Overview

Post

Replies

Boosts

Views

Activity

App stuck in Waiting for Review since 4 August 2026, never entered In Review
My app store review submission has sat in Waiting for Review for 8 days and has never moved to In Review. Checked and confirmed: Free Apps Agreement active Nothing in Resolution Center No contact from App Review at any point Reviewer demo account verified working end to end against production No builds removed or resubmitted since the original submission Developer Support case 20000132574764 was filed 8 August. No response so far. Is anyone else seeing new-app submissions failing to enter the queue in August? Any guidance on escalating this would be appreciated.
1
1
14
3h
Waiting for Review since July 30, 2026 — Express Evaluations iOS 1.0 (12+ days)
Hello App Review Team, Our iOS app has been stuck in "Waiting for Review" for more than 12 days with no status change and no Resolution Center messages. App name: Express Evaluations Developer: Express Evaluations, Inc Platform: iOS Version: 1.0 Current status: Waiting for Review Submitted: July 30, 2026 at 11:52 AM We opened an App Review Status case on August 10, 2026 and have not received a reply yet. Case ID: 20000133168856 This delay is blocking our planned release and is affecting stakeholder trust in our launch timeline. Could someone from App Review please check whether this submission is stuck in the queue and advise on the current status? Thank you for your help.
9
3
745
3h
App has been stuck in Waiting for Review after several rejections
I’ve been trying to get this app through App Review for more than two months now. It was rejected a few times before. I changed what Apple asked me to change and submitted it again each time. The current version has now been sitting in Waiting for Review for quite a while and nothing is happening. I’m actually not very familiar with the App Store review process, so I’m not sure how long Waiting for Review is supposed to take. Do I just leave it there and wait? Or should I submit it again? I’m also wondering if I need to create a new submission / new ID at this point. I don’t want to keep changing things if that just sends me back to the beginning of the queue. The whole thing has already been going on for more than two months, so I’m a bit lost on what I’m supposed to do now. Has anyone run into this before?
1
1
46
3h
Reference to malloc in IPA
The IPA generated for the project contains references to the malloc function, which is flagged as an insecure function. This occurs when using standard higher-order functions such as filter, first, etc., on arrays containing value-type elements. How can we address or eliminate this security finding? Example code struct ContentView: View { let arr = [1,2,3] var body: some View { VStack { Image(systemName: "globe") .imageScale(.large) .foregroundStyle(.tint) Text("Hello, world!") } .padding() .onAppear{ let twos = arr.filter{ $0 == 2 } } } }
1
0
16
3h
Claude Agent stuck on loading spinner in Xcode 26 Intelligence settings on macOS 27 beta 5
I'm unable to use the Claude Agent in Xcode 26 (stable release) running on macOS 27 beta 5. Steps to reproduce: Open Xcode 26 Settings > Intelligence Select Claude Agent Expected: The Account section loads and allows me to sign in / manage my Claude account. Actual: The Account row shows a loading spinner indefinitely and never resolves, so I can't sign in or use the Claude Agent at all. Environment: Xcode 26 (stable), macOS 27 beta 5. Is this a known incompatibility with macOS 27 beta 5? Is there a workaround (e.g. clearing a cache or re-adding the account) to get the Claude Agent account section to load?
0
0
3
3h
First submission stuck in "Waiting for Review" for 6+ days, expedite and support requests unanswered
My first app "Remote for Roku TV: RokuMote" (Apple ID 6795405234, iOS) was submitted for review on July 31, 2026. It has been in "Waiting for Review" ever since — 6+ days — and has never entered "In Review". No messages in App Store Connect, nothing in Resolution Center. What I've already done: Expedited review request on August 4 — no response. Email to App Review — no response. Developer Support case "App Review Status" on August 5 (Case ID 20000128844197) — pending. All metadata, review notes and a demo video were attached at submission. The account is new (created July 28, 2026) — if new accounts are queued differently, I'd appreciate knowing that. Is anyone from Apple able to look into this? Is there a known backlog right now for first submissions?
2
0
55
3h
SwiftUI Slider onEditingChanged is unreliable on iOS 26
For information I stumbled upon a regression with SwiftUI Slider on iOS 26. Its onEditingChanged closure might be called twice when interaction ends, with a final Boolean incorrect value of true provided to the closure. As a result apps cannot reliably rely on this closure to detect when an interaction with the slider starts or ends. I filed a feedback under FB20283439 (iOS 26.0 regression: Slider onEditingChanged closure is unreliable).
9
10
766
4h
Concurrent upload tasks over HTTP/2: request bodies sent strictly sequentially (no stream interleaving) — starved tasks fail behind slow-POST protection
We maintain a large file-sync app. After our upload endpoint moved to HTTP/2, we found that when multiple NSURLSessionUploadTasks run concurrently, all tasks send their request headers immediately (multiplexed on a single connection — confirmed identical localPort via URLSessionTaskMetrics), but request bodies are transmitted essentially one task at a time: while one task's body saturates the uplink, the other tasks send zero body bytes for the entire duration (countOfBytesSent == 0). This reproduces with both background sessions (BackgroundUploadTask) and default sessions (LocalUploadTask), on Wi-Fi and cellular. iOS 26.5, Xcode 26.3, tasks created with uploadTask(with:fromFile:), multipart POST. This becomes a hard failure behind a load balancer with slow-POST (RUDY) protection: requests whose first body KB doesn't arrive within 5s are rejected with 408. The starved tasks fail even though the network is healthy. For comparison, OkHttp on Android writes bodies in interleaved 16KB DATA frames under identical conditions, so all streams pass the first-KB check. Metrics excerpt (4 concurrent uploads, one h2 connection): task 1: duration 18.7s, sent 180MB (full line rate) task 2: duration 22.8s, sent 43MB (transmitted only after task 1 finished) task 3: duration 46.0s, sent 247MB (after task 2) task 4: duration 5.2s, sent 0 bytes → 408 from the gateway In one run a starved stream sent exactly 65,536 bytes (the default initial stream window) and then stalled. Questions: Is this sender-side scheduling (no round-robin between streams' DATA frames) the expected CFNetwork behavior? Does URLSessionTask.priority influence HTTP/2 stream weighting for upload bodies? Is there any other way to influence bandwidth sharing between concurrent uploads? Is there any supported way to opt out of HTTP/2 (constrain ALPN to HTTP/1.1) or cap concurrent streams per connection from the client side? We believe there isn't, but would like to confirm. What is the recommended pattern for concurrent large uploads in this situation? Filed as FB24062619 with full sanitized metrics attached. Happy to provide more data.
