I support Mac code signing and notarisation for DTS and, as part of that work, I often need to look inside various Apple-specific archive file formats. This post explains how I do this. It’s mostly for the benefit of Future Quinn™, but I figured other folks would appreciate it as well. IMPORTANT This post explains low-level techniques for inspecting archives. Do not use them to create archives. Instead, create your archives using the highest-level tool that will get the job done [1]. Flat Installer Package A flat installer package — appropriate for uploading to the Mac App Store or the notary service — is actually a xar archive. Unpack it using the xar tool. For example: % # List the contents: % % xar -tf InstallTest-1.0d1.pkg com.example.apple-samplecode.InstallTest.pkg com.example.apple-samplecode.InstallTest.pkg/Bom com.example.apple-samplecode.InstallTest.pkg/Payload com.example.apple-samplecode.InstallTest.pkg/PackageInfo Distribution % % # Actually unpack: # % mkdir tmp % cd tmp % xar -xf ../InstallTest-1.0d1.pkg % find . . ./Distribution ./com.example.apple-samplecode.InstallTest.pkg ./com.example.apple-samplecode.InstallTest.pkg/Bom ./com.example.apple-samplecode.InstallTest.pkg/Payload ./com.example.apple-samplecode.InstallTest.pkg/PackageInfo See the xar man page for more info on that tool. The resulting Bom file is a ‘bill of materials’. For more on this, see the bom man page for details. Use lsbom to dump this: % lsbom ./com.example.apple-samplecode.InstallTest.pkg/Bom . 0 0/0 ./InstallTest.app … ./InstallTest.app/Contents … ./InstallTest.app/Contents/Info.plist … ./InstallTest.app/Contents/MacOS … ./InstallTest.app/Contents/MacOS/InstallTest … … The Payload file contains… you guessed it… the installer’s payload. This is a gzipped cpio archive. To unpack it, pipe the file through cpio: % cpio -i < com.example.apple-samplecode.InstallTest.pkg/Payload 5072 blocks % find InstallTest.app InstallTest.app InstallTest.app/Contents InstallTest.app/Contents/Info.plist InstallTest.app/Contents/MacOS InstallTest.app/Contents/MacOS/InstallTest … See the cpio man page for more info on that tool. Note This is a bit of a hassle so most of the time I use a third-party app to unpack installer packages. Which one? Well, I can’t give away all my secrets (-: Xip Archives To extract a xip archive (pronounced, I believe, as chip archive), run the xip tool with the --expand argument: % xip --expand XipTest.xip However, if that doesn’t work you’ll need to dig into the archive. First, undo the outer xar wrapper: % xar -xf XipTest.xip This produces two files, Content and Metadata: % ls -l total 7552 -rw-r--r-- 1 quinn staff 1683391 10 Jun 17:05 Content -rw-r--r-- 1 quinn staff 287 10 Jun 17:08 Metadata -rw-r--r-- 1 quinn staff 1697157 10 Jun 17:05 XipTest.xip The Metadata file is an XML property list: % cat Metadata … <dict> <key>UncompressedSize</key> <integer>2598653</integer> <key>Version</key> <integer>1</integer> </dict> </plist> The Content file is an Apple Archive. Unpack this using the aa tool: % aa extract -ignore-eperm -i Content -d tmp % find tmp tmp tmp/XipTest tmp/XipTest/XipTest.app tmp/XipTest/XipTest.app/Contents tmp/XipTest/XipTest.app/Contents/Info.plist tmp/XipTest/XipTest.app/Contents/MacOS tmp/XipTest/XipTest.app/Contents/MacOS/QCodeIndex tmp/XipTest/XipTest.app/Contents/MacOS/XipTest … See the aa man page for more info on that tool. Note aa was previously known as yaa. iOS App Archives iOS apps are stored in an .ipa file. This is actually a zip archive under the covers. To unpack it, change the file name extension to .zip and then double click it it in the Finder (or use your favourite unzipping tool, like unzip or ditto). Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" [1] For installer package specifically, productbuild is your friend, but you can also use the lower-level tools like productsign, pkgbuild, and pkgutil. Revision History 2024-02-20 Added the iOS App Archives section. Added a note about third-party apps to the end of the Flat Installer Package section. 2022-09-30 Changed yaa to aa and added a reference to the Apple Archive framework. 2021-02-26 Fixed the formatting. 2020-06-10 First posted.

