything is working, make sure to delete that copy of the private key.
Some organisations have specific rules for managing Developer ID signing identities. For example, an organisation might require that the private key be stored in a hardware token, which prevents it from being exported. Setting that up is a bit tricky, but it offers important security benefits.
Even without a hardware token, there are steps you can take to protect your Developer ID signing identity. For example, you might put it in a separate keychain, one with a different password and locking policy than your login keychain. That way signing code for distribution will prompt you to unlock the keychain, which reminds you that this is a significant event and ensures that you don’t do it accidentally.
If you believe that your private key has been compromised, follow the instructions in the Compromised Certificates section of Developer > Support > Certificates.
IMPORTANT Don’t go down this path if you’ve simply lost your private key.
Back Up Your Signing Identities
Given that Developer ID signing identities are precious, consider making an independent backup of them. To back up a signing identity to a PKCS#12 (.p12) file:
Launch Keychain Access.
At the top, select My Certificates.
On the left, select the keychain you use for signing identities. For most folks this is the login keychain.
Select the identity.
Choose File > Export Items.
In the file dialog, select Personal Information Exchange (.p12) in the File Format popup.
Enter a name, navigate to your preferred location, and click Save.
You might be prompted to enter the keychain password. If so, do that and click OK.
You will be prompted to enter a password to protect the identity. Use a strong password and save this securely in a password manager, corporate password store, on a piece of paper in a safe, or whatever.
You might be prompted to enter the keychain password again. If so, do that and click Allow.
The end result is a .p12 file holding your signing identity. Save that file in a secure location, and make sure that you have a way to connect it to the password you saved in step 9.
Remember to backup all your Developer ID signing identities, including the Developer ID Installer one if you created it.
To restore a signing identity from a backup:
Launch Keychain Access.
Choose File > Import Items.
In the open sheet, click Show Options.
Use the Destination Keychain popup to select the target keychain.
Navigate to and select the .p12 file, and then click Open.
Enter the .p12 file’s password and click OK.
If prompted, enter the destination keychain password and click OK.
Recover a Signing Identity from a Mac Backup
If you didn’t independently backup your Developer ID signing identity, you may still be able to recover it from a general backup of your Mac. To start, work out roughly when you created your Developer ID signing identity:
Download your Developer ID certificate from the Developer website.
In the Finder, Quick Look it.
The Not Valid Before field is the date you’re looking for.
Now it’s time to look in your backups. The exact details depend on the backup software you’re using, but the basic process runs something like this:
Look for a backup taken shortly after the date you determined above.
In that backup, look for the file ~/Library/Keychains/login.keychain.
Recover that to a convenient location, like your desktop. Don’t put it in ~/Library/Keychains because that’ll just confuse things.
Rename it to something unique, like login-YYYY-MM-DD.keychain, where YYYY-MM-DD is the date of the backup.
In Keychain Access, choose File > Add Keychain and, in the resulting standard file panel, choose that .keychain file.
On the left, select login-YYYY-MM-DD.
Chose File > Unlock Keychain “login-YYYY-MM-DD“.
In the resulting password dialog, enter your login password at the date of the backup.
At the top, select My Certificates.
Look through the list of digital identities to find the Developer ID identity you want. If you don’t see the one you’re looking for, see Further Recovery Tips below.
Export it using the process described at the start of Back Up Your Signing Identities.
Once you’re done, remove the keychain from Keychain Access:
On the left, select the login-YYYY-MM-DD keychain.
Choose File > Delete Keychain “login-YYYY-MM-DD”.
In the confirmation alert, click Remove Reference.
The login-YYYY-MM-DD.keychain is now just a file. You can trash it, keep it, whatever, at your discretion.
This process creates a .p12 file. To work with that, import it into your keychain using the process described at the end of Back Up Your Signing Identities.
IMPORTANT Keep that .p12 file as your own independent backup of your signing identity.
Further Recovery Tips
If, in the previous section, you can’t find the Developer ID identity you want, there are a few things you might do:
Look in a different backup.
If your account has more than one keychain, look in your other keychains.
If you have more than one login account, look at the keychains for your other accounts.
If you have more than one Mac, look at the backups for your other Macs.
The login-YYYY-MM-DD keychain might have the private key but not the certificate. Add your Developer ID certificate to that keychain to see if it pairs with a private key.
Revision History
2025-03-28 Excised the discussion of Xcode’s import and export feature because that was removed in Xcode 16.
2025-02-20 Added some clarification to the end of Don’t Leak Your Private Key.
2023-10-05 Added the Recover a Signing Identity from a Mac Backup and Further Recovery Tips sections.
2023-06-23 Added a link to Identifying a Cloud Managed Signing Certificate.
2023-06-21 First posted.