3
0
591
4h
NetworkExtension URL Filter stops during startup only in TestFlight (NEAgentURLFilterErrorDomain Code=3, NEMembershipCheckerErrorDomain Code=3)
Hi Apple Developer Support / community, I am seeing a URL filter startup failure only in TestFlight builds. The same code path works in development and Ad Hoc builds. App setup: Host app bundle id: com.expleo.protectus.filter.main URL filter control extension bundle id: com.expleo.protectus.filter.main.buf Extension point: com.apple.networkextension.url-filter-control Using NEURLFilterManager / NEURLFilterControlProvider on iOS 26.x App Group and network extension entitlements are configured on host + extension Observed behavior: Extension process starts successfully (pid created) Status changes to starting Then updatePrefilterWithCompletionHandler runs Immediately after, plugin transitions to stopping with error 3 System retries in a loop Key logs: Error Domain=NEAgentURLFilterErrorDomain Code=3 Failed to startFilter NEPIRChecker start block reports: Error Domain=com.apple.CipherML Code=1100 Underlying Error Domain=com.apple.CipherML Code=1800 Message says details are redacted Example sequence: NEURLFilterPlugin ... started with pid ... status changed to starting updatePrefilterWithCompletionHandler enter acceptAgentClients enter setStatus:error ... NEAgentURLFilterErrorDomain Code=3 status changed to stopping with error 3 extension disposed / teardown repeats Important detail: This failure is reproducible in TestFlight only. Same code and configuration works in development and Ad Hoc builds. What we already checked: Extension launches and is discovered correctly by neagent App/extension bundle identifiers are correct App group and network extension entitlements are present in source and archive checks We tested startup gating around local bloom/prefilter readiness We still get NEMembershipCheckerErrorDomain Code=3 with CipherML 1100/1800 in TestFlight Questions: Is NEMembershipCheckerErrorDomain Code=3 in this startup path known to indicate PIR membership/status validation failure in distribution context? Are there TestFlight-specific prerequisites or server-side requirements for PIR/CipherML path that differ from development/Ad Hoc? Is there any supported way to get non-redacted diagnostic details for CipherML 1100/1800 (beyond sysdiagnose submission)? Are there recommended fail-open/fail-closed startup patterns when PIR status is temporarily unavailable? If needed, I can provide: Full sysdiagnose timestamped bundle Exact iOS version and device model Repro steps from clean install Full log stream around NEPIRChecker and NEURLFilterPlugin transitions Thanks in advance.
4
0
433
4h
Upgrading to Golden Gate Beta 27.0 having BuildVersion 26A5388g removes entires already present in authorisation db files
We have a macOS application that adds entries to the Authorization Database (system.login.console) as part of its setup. We observed that after upgrading from macOS Tahoe to the macOS Golden Gate beta, the entries added by our application were removed, and the default system.login.console configuration was restored. Is this expected behavior in the current Golden Gate beta, or is it a known issue? If it is a known issue, is there an expectation that it will be addressed in a future beta release? Additionally, is there any recommended approach for preserving or restoring application-specific Authorization Database entries across major macOS upgrades? It would be of great help if there is any suggested approach for the same.
3
0
196
4h
Vertically Off-Center Components in NSSearchToolbarItem in macOS 27 Developer Beta 5
In macOS 27 developer beta 5, search fields in toolbars (NSSearchToolbarItem instances) have their placeholder text, search strings, and magnifying glass icons vertically off-center. I reported this as FB24286690. You can see this in the Feedback Assistant app. The “Search” placeholder text, the magnifying glass, and the search string are all closer to the top of the toolbar item than the bottom. My feedback has a sample project demonstrating this, along with screenshots. I have a more detailed writeup at: https://www.virtualsanity.com/202608/vertically-off-center-components-in-nssearchtoolbaritem-in-macos-27-developer-beta-5/
Topic: UI Frameworks SubTopic: AppKit Tags:
0
0
16
5h
dismissalConfirmationDialog not working in iOS
It compiles for iOS but seems to be a no-op. Is this coming in a future beta? Or is there a way to hide the default back button when using the presentation + zoom navigationTransition APIs? I have a view that needs to show a confirmation on dismissal. I was previously doing this manually using a custom toolbar button + confirmationDialog modifier. But in iOS 27 I don't seem to be able to hide the navigation back button since I added the zoom navigationTransition API. This allows the user to tap the back button and lose changes. Not a great UX.