This post is part of a cluster of posts related to the trusted execution system. If you found your way here directly, I recommend that you start at the top. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Resolving Code Signing Crashes on Launch A code signing crash has the following exception information: Exception Type: EXC_CRASH (SIGKILL (Code Signature Invalid)) IMPORTANT Most developers never see a code signing crash because they use Xcode to build and sign their product. Xcode’s code signing infrastructure detects problems that could cause a code signing crash, and its automatic code signing fixes them for you! If you’re having problems with code signing crashes and you can use Xcode but aren’t, consider making the switch Xcode. The most common code signing crash is a crash on launch. To confirm that, look at the thread backtraces: Backtrace not available If you see valid thread backtraces this is not a crash on launch. Go back to Resolving Trusted Execution Problems and read through the Code Signing Crashes After Launch section. If you see no thread backtraces, your code didn’t run at all. The trusted execution system has blocked it. In most cases there is some evidence of the problem in the system log. For example: type: error time: 2022-05-19 06:29:17.640331 -0700 process: taskgated-helper subsystem: com.apple.ManagedClient category: ProvisioningProfiles message: com.example.apple-samplecode.OverClaim: Unsatisfied entitlements: com.apple.overclaim This indicates that the OverClaim app, with bundle ID com.example.apple-samplecode.OverClaim, claimed a restricted entitlement, com.apple.overclaim, that wasn’t authorised by a provisioning profile. For more information about provisioning profiles, see TN3125 Inside Code Signing: Provisioning Profiles. Specifically, the Entitlements on macOS section discusses the concept of restricted entitlements. For general information about the system log, see Your Friend the System Log. Normalise the Entitlements Property List Entitlement property list files look like text and so it’s tempting to edit them with a text editor. This can lead to all sorts of problems. If you have code whose entitlements property list contains comments, non-Unix line endings, or other weird formatting, the trusted execution system may block it. To avoid such problems, normalise your entitlements property list before passing it to codesign. For example: % plutil -convert xml1 MyApp.plist % codesign -s III --entitlements MyApp.plist MyApp.app Problems like this typically show up on older systems. Modern systems use DER-encoded entitlements, as discussed in The future is DER section of TN3125. A related gotcha is line breaks. Consider this entitlements property list file: % cat MyApp.plist … <plist version="1.0"> <dict> <key> com.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation</key> <true/> </dict> </plist> This is a valid property list but it doesn’t do what you think it does. It looks like it claims the com.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation entitlement but in reality it claims \ncom.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation. The system treats the latter as a restricted entitlement and thus requires it to be authorised by a profile. Of course no such profile will authorise that entitlement, and so the app is blocked by the trusted execution system. Similarly, consider this: % cat MyApp.plist … <plist version="1.0"> <dict> <key> com.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation</key> <true/> </dict> </plist> This claims com.apple.security.cs.disable-library-validation, note the leading space, and that’s also blocked by the trusted execution system. Check for Unauthorised Entitlements Sometimes the system log may not make it obvious what’s gone wrong. It may be easier to work this out by looking at the built program. The most common cause of problems like this is the app claiming a restricted entitlement that’s not authorised by a provisioning profile. To start your investigation, dump the entitlements to check for restricted entitlements: % codesign -d --entitlements - "OverClaim.app" …/OverClaim.app/Contents/MacOS/OverClaim [Dict] [Key] com.apple.application-identifier [Value] [String] SKMME9E2Y8.com.example.apple-samplecode.OverClaim [Key] com.apple.developer.team-identifier [Value] [String] SKMME9E2Y8 [Key] com.apple.overclaim [Value] [Bool] true [Key] com.apple.security.get-task-allow [Value] [Bool] true In this case all the entitlements except com.apple.security.get-task-allow are restricted. Note If there are no restricted entitlements, something else has gone wrong. Go back to Resolving Trusted Execution Problems and look for other potential causes. Now check that the provisioning profile was embedded correctly and extract its payload: % ls -l "OverClaim.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile" … OverClaim.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile % security cms -D -i "OverClaim.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile" -o "OverClaim-payload.plist" Check that the profile applies to this app by dumping the com.apple.application-identifier entitlement authorised by the profile: % /usr/libexec/PlistBuddy -c "print :Entitlements:com.apple.application-identifier" OverClaim-payload.plist SKMME9E2Y8.com.example.apple-samplecode.* This should match the com.apple.application-identifier entitlement claimed by the app. Repeat this for all the remaining restricted entitlements: % /usr/libexec/PlistBuddy -c "print :Entitlements:com.apple.developer.team-identifier" OverClaim-payload.plist SKMME9E2Y8 % /usr/libexec/PlistBuddy -c "print :Entitlements:com.apple.overclaim" OverClaim-payload.plist Print: Entry, ":Entitlements:com.apple.overclaim", Does Not Exist In this example the problem is the com.apple.overclaim entitlement, which is claimed by the app but not authorised by the profile. If that’s the case for your program, you have two choices: If you program doesn’t need this entitlement, update your code signing to not claim it. If you program relies on this entitlement, update your profile to authorise it. The entitlement allowlist in the profile is built by the Apple Developer website based on the capabilities enabled on your App ID. To change this allowlist, modify your App ID capabilities and rebuild your profile. Some capabilities are only available on some platforms and, within that platform, for some distribution channels. For these details for macOS, see Developer Account Help > Reference > Supported capabilities (macOS). Some capabilities require review and approval by Apple. For more on this, see Developer Account Help > Reference > Provisioning with capabilities. Check for Required Entitlements If your app claims any restricted entitlements, it must also claim the com.apple.application-identifier entitlement, with its value being your app’s App ID. macOS uses this value to confirm that the embedded provisioning profile is appropriate for your app. Without this, macOS might not use this profile, which means there’s nothing to authorise your app’s use of restricted entitlements, which prevents your app from launching. IMPORTANT macOS 12 and later will use an embedded provisioning profile even if the app doesn’t claim the com.apple.application-identifier entitlement. So, if your app works on macOS 12 and later but fails on macOS 11, this is likely the cause. If you claim the com.apple.application-identifier entitlement then I recommend that you also claim the com.apple.developer.team-identifier entitlement. That’s what Xcode does, and my experience is that it’s best to stay on that well-trodden path. Check the Signing Certificate If your program’s entitlements look good, the next most likely problem is that your program was signed by a signing identity whose certificate is not authorised by the profile. To debug this, first extract the certificate chain from your program: % codesign -d --extract-certificates=signed-with- "OverClaim.app" … % for i in signed-with-* ; do mv "${i}" "${i}.cer" ; done The first certificate is the one that matters: % certtool d "signed-with-0.cer" Serial Number : 53 DB 60 CC 85 32 83 DE 72 D9 6A C9 8F 84 78 25 … Subject Name : Other name : UT376R4K29 Common Name : Apple Development: Quinn Quinn (7XFU7D52S4) OrgUnit : SKMME9E2Y8 Org : Quinn Quinn Country : US … Now check this against each of the certificates authorised by the profile. Start by extracting the first one: % plutil -extract DeveloperCertificates.0 raw -o - OverClaim-payload.plist | base64 -D > "authorised0.cer" % certtool d "authorised0.cer" Serial Number : 46 A8 EF 2C 52 54 DE FD D1 76 9D 3A 41 7C 9E 43 … Subject Name : Other name : UT376R4K29 Common Name : Mac Developer: Quinn Quinn (7XFU7D52S4) OrgUnit : SKMME9E2Y8 Org : Quinn Quinn Country : US … That’s not a match. So try the next one: % plutil -extract DeveloperCertificates.1 raw -o - OverClaim-payload.plist | base64 -D > authorised1.cer % certtool d "authorised1.cer" Serial Number : 53 DB 60 CC 85 32 83 DE 72 D9 6A C9 8F 84 78 25 … Subject Name : Other name : UT376R4K29 Common Name : Apple Development: Quinn Quinn (7XFU7D52S4) OrgUnit : SKMME9E2Y8 Org : Quinn Quinn Country : US … This matches, which means the profile applies to this code. IMPORTANT When checking for a match, look at the Serial Number field. Don’t just rely on the Common Name field. A common mistake is to have two signing identities whose certificates have identical common names but the profile only lists one of them. If you get to the end of the list of certificate list in the profile and don’t find the certificate that the program was signed with, you know what the problem is: Your program is signed with a signing identity whose certificate is not listed in its profile. To fix this, either: Reconfigure your code signing to use a signing identity whose certificate is listed. Or update the profile to include the certificate of the signing identity you’re using. Check for Expiration If your certificates aren’t the problem, check that nothing has expired. Start with the certificate from the app’s signature: % certtool d "signed-with-0.cer" Serial Number : 53 DB 60 CC 85 32 83 DE 72 D9 6A C9 8F 84 78 25 … Not Before : 10:52:56 Apr 21, 2022 Not After : 10:52:55 Apr 21, 2023 … Also check the expiry date on the profile: % plutil -extract ExpirationDate raw -o - OverClaim-payload.plist 2023-04-21T11:02:58Z If either has expired, update it and re-sign your product. IMPORTANT Developer ID-signed code and installers include a secure timestamp. When the system checks the expiry date on a Developer ID certificate, it only checks that the certificate was valid at the time that the code was signed, base on that secure timestamp. Thus, an old Developer ID-signed app will continue to run after it’s certificate has expired. To learn more about secure timestamps, see TN3161 Inside Code Signing: Certificates. Check the Supported Devices If everything else checks out, the last thing to check is that the profile authorises the code to run on this machine. There are two cases here: Developer ID profiles authorise the code on all machines. Other profiles authorise the code on a specific list of machines. If you think you have a Developer ID profile, confirm that by looking for the ProvisionsAllDevices property: % plutil -extract "ProvisionsAllDevices" xml1 -o - "OverClaim-payload.plist" … No value at that key path or invalid key path: ProvisionsAllDevices If that’s not the case, get the ProvisionedDevices property and verify that the current machine’s provisioning UDID is listed there: % plutil -extract "ProvisionedDevices" xml1 -o - "OverClaim-payload.plist" … <array> … <string>A545CA26-80D7-5B38-A98C-530A798BE342</string> … </array> </plist> % system_profiler SPHardwareDataType … Provisioning UDID: A545CA26-80D7-5B38-A98C-530A798BE342 … If you get to the end any everything looks OK, your provisioning profile is not the cause of this crash. Return to Resolving Trusted Execution Problems for more suggestions. Revision History 2024-02-20 Added the Check for Required Entitlements section. Added a link to TN3161. Fixed the Developer Account Help links. 2022-06-08 Added the Normalise the Entitlements Property List section. 2022-05-20 First posted.