0
0
14
5h
Title: PackageKit install fails with PKInstallErrorDomain Code=120 and NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=1 during _relinkFile operation Body: We are investigating an intermittent package installation failure on macOS Tahoe 26.5 and are trying to understand
We are investigating an intermittent package installation failure on macOS Tahoe 26.5 and are trying to understand the conditions under which PackageKit may return the following errors during an upgrade installation: PKInstallErrorDomain Code=120 NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=1 ("Operation not permitted") The package successfully passes validation and authorization, and pre-install scripts complete successfully. The failure occurs during the final PackageKit commit phase when PackageKit attempts to move/relink content from the installer sandbox to the destination volume. Relevant log snippets: PackageKit: Shoving /Root to / Error relinking file (primary): .../Contents/_CodeSignature/CodeResources failed _relinkFile(...) Operation not permitted PackageKit: Install Failed: Error Domain=PKInstallErrorDomain Code=120 NSUnderlyingError: Error Domain=NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=1 "Operation not permitted" The issue is intermittent and only affects a subset of systems. The same package installs successfully on many machines running the same macOS version. Has anyone encountered similar _relinkFile / CodeResources failures during package upgrades? In particular, we are interested in understanding: Common causes of NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=1 during PackageKit relink operations. Whether existing signed application bundle metadata (CodeResources) can cause relink failures during upgrades. Any Installer or PackageKit changes in recent Tahoe releases that could affect bundle replacement during package installation. Any insights would be appreciated.
4
0
255
6h
Foundation Model tool calling giving system error in iOS27 beta 5
After updating my iOS and xcode to latest iOS 27 beta5 and xcode 27 beta5 all the system language model session calls with tool calls inclusion throwing Unrecognized system-instruction prefix ID: com.apple.fm_api.tool_calls_override error. The same code was working perfectly in iOS27 beta 4. Even the apple sample project OrigamiCraftingADynamicTutorialForAppleIntelligence failing with the same error when tool calls invoked. Anybody else facing similar issue or any workaround for this issue? sample code: struct GetRecordNotesTool: Tool { let name = "getRecordNotes" let description = "Fetches internal notes and returns Note_Title and Note_Content for up to 10 notes." @Generable struct Arguments { @Guide(description: "The API name of the module, e.g. Companies or Contacts") var module_api_name: String @Guide(description: "The unique record ID to fetch notes for") var record_id: String } func call(arguments: Arguments) async throws -> String { return "Fetched content" } }
1
0
230
6h
MagSafe charging light problem
Dear Apple, It looks likes Apple like my new idea, and a lot. I know this as Apple always want their things to be easily understandable, and for MagSafe to be understandable it has to mimic macOS. I got an unreliable reply for the first post, just a person telling me I’m in the wrong place for this. The MagSafe is amazing, but everything needs to be upgraded in some way or the other, DTS engineers are saying that developer forums are for developing, not feedback. So here I am, developing the MagSafe wire, as I would by now rather get a third-party MagSafe wire if mine possibly breaks. $49. This is the price tag for an official MagSafe wire. If it can’t show anything but charging and charged, it’s something that must be reproduced. We have the hardware, we have the red and green diodes in the MagSafe, we just need to turn both of them on to make yellow. We have the hardware, and physics is helping us by saying: “Red + green light = yellow light.” This isn’t as complicated as π, so please implement it and let over 100 million users feel that MagSafe is finally worth the price. It is extremely simple, no new tests, no new safety certifications, just a new code you can forget about once released. To make things as easy as possible, here is the code, you can inspect it and test it, it should be OK. (THIS CODE IS TO SHOW THE BASE OF THE IDEA, PLEASE DONT COPY-PASTE, DOUBLE CHECK IT FIRST. Consider that I didn’t code this myself, I got help. Don’t expect any code from me to be mine) #include <stdbool.h> #include <stdint.h> typedef enum { MODEL_AIR, MODEL_PRO } MacModel; typedef enum { LED_OFF, LED_SOLID_AMBER, LED_SOLID_YELLOW, LED_SOLID_GREEN, LED_PULSING_AMBER, LED_PULSING_YELLOW } LEDState; uint32_t current_cycle_seconds = 0; MacModel get_mac_model(void); uint8_t get_battery_soc(void); uint8_t get_charge_limit(void); uint32_t get_charger_wattage(void); bool check_hardware_faults(void); void apply_led_hardware_state(LEDState state, bool pin_high); void update_magsafe_led(void) { MacModel model = get_mac_model(); uint8_t soc = get_battery_soc(); uint8_t limit = get_charge_limit(); uint32_t wattage = get_charger_wattage(); bool overcharge_fault = (soc > (limit + 2)); bool critical_error = check_hardware_faults() || overcharge_fault; bool slow_charger = false; if (model == MODEL_AIR && wattage < 30) { slow_charger = true; } else if (model == MODEL_PRO && wattage < 70) { slow_charger = true; } LEDState normal_state; if (soc >= 90 || soc >= limit) { normal_state = LED_SOLID_GREEN; } else if (soc >= 50) { normal_state = LED_SOLID_YELLOW; } else { normal_state = LED_SOLID_AMBER; } LEDState active_state = normal_state; bool should_pulse = false; if (current_cycle_seconds < 10) { if (critical_error) { active_state = LED_PULSING_AMBER; should_pulse = true; } else if (slow_charger) { active_state = LED_PULSING_YELLOW; should_pulse = true; } } bool led_pin_high = true; if (should_pulse) { if (current_cycle_seconds % 2 != 0) { led_pin_high = false; } } apply_led_hardware_state(active_state, led_pin_high); current_cycle_seconds++; if (current_cycle_seconds >= 20) { current_cycle_seconds = 0; } } (THIS CODE IS TO SHOW THE BASE OF THE IDEA, PLEASE DONT COPY-PASTE, DOUBLE CHECK IT FIRST. Consider that I didn’t code this myself, I got help. Don’t expect any code from me to be mine) This should show: Pulsing Amber for critical issues Pulsing yellow for slow chargers, under 30w for Macbook air and if under 70w for Macbook pro. Pulses for 10 seconds, and shows the light of the battery percentage for 10 seconds. Amber: 0-50% battery Yellow: 50-90% battery Green: 90%+ battery or reached charging limit. Please consider this code, I prefer a reply if possible to keep track of the new MagSafe update. macOS is amazing, but there are always final touches to be added, and if the hardware can be as similar as possible to the software, this is what brings understanding the battery alive, and apple has always wanted macOS to be as understandable as possible, why not the wire as well? If you need any extra information for the MagSafe, feel free to reply to me on the forum, I will try replying as soon as possible. Let the MagSafe glow. Let it show a yellow. It’s WWDC, and here I am right here. Let 2026 be the year where MagSafe is the most understandable yet, and let the yellow color come alive to MagSafe. Please consider it another chance to get a fresh, serious and realistic start to this. I am more than ready to mark the other post as answered if I get a realistic, understandable and useful reply to this. I apologize if my previous responses weren't very useful; I am not a formally trained engineer, but I wanted to show my idea the best way I could. May I please get a proper reply? Im extremely sorry for my previous replies that lost me reputation, but I promise I won’t reply to other posts from now on. May I please get a proper reply? May my idea get supported? May MagSafe feel as good as the magnetic “snap”? Please keep in mind that im in developer forums to develop the MagSafe wire, and as the DTS engineer stated in their reply: “ These forums are for questions about developing software and accessories for Apple platforms. If this is the case then feel free to provide more information,” In this thread here. There I am. Developing an accessory. MagSafe. I have been using macOS for about a year now, I noticed this flaw since a long time, and here I am, getting it out and loud to Apple in WWDC. Please do not count this as spam, or a repost of my original idea, I am conscious of what im currently doing, so please give this a good read and a caring, useful reply. I really hope you consider this and make MagSafe stand out, alongside the MacBook Neo. It was amazing. Unstoppable. But why not the MagSafe be as well? All the best, Alyaman
Topic: Design SubTopic: General Tags:
9
0
2.8k
6h
App Store Connect: Can't change Primary Locale to nl-NL — 19 historical versions blocked by missing screenshots, API returns 409
I'm trying to change an app's Primary Language in App Store Connect from de-DE to nl-NL and hitting a state I can't resolve through any interface available to me. Environment App Store Connect (web UI) and App Store Connect API v1 Problem UI: App Information → Primary Language → nl-NL → Save fails with: "Primary Locale couldn't be saved because you must first provide all the required screenshots for each version in this language." API: PATCH /v1/apps/1669670490 with attributes.primaryLocale = "nl-NL" returns HTTP 409: ENTITY_ERROR.ATTRIBUTE.INVALID.INVALID_STATE.MISSING_SCREENSHOTS_PRIMARY_LOCALE Error detail contains an unsubstituted placeholder: "...you must first provide all the required @@LANGUAGE_VALUE@@ screenshots..." What I've verified Current live version (3.7.6) and current editable version (3.7.11) both have complete nl-NL screenshot sets for all required device sizes (6.9" iPhone, 13" iPad). No Watch app, iMessage extension, Custom Product Pages, In-App Events, or IAPs. Enumerated all 23 versions via the API (1.0 → 4.1.0). 19 of them have an nl-NL appStoreVersionLocalization (with real historical description/keywords/support URL) but zero nl-NL screenshots attached. Tried POSTing an nl-NL screenshot set to one historical version (4.1.0) directly via the API to confirm this isn't just a UI restriction. Also returns 409 ENTITY_ERROR.ATTRIBUTE.INVALID.INVALID_STATE — historical versions are locked against edits (including screenshots) at the API level, not just the UI. Question Since these historical versions can't be edited through any supported interface, is there a documented way to satisfy or bypass the "screenshots for each version" check for locked historical versions when changing Primary Locale? Filed as case 20000130035264 with Developer Support, who pointed me here for the technical side.
9
0
378
7h
Subject: SecKeychainUnlock fails with -25293 for login.keychain-db in Authorization Plugin pre-session context on macOS 26.6
We have a macOS Authorization Plugin that reads and writes data from login.keychain-db during the login flow (logout→login scenario). On macOS 26.6, SecKeychainUnlock consistently fails in the pre-session context — before the user session is established. Error returned: Error Domain=NSOSStatusErrorDomain Code=-25293 "errSecAuthFailed: The username or passphrase you entered is not correct." However, the error message is misleading. We tested four combinations on macOS 26.6 to isolate the exact cause: Active session + correct password → Success Active session + wrong password → -25293 Pre-session + correct password → -25293 Pre-session + wrong password → -25293 In the pre-session context, macOS 26.6 returns -25293 for both correct and wrong passwords identically. This strongly suggests macOS is not evaluating the password at all in that context — the failure happens before password validation, likely because the session-bound material required to unlock login.keychain-db does not exist yet when the auth plugin runs. Key observations: The same code works correctly on macOS 26.3.1 and 26.5.1 — SecKeychainUnlock succeeds with the correct password in the pre-session context on those versions. The issue is specific to macOS 26.6. The file path /Users//Library/Keychains/login.keychain-db is unchanged — we get -25293 (auth failed), not -25294 (no such keychain), confirming the file is found and opened correctly. SecKeychainUnlock(ref, 0, NULL, NO) also fails for login.keychain-db in both pre-session and active session contexts. System.keychain with SecKeychainUnlock(ref, 0, NULL, NO) continues to work correctly in the pre-session context on macOS 26.6. Questions: Has the protection model for login.keychain-db changed in macOS 26.6 such that it can no longer be unlocked viaSecKeychainUnlock in a pre-session authorization plugin context? Is this an intentional security hardening change, or a regression? Is there a supported API or entitlement for authorization plugins to access login.keychain-db before the user session is established? Does the modern Data Protection Keychain (SecItemCopyMatching/SecItemAdd with kSecUseDataProtectionKeychain: @YES) work correctly in the authorization plugin pre-session context on macOS 26.6? If yes, is migrating to that API the recommended approach? Note: We are aware that SecKeychainUnlock is deprecated. We are actively evaluating migration to the modern Data Protection Keychain API, but understanding whether this is an intentional change, would help us choose the right fix approach.