IMPORTANT I’m very pleased to report that, due to the hard work of a number of folks at Apple, this DevForums post has been replaced by official documentation: Packaging Mac software for distribution. I’m leaving this post in place as a historical curiosity, but please consult the official documentation going forward. This post is one of a pair of posts, the other one being Creating Distribution-Signed Code for Mac, that replaces my earlier Signing a Mac Product For Distribution post. For more background on this, see the notes at the top of Creating Distribution-Signed Code for Mac. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Packaging Mac Software for Distribution Build a zip archive, disk image, or installer package for distributing your Mac software. Overview Xcode is a great tool for creating and distributing Mac apps. Once you’ve written your code you can upload it to the App Store with just a few clicks. However, Xcode cannot do everything. For example: Some Mac software products are not apps. You might, for example, be creating a product that includes a daemon. Some Mac products include multiple components. Your daemon might include an app to configure it. Some Mac products ship outside of the App Store, and so need to be packaged for distribution. For example, you might choose to distribute your daemon and its configuration app in an installer package. Some Mac products are built with third-party developer tools. If your product cannot be built and distributed using Xcode alone, follow these instructions to package it for distribution. Note If you use a third-party developer tool to build your app, consult its documentation for advice specific to that tool. To start this process you need distribution-signed code. For detailed advice on how to create distribution-signed code, see Creating Distribution-Signed Code for Mac. If you ship your product frequently, create a script to automate the distribution process. Decide on a Container Format To get started, decide on your container format. Mac products support two distribution channels: The Mac App Store, for apps Independent distribution, for apps and non-apps, using Developer ID signing A Mac App Store app must be submitted as an installer package. In contrast, products distributed outside of the Mac App Store use a variety of different container formats, the most common being: Zip archive (.zip) Disk image (.dmg) Installer package (.pkg) You may choose to nest these containers. For example, you might ship an app inside an installer package on a disk image. Nesting containers is straightforward: Just work from the inside out, following the instructions for each container at each step. IMPORTANT Sign your code and each nested container (if the container supports signing). For example, if you ship an app inside an installer package on a disk image, sign the app, then create the installer package, then sign that package, then create the disk image, then sign the disk image. Each container format has its own pros and cons, so choose an approach based on the requirements of your product. Build a Zip Archive If you choose to distribute your product in a zip archive, use the ditto tool to create that archive: Create a directory that holds everything you want to distribute. Run the ditto tool as shown below, where DDD is the path to the directory from step 1 and ZZZ is the path where ditto creates the zip archive. % ditto -c -k --keepParent DDD ZZZ Zip archives cannot be signed, although their contents can be. Build an Installer Package If you choose to distribute your product in an installer package, start by determining your installer signing identity. Choose the right identity for your distribution channel: If you’re distributing an app on the Mac App Store, use a Mac Installer Distribution signing identity. This is named 3rd Party Mac Developer Installer: TTT, where TTT identifies your team. If you’re distributing a product independently, use a Developer ID Installer signing identity. This is named Developer ID Installer: TTT, where TTT identifies your team. For information on how to set up these installer signing identities, see Developer Account Help. Run the following command to confirm that your installer signing identity is present and correct: % security find-identity -v 1) 6210ECCC616B6A72F238DE6FDDFDA1A06DEFF9FB "3rd Party Mac Developer Installer: …" 2) C32E0E68CE92936D5532E21BAAD8CFF4A6D9BAA1 "Developer ID Installer: …" 2 valid identities found The -v argument filters for valid identities only. If the installer signing identity you need is not listed, see Developer Account Help. IMPORTANT Do not use the -p codesigning option to filter for code signing identities. Installer signing identities are different from code signing identities and the -p codesigning option filters them out. If your product consists of a single app, use the productbuild tool to create a simple installer package for it: % productbuild --sign III --component AAA /Applications PPP In this command: III is your installer signing identity. AAA is the path to your app. PPP is the path where productbuild creates the installer package. The above is the simplest possible use of productbuild. If you’re submitting an app to the Mac App Store, that’s all you need. If you have a more complex product, you’ll need a more complex installer package. For more details on how to work with installer packages, see the man pages for productbuild, productsign, pkgbuild, and pkgutil. For instructions on how to read a man page, see Reading UNIX Manual Pages. Build a Disk Image If you choose to distribute your product in a disk image: Create a directory to act as the source for the root directory of your disk image’s volume. Populate that directory with the items you want to distribute. If you’re automating this, use ditto rather than cp because ditto preserves symlinks. Use hdiutil command shown below to create the disk image, where SSS is the directory from step 1 and DDD is the path where hdiutil creates the disk image. Decide on a code signing identifier for this disk image. If you were signing bundled code, you’d use the bundle ID as the code signing identifier. However, disk images have no bundle ID and thus you must choose a code signing identifier for your image. For advice on how to do this, see the Sign Each Code section in Creating Distribution-Signed Code for Mac. Use the codesign command shown below to sign the disk image, where III is your Developer ID Application code signing identity (named Developer ID Application: TTT, where TTT identifies your team), BBB is the code signing identifier you chose in the previous step, and DDD is the path to the disk image from step 3. % hdiutil create -srcFolder SSS -o DDD % codesign -s III --timestamp -i BBB DDD For more information on code signing identities, see the Confirm Your Code Signing section in Creating Distribution-Signed Code for Mac. IMPORTANT Sign your disk image with a code signing identity, not an installer signing identity. There are various third-party tools that configure a disk image for distribution. For example, the tool might arrange the icons nicely, set a background image, and add a symlink to the Applications folder. If you use such a tool, or create your own tool for this, make sure that the resulting disk image: Is signed with your Developer ID Application code signing identity Is a UDIF-format read-only zip-compressed disk image (type UDZO) Submit Your App to the Mac App Store If you’re creating an app for the Mac App Store, submit your signed installer package using either the altool command-line tool or the Transporter app. For detailed instructions, see App Store Connect Help > Reference > Upload tools. Notarize Your Product If you’re distributing outside of the Mac App Store, notarize the file you intend to distribute to your users. For detailed instructions, see Customizing the Notarization Workflow. Skip the Export a Package for Notarization section because you already have the file that you want to submit. If you’re using nested containers, only notarize the outermost container. For example, if you have an app inside an installer package on a disk image, sign the app, sign the installer package, and sign the disk image, but only notarize the disk image. The exception to this rule is if you have a custom third-party installer. In that case, see the discussion in Customizing the Notarization Workflow. Staple Your Product Once you’ve notarized your product, staple the resulting ticket to the file you intend to distribute. Staple the Ticket to Your Distribution discusses how to do this for an app within a zip archive. The other common container formats, installer packages and disk images, support stapling directly. For example, to staple a tick to a disk image: % xcrun stapler staple FlyingAnimals.dmg Stapling is recommended but not mandatory. However, if you don’t staple a user might find that your product is blocked by Gatekeeper if they try to install or use it while the Mac is offline. Revision History 2024-02-19 Added a preamble that links to the official documentation, Packaging Mac software for distribution. 2022-03-01 First posted.

IMPORTANT I’m very pleased to report that, due to the hard work of a number of folks at Apple, this DevForums post has been replaced by official documentation: Creating distribution-signed code for macOS. I’m leaving this post in place as a historical curiosity, but please consult the official documentation going forward. This post is one of a pair of posts, the other one being Packaging Mac Software for Distribution, that replaces my earlier Signing a Mac Product For Distribution post. Over the past year I’ve been trying to convert my most useful code signing posts here on DevForums to official documentation, namely: Placing Content in a Bundle Updating Mac Software Signing a Daemon with a Restricted Entitlement Embedding a Command-Line Tool in a Sandboxed App Embedding Nonstandard Code Structures in a Bundle Unfortunately in the past month or so my Day Job™, answering developer questions for DTS, has become super busy, and so I’ve not had chance to complete this work by publish a replacement for Signing a Mac Product For Distribution. This post, and Packaging Mac Software for Distribution, represent the current state of that effort. I think these are sufficiently better than Packaging Mac Software for Distribution to warrant posting them here on DevForums while I wait for the quiet time needed to finish the official work. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Creating Distribution-Signed Code for Mac Sign Mac code for distribution using either Xcode or command-line tools. Overview Before shipping a software product for the Mac, you must first create distribution-signed code, that is, code that you can package up and then submit to either the Mac App Store or the notary service. The way you do this depends on the nature of your product and how it was built: If your product is a standalone app, possibly with nested code such as an app extension, that you build using Xcode, use Xcode to export a distribution-signed app. If your product isn't a standalone app, but you build it using Xcode, create an Xcode archive, and then manually export distribution-signed code from that archive. If you build your product using an external build system, such as make, add a manual signing step to your build system. Once you have distribution-signed code, package it for distribution. For more information, see Packaging Mac Software for Distribution. Note If you use a third-party developer tool to build your app, consult its documentation for advice specific to that tool. Export an App from Xcode If your product is a standalone app that you build with Xcode, follow these steps to export a distribution-signed app: Build an Xcode archive from your project. Export a distribution-signed app from that Xcode archive. You can complete each step from the Xcode app or automate the steps using xcodebuild. To build an Xcode archive using the Xcode app, select your app’s scheme and choose Product > Archive. This creates the Xcode archive and selects it in the organizer. To create a distribution-sign app from that archive, select the archive in the organizer, click Distribute App, and follow the workflow from there. Note If the button says Distribute Content rather than Distribute App, your archive has multiple items in its Products directory. Make sure that every target whose output is embedded in your app has the Skip Install (SKIP_INSTALL) build setting set; this prevents the output from also being copied into the Xcode archive’s Products directory. For more on this, see TN3110 Resolving generic Xcode archive issue. For more information about the Xcode archives and the organizer, see Distributing Your App for Beta Testing and Releases. To build an Xcode archive from the command line, run xcodebuild with the archive action. Once you have an Xcode archive, export a distribution-signed app by running xcodebuild with the -exportArchive option. For more information about xcodebuild, see its man page. For instructions on how to read a man page, see Reading UNIX Manual Pages. For information about the keys supported by the export options property list, run xcodebuild with the -help argument. Export a Non-App Product Built with Xcode If you build your product with Xcode but it’s not a standalone app, you can build an Xcode archive using the techniques described in the previous section but you cannot export distribution-signed code from that archive. The Xcode organizer and the -exportArchive option only work for standalone apps. To export a distribution-signed product from the Xcode archive: Copy the relevant components from the archive. Sign those components manually. The exact commands for doing this vary depending on how your product is structured, so let’s consider a specific example. Imagine your product is a daemon but it also has an associated configuration app. Moreover, the configuration app has a share extension, and an embedded framework to share code between the app and the extension. When you build an Xcode archive from this project it has this structure: DaemonWithApp.xcarchive/ Info.plist Products/ usr/ local/ bin/ Daemon Applications/ ConfigApp.app/ Contents/ embedded.provisionprofile Frameworks/ Core.framework/ … PlugIns/ Share.appex/ Contents/ embedded.provisionprofile … … … The Products directory contains two items: the daemon itself (Daemon) and the configuration app (ConfigApp.app). To sign this product, first copy these items out of the archive: % mkdir "to-be-signed" % ditto "DaemonWithApp.xcarchive/Products/usr/local/bin/Daemon" "to-be-signed/Daemon" % ditto "DaemonWithApp.xcarchive/Products/Applications/ConfigApp.app" "to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app" IMPORTANT When you copy code, use ditto rather than cp. ditto preserves symlinks, which are critical to the structure of Mac frameworks. For more information on this structure, see Placing Content in a Bundle. Symlinks are also useful when dealing with nonstandard code structures. For more details, see Embedding Nonstandard Code Structures in a Bundle. The code you copy from the Xcode archive is typically development-signed: % codesign -d -vv to-be-signed/Daemon … Authority=Apple Development: … … To ship this code, you need to re-sign it for distribution. Confirm Your Code Signing Identity To sign code for distribution you need a code signing identity. Choose the right identity for your distribution channel: If you’re distributing an app on the Mac App Store, use an Apple Distribution code signing identity. This is named Apple Distribution: TTT, where TTT identifies your team. Alternatively, you can use the old school Mac App Distribution code signing identity. This is named 3rd Party Mac Developer Application: TTT, where TTT identifies your team. If you’re distributing a product independently, use a Developer ID Application code signing identity. This is named Developer ID Application: TTT, where TTT identifies your team. For information on how to set up these code signing identities, see Developer Account Help. To confirm that your code-signing identity is present and correct, run the following command: % security find-identity -p codesigning -v 1) A06E7F3F8237330EE15CB91BE1A511C00B853358 "Apple Distribution: …" 2) ADC03B244F4C1018384DCAFFC920F26136F6B59B "Developer ID Application: …" 2 valid identities found The -p codesigning argument filters for code-signing identities. The -v argument filters for valid identities only. If the code-signing identity that you need isn't listed, see Developer Account Help. Each output line includes a SHA-1 hash that uniquely identifies the identity. If you have multiple identities with the same name, sign your code using this hash rather than the identity name. Identify the Code to Sign To sign your product, first identify each code item that you need to sign. For example, in the DaemonWithApp product, there are four code items: ConfigApp.app, Core.framework, Share.appex, and Daemon. For each code item, determine the following: Is it bundled code? Is it a main executable? IMPORTANT For a code item to be considered bundled code it must be the main code within a bundle. If, for example, you have an app with a nested helper tool, there are two code items: the app and the helper tool. The app is considered bundle code but the helper tool is not. In some cases, it might not be obvious whether the code item is a main executable. To confirm, run the file command. A main executable says Mach-O … executable. For example: % file "to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app/Contents/Frameworks/Core.framework/Versions/A/Core" … … Mach-O 64-bit dynamically linked shared library x86_64 … % file "to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app/Contents/PlugIns/Share.appex/Contents/MacOS/Share" … … Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64 … The Core.framework is not a main executable but Share.appex is. To continue the DaemonWithApp example, here’s a summary of this info for each of its code items: | Code Item | Bundled Code? | Main Executable | | --------- | ------------- | --------------- | | ConfigApp.app | yes | yes | | Core.framework | yes | no | | Share.appex | yes | yes | | Daemon | no | yes | Determine the Signing Order Sign code from the inside out. That is, if A depends on B, sign B before you sign A. For the DaemonWithApp example, the signing order for the app is: Core.framework Share.appex ConfigApp.app The app and daemon are independent, so you can sign them in either order. Configure Your Entitlements A code signature may include entitlements. These key-value pairs grant an executable permission to use a service or technology. For more information about this, see Entitlements. Entitlements only make sense on a main executable. When a process runs an executable, the system grants the process the entitlements claimed by its code signature. Do not apply entitlements to library code. It doesn’t do anything useful and can prevent your code from running. When signing a main executable, decide whether it needs entitlements. If so, create an entitlements file to use when signing that executable. This entitlements file is a property list containing the key-value pairs for the entitlements that the executable claims. If you build your product with Xcode, you might be able to use the .entitlements file that Xcode manages in your source code. If not, create the .entitlements file yourself. IMPORTANT The entitlements file must be a property list in the standard XML format with LF line endings, no comments, and no BOM. If you’re not sure of the file’s provenance, use plutil to convert it to the standard format. For specific instructions, see Ensure Properly Formatted Entitlements. If you have a development-signed version of your program you can get a head start on this by dumping its entitlements. For example: % codesign -d --entitlements - --xml "to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app" | plutil -convert xml1 -o - - … <dict> <key>com.apple.application-identifier</key> <string>SKMME9E2Y8.com.example.apple-samplecode.DaemonWithApp.App</string> <key>com.apple.developer.team-identifier</key> <string>SKMME9E2Y8</string> <key>com.apple.security.app-sandbox</key> <true/> <key>keychain-access-groups</key> <array> <string>SKMME9E2Y8.com.example.apple-samplecode.DaemonWithApp.SharedKeychain</string> </array> </dict> </plist> Keep in mind that some entitlements vary between development and distribution builds. For example: The value of the APS Environment (macOS) Entitlement changes from development to production. The com.apple.security.get-task-allow entitlement allows the debugger to attach to your program, so you rarely apply it to a distribution-signed program. To check whether an entitlement varies in distribution builds, see the documentation for that specific entitlement in Entitlements. For information about when it makes sense to distribute a program signed with the get-task-allow entitlement, see Avoid the Get-Task-Allow Entitlement section in Resolving Common Notarization Issues). Embed Distribution Provisioning Profiles In general, all entitlement claims must be authorized by a provisioning profile. This is an important security feature. For example, the fact that the keychain-access-groups entitlement must be authorized by a profile prevents other developers from shipping an app that impersonates your app in order to steal its keychain items. However, macOS allows programs to claim some entitlements without such authorization. These unrestricted entitlements include: com.apple.security.get-task-allow com.apple.security.application-groups Those used to enable and configure the App Sandbox Those used to configure the Hardened Runtime If your program claims a restricted entitlement, include a distribution provisioning profile to authorize that claim: Create the profile on the developer web site. Copy that profile into your program’s bundle. Note If your product includes a non-bundled executable that uses a restricted entitlement, package that executable in an app-like structure. For details on this technique, see Signing a Daemon with a Restricted Entitlement. To create a distribution provisioning profile, follow the instructions in Developer Account Help. Make sure to choose a profile type that matches your distribution channel (Mac App Store or Developer ID). Once you have a distribution provisioning profile, copy it into your program’s bundle. For information about where to copy it, see Placing Content in a Bundle. To continue the DaemonWithApp example, the configuration app and its share extension use a keychain access group to share secrets. The system grants the programs access to that group based on their keychain-access-groups entitlement claim, and such claims must be authorized by a provisioning profile. The app and the share extension each have their own profile. To distribute the app, update the app and share extension bundles with the corresponding distribution provisioning profile: % cp "ConfigApp-Dist.provisionprofile" "to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile" % cp "Share-Dist.provisionprofile" "to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app/Contents/PlugIns/Share.appex/Contents/embedded.provisionprofile" Modifying the app in this way will break the seal on its code signature. This is fine because you are going to re-sign the app before distributing it. IMPORTANT If you’re building your product with Xcode then you might find that Xcode has embedded a provisioning profile within your bundle. This is a development provisioning profile. You must replace it with a distribution provisioning profile. Sign Each Code Item For all code types, the basic codesign command looks like this: % codesign -s III PPP Here III is the name of the code signing identity to use and PPP is the path to the code to sign. The specific identity you use for III varies depending on your distribution channel, as discussed in Confirm Your Code Signing, above. Note If you have multiple identities with the same name, supply the identity’s SHA-1 hash to specify it unambiguously. For information on how to get this hash, see Confirm Your Code Signing, above. When signing bundled code, as defined in Identify the Code to Sign, above, use the path to the bundle for PPP, not the path to the bundle’s main code. If you’re re-signing code — that is, the code you’re signing is already signed — add the -f option. If you’re signing a main executable that needs entitlements, add the --entitlements EEE option, where EEE is the path to the entitlements file for that executable. For information on how to create this file, see Configure Your Entitlements, above. If you’re signing for Developer ID distribution, add the --timestamp option to include a secure timestamp. If you’re signing a main executable for Developer ID distribution, add the -o runtime option to enable the Hardened Runtime. For more information about the Hardened Runtime, see Hardened Runtime. If you’re signing non-bundled code, add the -i BBB option to set the code signing identifier. Here BBB is the bundle ID the code would have if it had a bundle ID. For example, if you have an app whose bundle ID is com.example.flying-animals that has a nested command-line tool called pig-jato, the bundle ID for that tool would logically be com.example.flying-animals.pig-jato, and that’s a perfectly fine value to use for BBB. Note For bundled code, you don’t need to supply a code signing identifier because codesign defaults to using the bundle ID. Repeat this signing step for every code item in your product, in the order you established in Determine the Signing Order, above. If you have a complex product with many code items to sign, create a script to automate this process. Here's the complete sequence of commands to sign the DaemonWithApp example for Developer ID distribution: % codesign -s "Developer ID Application" -f --timestamp "to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app/Contents/Frameworks/Core.framework" to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app/Contents/Frameworks/Core.framework: replacing existing signature % codesign -s "Developer ID Application" -f --timestamp -o runtime --entitlements "Share.entitlements" "to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app/Contents/PlugIns/Share.appex" to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app/Contents/PlugIns/Share.appex: replacing existing signature % codesign -s "Developer ID Application" -f --timestamp -o runtime --entitlements "ConfigApp.entitlements" "to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app" to-be-signed/ConfigApp.app: replacing existing signature % codesign -s "Developer ID Application" -f --timestamp -o runtime -i "com.example.apple-samplecode.DaemonWithApp.Daemon" "to-be-signed/Daemon" to-be-signed/Daemon: replacing existing signature Consider Deep Harmful When signing code, do not pass the --deep option to codesign. This option is helpful in some specific circumstances but it will cause problems when signing a complex product. Specifically: It applies the same code signing options to every code item that it signs, something that’s not appropriate. For example, you might have an app with an embedded command-line tool, where the app and the tool need different entitlements. The --deep option will apply the same entitlements to both, which is a serious mistake. It only signs code that it can find, and it only finds code in nested code sites. If you put code in a place where the system is expecting to find data, --deep won’t sign it. The first issue is fundamental to how --deep works, and is the main reason you should avoid it. The second issue is only a problem if you don’t follow the rules for nesting code and data within a bundle, as documented in Placing Content in a Bundle. Revision History 2024-02-19 Added a preamble that links to the official documentation, Creating distribution-signed code for macOS. 2022-08-17 Updated the Confirm Your Code Signing Identity section to cover Apple Distribution code signing identities. Added a link to TN3110. 2022-03-01 First posted.