0
0
20
7h
Does the supported app group transfer preserve the container's existing data?
I am planning an app transfer between two developer teams, iOS only, no macOS app. The app shares an app group with a notification service extension and a share extension. The container holds a SQLite database, message attachments and user avatars. The database encryption key is in the keychain. I have read thread https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/706128 (including the 2026-03-31 revision), and the plan is to follow it: a pre-transfer release moving keychain items into the AGI keychain access group, time for adoption, then the app transfer, then the app group transfer. I've also read https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/774831, https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/782132 and https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/815779. My questions are about the container rather than the keychain: Step 7 of 706128 says that when a user installs the post-transfer version, "it will have access to your app group, and hence your keychain items". Does that access include the files already in the app group container, written while the app was signed by the old team? Or does the transfer restore only AGI keychain access group membership, leaving the container's prior contents inaccessible? If those files are not preserved, is there a supported way to migrate them, or should I relocate that data into the app's own container before the transfer? Thread 815779 asked this and I do not think it was answered. While the app group transfer is in progress, do already installed builds signed by the old team, which the user has not updated, keep working against the original container? App Store Connect Help (Transfer an app > Overview of app transfer > Apps using App Groups) says the app group "can be deleted from the transferor's account and registered to the recipient's account". Is that the same operation as step 5 of 706128, "transfer the app group ID", or two different things? I ask because the developer in thread 774831, who lost shared container data for roughly 25% of users, deleted and recreated the group during the transfer, whereas 706128 step 5 says to do it once the app transfer is complete.
1
0
209
7h
App stuck in Waiting for Review since 4 August 2026, never entered In Review
My app store review submission has sat in Waiting for Review for 8 days and has never moved to In Review. Checked and confirmed: Free Apps Agreement active Nothing in Resolution Center No contact from App Review at any point Reviewer demo account verified working end to end against production No builds removed or resubmitted since the original submission Developer Support case 20000132574764 was filed 8 August. No response so far. Is anyone else seeing new-app submissions failing to enter the queue in August? Any guidance on escalating this would be appreciated.
Replies
1
Boosts
1
Views
14
Activity
3h
Waiting for Review since July 30, 2026 — Express Evaluations iOS 1.0 (12+ days)
Hello App Review Team, Our iOS app has been stuck in "Waiting for Review" for more than 12 days with no status change and no Resolution Center messages. App name: Express Evaluations Developer: Express Evaluations, Inc Platform: iOS Version: 1.0 Current status: Waiting for Review Submitted: July 30, 2026 at 11:52 AM We opened an App Review Status case on August 10, 2026 and have not received a reply yet. Case ID: 20000133168856 This delay is blocking our planned release and is affecting stakeholder trust in our launch timeline. Could someone from App Review please check whether this submission is stuck in the queue and advise on the current status? Thank you for your help.
Replies
9
Boosts
3
Views
745
Activity
3h
App has been stuck in Waiting for Review after several rejections
I’ve been trying to get this app through App Review for more than two months now. It was rejected a few times before. I changed what Apple asked me to change and submitted it again each time. The current version has now been sitting in Waiting for Review for quite a while and nothing is happening. I’m actually not very familiar with the App Store review process, so I’m not sure how long Waiting for Review is supposed to take. Do I just leave it there and wait? Or should I submit it again? I’m also wondering if I need to create a new submission / new ID at this point. I don’t want to keep changing things if that just sends me back to the beginning of the queue. The whole thing has already been going on for more than two months, so I’m a bit lost on what I’m supposed to do now. Has anyone run into this before?
Replies
1
Boosts
1
Views
46
Activity
3h
Reference to malloc in IPA
The IPA generated for the project contains references to the malloc function, which is flagged as an insecure function. This occurs when using standard higher-order functions such as filter, first, etc., on arrays containing value-type elements. How can we address or eliminate this security finding? Example code struct ContentView: View { let arr = [1,2,3] var body: some View { VStack { Image(systemName: "globe") .imageScale(.large) .foregroundStyle(.tint) Text("Hello, world!") } .padding() .onAppear{ let twos = arr.filter{ $0 == 2 } } } }
Replies
1
Boosts
0
Views
16
Activity
3h
Claude Agent stuck on loading spinner in Xcode 26 Intelligence settings on macOS 27 beta 5
I'm unable to use the Claude Agent in Xcode 26 (stable release) running on macOS 27 beta 5. Steps to reproduce: Open Xcode 26 Settings > Intelligence Select Claude Agent Expected: The Account section loads and allows me to sign in / manage my Claude account. Actual: The Account row shows a loading spinner indefinitely and never resolves, so I can't sign in or use the Claude Agent at all. Environment: Xcode 26 (stable), macOS 27 beta 5. Is this a known incompatibility with macOS 27 beta 5? Is there a workaround (e.g. clearing a cache or re-adding the account) to get the Claude Agent account section to load?