Hello, I'm running into an issue when code signing my .app file on macOS. After introducing the --entitlements flag, I'm encountering an error that prevents the app from launching: Error Messages: App UI: "Cannot open the file" Terminal (using open file.app) The application cannot be opened for an unexpected reason, error=Error Domain=RBSRequestErrorDomain Code=5 "Launch failed." UserInfo={NSLocalizedFailureReason=Launch failed., NSUnderlyingError=0x60000216d620 {Error Domain=NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=153 "Unknown error: 153" UserInfo={NSLocalizedDescription=Launchd job spawn failed}}} Troubleshooting Details: Without code signing, the app launches and permission pop-ups function correctly (the file tauri generates). With code signing (but without --entitlements), the app launches but there are no permission pop-ups. All scenarios (without signing, with signing, with signing + --entitlements) all have Info.plist in the /Contents of the .app file Notarizing and stapling works fine when I do not include the --entitlements flag when signing. Code for signing with entitlements: codesign --timestamp --sign "Developer ID Application: ()" --options=runtime --entitlements ./src-tauri/Info.plist "${APP_FILE}" Specifications MacBook Air, M2, 16GB macOS Sonoma 14.3.1 Xcode 15.2 (Build version 15C500b)

We are using an iPhone app distributed as an AdHoc app, but an error message saying "App cannot be verified" was displayed. The error screen says, "Internet connection is required to verify the credibility of developer "Apple Distribution:●●●● CO.,LTD.(QQQ29B8GG2)"." When using this app, We are connected to the LAN, but not connected to the Internet. If you temporarily connect to the Internet and start the app when the error screen appears, the error screen will disappear. After that, when I switched from connecting to the Internet to connecting to LAN, it worked normally for a while, but after about 2 months, the same error screen appears again. Please tell me how to resolve this error.