Replies
0
Boosts
0
Views
3
Activity
3h
BC test plainhtml bcmarker31337
csrf test wrong-token
Replies
0
Boosts
0
Views
1
Activity
3h
Cannot renew expired membership - Renew button missing
My Apple Developer Program membership has expired and I am completely unable to renew it through any documented channel. After 3 days with no response on my support case, I am posting here hoping for community advice or Apple staff visibility.
Replies
1
Boosts
0
Views
146
Activity
3h
First submission stuck in "Waiting for Review" for 6+ days, expedite and support requests unanswered
My first app "Remote for Roku TV: RokuMote" (Apple ID 6795405234, iOS) was submitted for review on July 31, 2026. It has been in "Waiting for Review" ever since — 6+ days — and has never entered "In Review". No messages in App Store Connect, nothing in Resolution Center. What I've already done: Expedited review request on August 4 — no response. Email to App Review — no response. Developer Support case "App Review Status" on August 5 (Case ID 20000128844197) — pending. All metadata, review notes and a demo video were attached at submission. The account is new (created July 28, 2026) — if new accounts are queued differently, I'd appreciate knowing that. Is anyone from Apple able to look into this? Is there a known backlog right now for first submissions?
Replies
2
Boosts
0
Views
55
Activity
3h
SwiftUI Slider onEditingChanged is unreliable on iOS 26
For information I stumbled upon a regression with SwiftUI Slider on iOS 26. Its onEditingChanged closure might be called twice when interaction ends, with a final Boolean incorrect value of true provided to the closure. As a result apps cannot reliably rely on this closure to detect when an interaction with the slider starts or ends. I filed a feedback under FB20283439 (iOS 26.0 regression: Slider onEditingChanged closure is unreliable).
Replies
9
Boosts
10
Views
766
Activity
4h
Concurrent upload tasks over HTTP/2: request bodies sent strictly sequentially (no stream interleaving) — starved tasks fail behind slow-POST protection
We maintain a large file-sync app. After our upload endpoint moved to HTTP/2, we found that when multiple NSURLSessionUploadTasks run concurrently, all tasks send their request headers immediately (multiplexed on a single connection — confirmed identical localPort via URLSessionTaskMetrics), but request bodies are transmitted essentially one task at a time: while one task's body saturates the uplink, the other tasks send zero body bytes for the entire duration (countOfBytesSent == 0). This reproduces with both background sessions (BackgroundUploadTask) and default sessions (LocalUploadTask), on Wi-Fi and cellular. iOS 26.5, Xcode 26.3, tasks created with uploadTask(with:fromFile:), multipart POST. This becomes a hard failure behind a load balancer with slow-POST (RUDY) protection: requests whose first body KB doesn't arrive within 5s are rejected with 408. The starved tasks fail even though the network is healthy. For comparison, OkHttp on Android writes bodies in interleaved 16KB DATA frames under identical conditions, so all streams pass the first-KB check. Metrics excerpt (4 concurrent uploads, one h2 connection): task 1: duration 18.7s, sent 180MB (full line rate) task 2: duration 22.8s, sent 43MB (transmitted only after task 1 finished) task 3: duration 46.0s, sent 247MB (after task 2) task 4: duration 5.2s, sent 0 bytes → 408 from the gateway In one run a starved stream sent exactly 65,536 bytes (the default initial stream window) and then stalled. Questions: Is this sender-side scheduling (no round-robin between streams' DATA frames) the expected CFNetwork behavior? Does URLSessionTask.priority influence HTTP/2 stream weighting for upload bodies? Is there any other way to influence bandwidth sharing between concurrent uploads? Is there any supported way to opt out of HTTP/2 (constrain ALPN to HTTP/1.1) or cap concurrent streams per connection from the client side? We believe there isn't, but would like to confirm. What is the recommended pattern for concurrent large uploads in this situation? Filed as FB24062619 with full sanitized metrics attached. Happy to provide more data.