Hello I jump on my mac every 3-4 months to release new version of my apps. Process usually is "ok" some cmake/compile issues as 99% of dev is done on windows but other than that its all good. But now I'm stuck. My app can run locally/start etc just fine, but clients are panicking because they can't run them. They have undefined developer warning. I don't understand this. Its notarised and been working for 2 years. What am I doing wrong ?! How can I test it ? I tried creating new user-profile on my mac, but there is no issue, app starts. Do I need to buy ANOTHER mac to test my apps before release ?! Can any1 help how to debug this issue? I'm lost, I used finder-compress myapp.app &amp; send it via slack to client to get him quickly going but that does not help either. - I though it was zip stripping down data or something. Anyway, very frustrated here, and lost. Can any1 help? hint? Is this good resource to check against? https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Security/Conceptual/CodeSigningGuide/Procedures/Procedures.html I've run spctl --assess --type execute myApp and I'm getting rejected (bundle format is ambiguous (could be app or framework)) But then why does it notarize/sign/etc with no errors ?! I'm so lost :- (((( Any help would be greatly appreciated I've attached app content &gt; Ok I've tested my older releases, they all have the same issue but they all work on client system. I'm so lost :- (((

Hi, I've ran into an issue which only seems to affect one of my macs. It's currently running 14.2.1 but I first saw this issue in 13.6. If I download the macOS Sonoma 14.2.1 installer (via App store) onto this particular machine, it will never execute the installer. It always reports that the installer is "damaged". Of course I did reasearch this online and you get the usual unhelpful posts which just say "re download it" and of course, I wouldn't be posting here had I not tried that. This happens with any macOS installer I download using the softwareupdate --fetch-full-installer utility as well. The thing is, if I copy this .app to another (identical as far as I can tell) Mac - it will work. So far this also seems limited to macOS installers - other third party apps are fine. I'm convinced this is related to trusted execution and something has gone wrong in the environment. I've been looking at my router logs to see if any connections may have been blocked (I'm using OPNsense) and also looking to see what connections are being made via Little Snitch and so far it looks fine. Again, other machines on the network can run these just fine. I've read through eskimo's excellent guide here: https://forums.developer.apple.com/forums/thread/706442 but I was wondering if anyone can give me some pointers to narrow this down further. As it stands, I can't trust this machine for app development if I can't even get the official Apple installers to run sucessfully.

I help a lot of developers with macOS trusted execution problems. For example, they might have an app being blocked by Gatekeeper, or an app that crashes on launch with a code signing error. If you encounter a problem that’s not explained here, start a new thread with the details. Make sure to add relevant tags — like Gatekeeper, Code Signing, and Notarization — so that I see your post. IMPORTANT macOS 14 has a new tool, syspolicy_check, that was specifically designed to help diagnose problems like this. I plan to update this post once I have more experience with it. In the meantime, however, if you hit a trusted execution problem and it reproduces on macOS 14, please try out syspolicy_check and let us know how that pans out. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" Resolving Trusted Execution Problems macOS supports three software distribution channels: The user downloads an app from the App Store. The user gets a Developer ID-signed program directly from its developer. The user builds programs locally using Apple or third-party developer tools. The trusted execution system aims to protect users from malicious code. It’s comprised of a number of different subsystems. For example, Gatekeeper strives to ensure that only trusted software runs on a user’s Mac, while XProtect is the platform’s built-in anti-malware technology. Note To learn more about these technologies, see Apple Platform Security. If you’re developing software for macOS your goal is to avoid trusted execution entanglements. You want users to install and use your product without taking any special steps. If, for example, you ship an app that’s blocked by Gatekeeper, you’re likely to lose a lot of customers, and your users’ hard-won trust. Trusted execution problems are rare with Mac App Store apps because the Mac App Store validation process tends to catch things early. This post is primarily focused on Developer ID-signed programs. Developers who use Xcode encounter fewer trusted execution problems because Xcode takes care of many code signing and packaging chores. If you’re not using Xcode, consider making the switch. If you can’t, consult the following for information on how to structure, sign, and package your code: Placing Content in a Bundle Embedding Nonstandard Code Structures in a Bundle Embedding a Command-Line Tool in a Sandboxed App Creating Distribution-Signed Code for Mac DevForums post Packaging Mac Software for Distribution DevForums post Gatekeeper Basics User-level apps on macOS implement a quarantine system for new downloads. For example, if Safari downloads a zip archive, it quarantines that archive. This involves setting the com.apple.quarantine extended attribute on the file. Note The com.apple.quarantine extended attribute is not documented as API. If you need to add, check, or remove quarantine from a file programmatically, use the quarantinePropertiesKey property. User-level unarchiving tools preserve quarantine. To continue the above example, if you double click the quarantined zip archive in the Finder, Archive Utility will unpack the archive and quarantine the resulting files. If you launch a quarantined app, the system invokes Gatekeeper. Gatekeeper checks the app for problems. If it finds no problems, it asks the user to confirm the launch, just to be sure. If it finds a problem, it displays an alert to the user and prevents them from launching it. The exact wording of this alert varies depending on the specific problem, and from release to release of macOS, but it generally looks like the ones shown in Apple > Support > Safely open apps on your Mac. The system may run Gatekeeper at other times as well. The exact circumstances under which it runs Gatekeeper is not documented and changes over time. However, running a quarantined app always invokes Gatekeeper. Unix-y networking tools, like curl and scp, don’t quarantine the files they download. Unix-y unarchiving tools, like tar and unzip, don’t propagate quarantine to the unarchived files. Confirm the Problem Trusted execution problems can be tricky to reproduce: You may encounter false negatives, that is, you have a trusted execution problem but you don’t see it during development. You may also encounter false positives, that is, things fail on one specific Mac but otherwise work. To avoid chasing your own tail, test your product on a fresh Mac, one that’s never seen your product before. The best way to do this is using a VM, restoring to a snapshot between runs. For a concrete example of this, see Testing a Notarised Product. The most common cause of problems is a Gatekeeper alert saying that it’s blocked your product from running. However, that’s not the only possibility. Before going further, confirm that Gatekeeper is the problem by running your product without quarantine. That is, repeat the steps in Testing a Notarised Product except, in step 2, download your product in a way that doesn’t set quarantine. Then try launching your app. If that launch fails then Gatekeeper is not the problem, or it’s not the only problem! Note The easiest way to download your app to your test environment without setting quarantine is curl or scp. Alternatively, use xattr to remove the com.apple.quarantine extended attribute from the download before you unpack it. For more information about the xattr tool, see the xattr man page. Trusted execution problems come in all shapes and sizes. The remaining sections address the most common ones. App Blocked by Gatekeeper If your product is an app and it works correctly when not quarantined but is blocked by Gatekeeper when it is, you have a Gatekeeper problem. For advice on how to investigate such issues, see Resolving Gatekeeper Problems. App Can’t Be Opened Not all failures to launch are Gatekeeper errors. In some cases the app is just broken. For example: The app’s executable might be missing the x bit set in its file permissions. The app’s executable might be subtly incompatible with the current system. A classic example of this is trying to run a third-party app that contains arm64e code. macOS requires that third-party kernel extensions use the arm64e architecture. In other circumstances, stick to arm64 for your shipping products. If you want to test arm64e code locally, see Preparing Your App to Work with Pointer Authentication. The app’s executable might claim restricted entitlements that aren’t authorised by a provisioning profile. Or the app might have some other code signing problem. Note For more information about provisioning profiles, see TN3125 Inside Code Signing: Provisioning Profiles. In such cases the system displays an alert saying: The application “NoExec” can’t be opened. [[OK]] Note In macOS 11 this alert was: You do not have permission to open the application “NoExec”. Contact your computer or network administrator for assistance. [[OK]] which was much more confusing. A good diagnostic here is to run the app’s executable from Terminal. For example, an app with a missing x bit will fail to run like so: % NoExec.app/Contents/MacOS/NoExec zsh: permission denied: NoExec.app/Contents/MacOS/NoExec And an app with unauthorised entitlements will be killed by the trusted execution system: % OverClaim.app/Contents/MacOS/OverClaim zsh: killed OverClaim.app/Contents/MacOS/OverClaim In some cases running the executable from Terminal will reveal useful diagnostics. For example, if the app references a library that’s not available, the dynamic linker will print a helpful diagnostic: % MissingLibrary.app/Contents/MacOS/MissingLibrary dyld[88394]: Library not loaded: @rpath/CoreWaffleVarnishing.framework/Versions/A/CoreWaffleVarnishing … zsh: abort MissingLibrary.app/Contents/MacOS/MissingLibrary Code Signing Crashes on Launch A code signing crash has the following exception information: Exception Type: EXC_CRASH (SIGKILL (Code Signature Invalid)) The most common such crash is a crash on launch. To confirm that, look at the thread backtraces: Backtrace not available For steps to debug this, see Resolving Code Signing Crashes on Launch. One common cause of this problem is running distribution-signed code. Don’t do that! For details on why that’s a bad idea, see Don’t Run App Store Distribution-Signed Code. Code Signing Crashes After Launch If your program crashes due to a code signing problem after launch, you might have encountered the issue discussed in Updating Mac Software. Non-Code Signing Failures After Launch The hardened runtime enables a number of security checks within a process. Some coding techniques are incompatible with the hardened runtime. If you suspect that your code is incompatible with the hardened runtime, see Resolving Hardened Runtime Incompatibilities. App Sandbox Inheritance If you’re creating a product with the App Sandbox enabled and it crashes with a trap within _libsecinit_appsandbox, it’s likely that you’re having App Sandbox inheritance problems. For the details, see Resolving App Sandbox Inheritance Problems. Library Loading Problem Most library loading problems have an obvious cause. For example, the library might not be where you expect it, or it might be built with the wrong platform or architecture. However, some library loading problems are caused by the trusted execution system. For the details, see Resolving Library Loading Problems. Explore the System Log If none of the above resolves your issue, look in the system log for clues as to what’s gone wrong. Some good keywords to search for include: gk, for Gatekeeper xprotect syspolicy, per the syspolicyd man page cmd, for Mach-O load command oddities amfi, for Apple mobile file integrity, per the amfid man page taskgated, see its taskgated man page yara, discussed in Apple Platform Security ProvisioningProfiles Here’s a log command that I often use when I’m investigating a trusted execution problem and I don’t know here to start: % log stream --predicate "sender == 'AppleMobileFileIntegrity' or sender == 'AppleSystemPolicy' or process == 'amfid' or process == 'taskgated-helper' or process == 'syspolicyd'" For general information the system log, see Your Friend the System Log. Revision History 2024-01-12 Added a specific command to the Explore the System Log section. Change the syspolicy_check callout to reflect that macOS 14 is no longer in beta. Made minor editorial changes. 2023-06-14 Added a quick call-out to the new syspolicy_check tool. 2022-06-09 Added the Non-Code Signing Failures After Launch section. 2022-06-03 Added a link to Don’t Run App Store Distribution-Signed Code. Fixed the link to TN3125. 2022-05-20 First posted.

Hi! I am wondering about certain features that I witnessed today. Base scenario: I created a developer certificate signed version of my installer package and then downloaded it via the internet. It has not been notarized. As expected, macOS prevented the opening of the package, stating that it could not be determined whether it contained for malicious content. But, several operations I then performed made this package trusted by macOS: I moved the package through a file-sharing service via Finder, namely OneDrive. The recipient machine immediately opened the unsigned package, without any interruption from the operating system. This sounds extremely unsecure. I checked manually with xattr, and indeed, the com.apple.quarantine attribute has been removed on the recipient side. I used pkgutil to explode the package, modified some files in it, then recompiled it. xattr again confirmed that the quarantine attribute has been removed. Why can pkgutil operate on untrusted packages? I have personally been extremely surprised operations as simple as these remove security hurdles in macOS. These scenarios can be harmful for end-users who have little IT knowledge. Why are they allowed? Are these scenarios considered the responsibility of end-users? Why do we notarize and sign with precious distribution certificates if it's this simple to bypass any security check on macOS? :(

I want to distribute my app with my developer ID. This works fine in a dmg or zip container if I download it on another Mac by FTP. But if I download it by HTTPS macOS brings a Popup: “Rocrail.app” is damaged and can’t be opened. You should move it to the Bin. I don't understand the diff between FTP and HTTPS download... How can I fix this?

Have been using a Mac for about a month, but am a 48-year engineer. Too many operating systems to list. Have my cross-platform self-contained Java application looking great on macOS with all the cool Mac conventions and a DMG "installer". Am attempting to get the existing self-updater working for macOS. It has conditional logic based on the operating system. But I'm stuck ... this is on a Macbook Pro 13" Retina Late 2013 2.8Ghz running macOS Big Sur 11.7.10 (fully updated). Deliberately supporting older hardware due to the nature of the application. The Process in Short Main program downloads updater program into a system temp directory Mounts updater DMG image with -mountroot in that directory Executes updater .app Exits Updater program downloads new Main program Mounts new program DMG image in the system temp directory The DMG image is the same one used for initial installations Makes back-ups of the Java and Plugins directories of existing program Copies the new Java and Plugins directories to existing Main program locations Umounts new program DMG image Either deletes back-up directories or restores them based on success or failure Restarts Main program .app Exits Main program receives special argument indicating success or failure of update Unmounts updater DMG image Displays appropriate dialog Issues The problems encountered are the mounting and unmounting of the DMG images executing hdiutil with Java Runtime.getRuntime().exec(). All mounts and unmounts have 1.5 sec. time-delayed retries for 3 attempts The initial download, mount, and execution of the updater works The mounting of the downloaded update DMG fails Running the command by hand works When the Main program is restarted the unmount of the updater DMG fails Running the command by hand works Also - these are unsigned images at this point. Have been unsure whether I would support macOS. But this is the last stumbling block. Questions Odd point - the initial download, mount and execution of the updater works Is this all because the DMG images are not signed (yet), so hdiutil is failing? Or is there something basic that I'm missing? Thank You For taking your time to read this. Any pointers would be appreciated. The Project https://github.com/Corionis/ELS/tree/Version-4.0.0 (not released) Component projects: https://github.com/Corionis

Our updating process is a launchd daemon that will download zipped bundle directories that contain resources to be used for updating. One of the bundles is an app that has a tool that is executed to perform the updating after all of the bundles have been downloaded. We are finding that on Sonoma starting in version 14.1 the zip extraction of the bundle containing the executable now is blocked on about 1 in 7 computers when the bundle directory itself is being created. &amp;lt;redacted&amp;gt;Updater &amp;lt;subsystem&amp;gt; Error during Extract state: Error Domain=&amp;lt;our error domain&amp;gt; Code=2001 "filesystem error: in create_directories: Operation not permitted ["/Library/Caches/&amp;lt;reverse-DNS name&amp;gt;/&amp;lt;redacted&amp;gt;Installer.bundle"]" UserInfo={NSLocalizedDescription=filesystem error: in create_directories: Operation not permitted ["/Library/Caches/&amp;lt;reverse-DNS name&amp;gt;/&amp;lt;redacted&amp;gt;Installer.bundle"]} We have seen the following error just preceding the above on some of these failures: &amp;lt;date&amp;gt; Error 0x45c755 184 0 sandboxd: tcc_server_message_request_authorization(kTCCServiceSystemPolicyAppBundles) failed: Error Domain=kTCCErrorDomain Code=2 "missing 'auth_value' in reply message" UserInfo={NSDescription=missing 'auth_value' in reply message} &amp;lt;date&amp;gt; Error 0x0 184 0 sandboxd: [com.apple.sandbox.reporting:violation] System Policy: &amp;lt;redacted&amp;gt;Updater(1431) deny(1) file-write-create /Library/Caches/&amp;lt;reverse-DNS name&amp;gt;/&amp;lt;redacted&amp;gt;Installer.bundle Violation: deny(1) file-write-create /Library/Caches/&amp;lt;reverse-DNS name&amp;gt;/&amp;lt;redacted&amp;gt;Installer.bundle I believe that the kTCCServiceSystemPolicyAppBundles failure occurs because TCC has determined that our Updater does not have permission to modify the Installer.bundle. Both the Updater and Installer.bundle have been signed by the same Apple Developer certificate (with the same team id). The Updater has been using this same procedure successfully but starts failing after the update to Sonoma v14.1. When this failure occurs, the updater has been able to extract the other resource-only bundles (no executables) that precede it. Computers that have this failure show the updater in the System Settings &amp;gt; Privacy &amp;amp; Security &amp;gt; Full Disk Access list as disabled. The computers that do not see this failure, do not have the updater listed in Full Disk Access. This has been raised as Feedback #FB13359407 What is the recommended way that an updater is supposed to create a new copy of an application without running into these TCC errors? Would extracting the app bundle as a directory without the .bundle extension and then renaming the directory to add the .bundle extension be a reasonable approach? BTW: The above approach does seem to work on Sonoma v 14.1 At what point does an app become subject to kTCCServiceSystemPolicyAppBundles? Is it is just a directory with a .app or .bundle extension or when a bundle structure exists that a signing check can validate?