Replies
3
Boosts
0
Views
591
Activity
4h
NetworkExtension URL Filter stops during startup only in TestFlight (NEAgentURLFilterErrorDomain Code=3, NEMembershipCheckerErrorDomain Code=3)
Hi Apple Developer Support / community, I am seeing a URL filter startup failure only in TestFlight builds. The same code path works in development and Ad Hoc builds. App setup: Host app bundle id: com.expleo.protectus.filter.main URL filter control extension bundle id: com.expleo.protectus.filter.main.buf Extension point: com.apple.networkextension.url-filter-control Using NEURLFilterManager / NEURLFilterControlProvider on iOS 26.x App Group and network extension entitlements are configured on host + extension Observed behavior: Extension process starts successfully (pid created) Status changes to starting Then updatePrefilterWithCompletionHandler runs Immediately after, plugin transitions to stopping with error 3 System retries in a loop Key logs: Error Domain=NEAgentURLFilterErrorDomain Code=3 Failed to startFilter NEPIRChecker start block reports: Error Domain=com.apple.CipherML Code=1100 Underlying Error Domain=com.apple.CipherML Code=1800 Message says details are redacted Example sequence: NEURLFilterPlugin ... started with pid ... status changed to starting updatePrefilterWithCompletionHandler enter acceptAgentClients enter setStatus:error ... NEAgentURLFilterErrorDomain Code=3 status changed to stopping with error 3 extension disposed / teardown repeats Important detail: This failure is reproducible in TestFlight only. Same code and configuration works in development and Ad Hoc builds. What we already checked: Extension launches and is discovered correctly by neagent App/extension bundle identifiers are correct App group and network extension entitlements are present in source and archive checks We tested startup gating around local bloom/prefilter readiness We still get NEMembershipCheckerErrorDomain Code=3 with CipherML 1100/1800 in TestFlight Questions: Is NEMembershipCheckerErrorDomain Code=3 in this startup path known to indicate PIR membership/status validation failure in distribution context? Are there TestFlight-specific prerequisites or server-side requirements for PIR/CipherML path that differ from development/Ad Hoc? Is there any supported way to get non-redacted diagnostic details for CipherML 1100/1800 (beyond sysdiagnose submission)? Are there recommended fail-open/fail-closed startup patterns when PIR status is temporarily unavailable? If needed, I can provide: Full sysdiagnose timestamped bundle Exact iOS version and device model Repro steps from clean install Full log stream around NEPIRChecker and NEURLFilterPlugin transitions Thanks in advance.
Replies
4
Boosts
0
Views
433
Activity
4h
Upgrading to Golden Gate Beta 27.0 having BuildVersion 26A5388g removes entires already present in authorisation db files
We have a macOS application that adds entries to the Authorization Database (system.login.console) as part of its setup. We observed that after upgrading from macOS Tahoe to the macOS Golden Gate beta, the entries added by our application were removed, and the default system.login.console configuration was restored. Is this expected behavior in the current Golden Gate beta, or is it a known issue? If it is a known issue, is there an expectation that it will be addressed in a future beta release? Additionally, is there any recommended approach for preserving or restoring application-specific Authorization Database entries across major macOS upgrades? It would be of great help if there is any suggested approach for the same.
Replies
3
Boosts
0
Views
196
Activity
4h
Vertically Off-Center Components in NSSearchToolbarItem in macOS 27 Developer Beta 5
In macOS 27 developer beta 5, search fields in toolbars (NSSearchToolbarItem instances) have their placeholder text, search strings, and magnifying glass icons vertically off-center. I reported this as FB24286690. You can see this in the Feedback Assistant app. The “Search” placeholder text, the magnifying glass, and the search string are all closer to the top of the toolbar item than the bottom. My feedback has a sample project demonstrating this, along with screenshots. I have a more detailed writeup at: https://www.virtualsanity.com/202608/vertically-off-center-components-in-nssearchtoolbaritem-in-macos-27-developer-beta-5/
Topic: UI Frameworks SubTopic: AppKit Tags:
Replies
0
Boosts
0
Views
16
Activity
5h
dismissalConfirmationDialog not working in iOS
It compiles for iOS but seems to be a no-op. Is this coming in a future beta? Or is there a way to hide the default back button when using the presentation + zoom navigationTransition APIs? I have a view that needs to show a confirmation on dismissal. I was previously doing this manually using a custom toolbar button + confirmationDialog modifier. But in iOS 27 I don't seem to be able to hide the navigation back button since I added the zoom navigationTransition API. This allows the user to tap the back button and lose changes. Not a great UX.
Replies
0
Boosts
0
Views
14
Activity
5h
Title: PackageKit install fails with PKInstallErrorDomain Code=120 and NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=1 during _relinkFile operation Body: We are investigating an intermittent package installation failure on macOS Tahoe 26.5 and are trying to understand
We are investigating an intermittent package installation failure on macOS Tahoe 26.5 and are trying to understand the conditions under which PackageKit may return the following errors during an upgrade installation: PKInstallErrorDomain Code=120 NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=1 ("Operation not permitted") The package successfully passes validation and authorization, and pre-install scripts complete successfully. The failure occurs during the final PackageKit commit phase when PackageKit attempts to move/relink content from the installer sandbox to the destination volume. Relevant log snippets: PackageKit: Shoving /Root to / Error relinking file (primary): .../Contents/_CodeSignature/CodeResources failed _relinkFile(...) Operation not permitted PackageKit: Install Failed: Error Domain=PKInstallErrorDomain Code=120 NSUnderlyingError: Error Domain=NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=1 "Operation not permitted" The issue is intermittent and only affects a subset of systems. The same package installs successfully on many machines running the same macOS version. Has anyone encountered similar _relinkFile / CodeResources failures during package upgrades? In particular, we are interested in understanding: Common causes of NSPOSIXErrorDomain Code=1 during PackageKit relink operations. Whether existing signed application bundle metadata (CodeResources) can cause relink failures during upgrades. Any Installer or PackageKit changes in recent Tahoe releases that could affect bundle replacement during package installation. Any insights would be appreciated.