I have created an "installer" style DMG for a VST3 audio plugin. It works fine on 13.4, but fails on 14.1. Note this is when I download the DMG from GitHub. On 14.1, when I drag the plugin icon to the link to /Library/Audio/Plug-Ins/VST3, the icon snaps back and the copy is not made. It DOES work if I use xattr to remove the quarantine. I can also mount the dmg, cd into the volume and use cp -R to copy the bundle through the link. Random other facts : The dmg is built on a GitHub runner (MacOS 12.6.9) using Xcode 14.2 The plug in and the dmg are signed. The dmg is notarized and stapled. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!

Have been working on a Java Open Source project for 8 years with the last 2+ years on a cross-platform desktop GUI for it with a separate updater. The self-contained application runs on Linux and Windows - now I'm trying to figure-out Mac. Have had a Macbook Pro 13" Late 2013 Retina running Big Sur 11.7.10 for 3 weeks. Very new to Apple, but a retired 48-year engineer trying to support MacOS for the first time. Building with Ant and appbundler task, https://github.com/TheInfiniteKind/appbundler, then creating a DMG with DMG Canvas, https://www.araelium.com/dmgcanvas. Deliberately supporting older systems due to the nature of this data management and back-up application. It's been adapted to the MacOS look 'n feel. Questions: If I sign-up as an Apple Developer and pay the fee will this 2013 Macbook Pro still be able to sign DMG files - that will work on the latest MacOS - after the end-of-support in December 2023? For a updater: Should both the main application and separate updater both be signed? The basic process is: Download updater into system temp folder, prepare and execute updater, stop desktop application, updater downloads new version, prepares and copies update to installed location, then restarts desktop application and ends the updater. I'm old and have setup this Open Source project and web site so that it can be passed-off to others when I stop, one way or another. Can the developer account or certificate credentials be transferred to someone else at that time? Guidance for a noob would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. The project, not released yet: https://github.com/Corionis/ELS/tree/Version-4.0.0

I was reading through this post: https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/718583 I've been able to reproduce this behavior by double-clicking a DMG in the Finder while the Mac is Offline. I checked the Notarization status of the app via spctl and it shows "Notarized Developer ID". So sure enough, Quinn's comment about Gatekeeper "ingesting" the notarization ticket stapled to the DMG and automatically applying it to the app inside is 100% spot-on. However, I can't seem to get the same behavior to happen when mounting the DMG via hdiutil in Terminal. While Offline, I do a: hdiutil attach /path/to/my/dmg.dmg and then spctl -a -t exec -vvv /Volumes/path/to/my/mounted/dmg/myapp.app After the spctl I'm seeing /Volumes/path/to/my/mounted/dmg/myapp.app: rejected source=Unnotarized Developer ID origin=Developer ID Application: My Developer Creds (XXXXXXXXXX) Is there a way to get Gatekeeper to "ingest" the notarization ticket stapled to the DMG when using hdiutil while Offline? Note 1: If I use hdiutil while online, everything works as expected. Note 2: I'm testing all this via a VM of macOS 12.7.1, if that makes any difference. Thanks!

I've built an app in Electron. I am in the process of preparing to release the app on my website as a free download. Since the app is free, I'm not really looking to spend a ton of money on security certificates. I can get the app to work on Windows by clicking through the Windows Defender, but I cannot run it at all on Mac even after disabling Gatekeeper. So my question is... Is it possible for me to get a certificate for my Electron app through the apple developer program. Keep in mind I have never touched the apple developer ecosystem. Avoiding subscriptions for this app's security certificates is what I am looking for. As that is all I have seen as options online so far. Any other suggestions are more than welcome! Thanks in advance!

Hello, I have made a basic c program and i have compiled it with gcc. This program has not been signed (i didn't run codesign). When i am trying to run this program from terminal, i don't get any Gatekeeper popup. My first question is... why ? I have create a SwiftUI project with Xcode (Xcode 15). I have set signing settings to "Sign to run locally" (by the way, can you tell me how i can disable signing in Xcode ?) I have opened terminal and i have changed current directory to ~/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivatedData/..../Products/Debug/MyApp.app/Contents/MacOS folder. Now i get a gatekeeper confirmation popup if run "./Myapp" from terminal. My second question is... Why ? Does that mean Gatekeeper only checks signed binaries ? Thanks

I have a toy application that uses CMake to generate a .dmg that contains a simple c++ binary that prints "codesignTest". The binary gets signed by CMake, and I manually sign the .dmg. I am using the "Unix Makefiles" generator, and am signing with a Developer ID Application certificate with a Private Key. Despite this, I still get an "App is damaged and can't be opened" error when running the binary on a secondary test MacOS machine. I've created a github repository with instructions on how to reproduce this problem, and I've copy/pasted the binary's signature below. Is there anything invalid with my signature? Thank you. cisl-ridgeland:~ pearse$ codesign -dv --verbose=4 /Applications/codesignTest.app/Contents/MacOS/codesignTest Executable=/Applications/codesignTest.app/Contents/MacOS/codesignTest Identifier=codesignTest Format=bundle with Mach-O thin (arm64) CodeDirectory v=20400 size=496 flags=0x0(none) hashes=10+2 location=embedded VersionPlatform=1 VersionMin=786432 VersionSDK=787200 Hash type=sha256 size=32 CandidateCDHash sha256=df158907d48f1eb3f5ef7b145d43d114bff0c6c3 CandidateCDHashFull sha256=df158907d48f1eb3f5ef7b145d43d114bff0c6c3e2564197c4a69594500f7f66 Hash choices=sha256 CMSDigest=df158907d48f1eb3f5ef7b145d43d114bff0c6c3e2564197c4a69594500f7f66 CMSDigestType=2 Executable Segment base=0 Executable Segment limit=16384 Executable Segment flags=0x1 Page size=4096 Launch Constraints: None CDHash=df158907d48f1eb3f5ef7b145d43d114bff0c6c3 Signature size=9045 Authority=Developer ID Application: University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (DQ4ZFL4KLF) Authority=Developer ID Certification Authority Authority=Apple Root CA Timestamp=Nov 1, 2023 at 9:43:36 AM Info.plist=not bound TeamIdentifier=DQ4ZFL4KLF Sealed Resources=none Internal requirements count=1 size=172

I've recently updated my development laptop, and my continuous integration build nodes (a pair of Mac minis) to macOS Sonoma. Prior to this update, my CI workflows passed without issue. Since updating, every time I attempt to run my app's unit tests, an impassible alert is shown stating: “MyApp” differs from previously opened versions. Are you sure you want to open it? Opening “MyApp” will allow it to access data from previously used versions of “MyApp”. My tests go no further, and my CI workflows fail. I found that if I switched from using Ad-Hoc code signing for my tests, that this dialog is no longer shown on my local development laptop, however it is still shown on my CI nodes. Is there some way to tell Xcode to bypass this warning? If there's not, Sonoma doesn't seem to be usable for doing testing.