Replies
4
Boosts
0
Views
255
Activity
6h
Foundation Model tool calling giving system error in iOS27 beta 5
After updating my iOS and xcode to latest iOS 27 beta5 and xcode 27 beta5 all the system language model session calls with tool calls inclusion throwing Unrecognized system-instruction prefix ID: com.apple.fm_api.tool_calls_override error. The same code was working perfectly in iOS27 beta 4. Even the apple sample project OrigamiCraftingADynamicTutorialForAppleIntelligence failing with the same error when tool calls invoked. Anybody else facing similar issue or any workaround for this issue? sample code: struct GetRecordNotesTool: Tool { let name = "getRecordNotes" let description = "Fetches internal notes and returns Note_Title and Note_Content for up to 10 notes." @Generable struct Arguments { @Guide(description: "The API name of the module, e.g. Companies or Contacts") var module_api_name: String @Guide(description: "The unique record ID to fetch notes for") var record_id: String } func call(arguments: Arguments) async throws -> String { return "Fetched content" } }
Replies
1
Boosts
0
Views
230
Activity
6h
MagSafe charging light problem
Dear Apple, It looks likes Apple like my new idea, and a lot. I know this as Apple always want their things to be easily understandable, and for MagSafe to be understandable it has to mimic macOS. I got an unreliable reply for the first post, just a person telling me I’m in the wrong place for this. The MagSafe is amazing, but everything needs to be upgraded in some way or the other, DTS engineers are saying that developer forums are for developing, not feedback. So here I am, developing the MagSafe wire, as I would by now rather get a third-party MagSafe wire if mine possibly breaks. $49. This is the price tag for an official MagSafe wire. If it can’t show anything but charging and charged, it’s something that must be reproduced. We have the hardware, we have the red and green diodes in the MagSafe, we just need to turn both of them on to make yellow. We have the hardware, and physics is helping us by saying: “Red + green light = yellow light.” This isn’t as complicated as π, so please implement it and let over 100 million users feel that MagSafe is finally worth the price. It is extremely simple, no new tests, no new safety certifications, just a new code you can forget about once released. To make things as easy as possible, here is the code, you can inspect it and test it, it should be OK. (THIS CODE IS TO SHOW THE BASE OF THE IDEA, PLEASE DONT COPY-PASTE, DOUBLE CHECK IT FIRST. Consider that I didn’t code this myself, I got help. Don’t expect any code from me to be mine) #include <stdbool.h> #include <stdint.h> typedef enum { MODEL_AIR, MODEL_PRO } MacModel; typedef enum { LED_OFF, LED_SOLID_AMBER, LED_SOLID_YELLOW, LED_SOLID_GREEN, LED_PULSING_AMBER, LED_PULSING_YELLOW } LEDState; uint32_t current_cycle_seconds = 0; MacModel get_mac_model(void); uint8_t get_battery_soc(void); uint8_t get_charge_limit(void); uint32_t get_charger_wattage(void); bool check_hardware_faults(void); void apply_led_hardware_state(LEDState state, bool pin_high); void update_magsafe_led(void) { MacModel model = get_mac_model(); uint8_t soc = get_battery_soc(); uint8_t limit = get_charge_limit(); uint32_t wattage = get_charger_wattage(); bool overcharge_fault = (soc > (limit + 2)); bool critical_error = check_hardware_faults() || overcharge_fault; bool slow_charger = false; if (model == MODEL_AIR && wattage < 30) { slow_charger = true; } else if (model == MODEL_PRO && wattage < 70) { slow_charger = true; } LEDState normal_state; if (soc >= 90 || soc >= limit) { normal_state = LED_SOLID_GREEN; } else if (soc >= 50) { normal_state = LED_SOLID_YELLOW; } else { normal_state = LED_SOLID_AMBER; } LEDState active_state = normal_state; bool should_pulse = false; if (current_cycle_seconds < 10) { if (critical_error) { active_state = LED_PULSING_AMBER; should_pulse = true; } else if (slow_charger) { active_state = LED_PULSING_YELLOW; should_pulse = true; } } bool led_pin_high = true; if (should_pulse) { if (current_cycle_seconds % 2 != 0) { led_pin_high = false; } } apply_led_hardware_state(active_state, led_pin_high); current_cycle_seconds++; if (current_cycle_seconds >= 20) { current_cycle_seconds = 0; } } (THIS CODE IS TO SHOW THE BASE OF THE IDEA, PLEASE DONT COPY-PASTE, DOUBLE CHECK IT FIRST. Consider that I didn’t code this myself, I got help. Don’t expect any code from me to be mine) This should show: Pulsing Amber for critical issues Pulsing yellow for slow chargers, under 30w for Macbook air and if under 70w for Macbook pro. Pulses for 10 seconds, and shows the light of the battery percentage for 10 seconds. Amber: 0-50% battery Yellow: 50-90% battery Green: 90%+ battery or reached charging limit. Please consider this code, I prefer a reply if possible to keep track of the new MagSafe update. macOS is amazing, but there are always final touches to be added, and if the hardware can be as similar as possible to the software, this is what brings understanding the battery alive, and apple has always wanted macOS to be as understandable as possible, why not the wire as well? If you need any extra information for the MagSafe, feel free to reply to me on the forum, I will try replying as soon as possible. Let the MagSafe glow. Let it show a yellow. It’s WWDC, and here I am right here. Let 2026 be the year where MagSafe is the most understandable yet, and let the yellow color come alive to MagSafe. Please consider it another chance to get a fresh, serious and realistic start to this. I am more than ready to mark the other post as answered if I get a realistic, understandable and useful reply to this. I apologize if my previous responses weren't very useful; I am not a formally trained engineer, but I wanted to show my idea the best way I could. May I please get a proper reply? Im extremely sorry for my previous replies that lost me reputation, but I promise I won’t reply to other posts from now on. May I please get a proper reply? May my idea get supported? May MagSafe feel as good as the magnetic “snap”? Please keep in mind that im in developer forums to develop the MagSafe wire, and as the DTS engineer stated in their reply: “ These forums are for questions about developing software and accessories for Apple platforms. If this is the case then feel free to provide more information,” In this thread here. There I am. Developing an accessory. MagSafe. I have been using macOS for about a year now, I noticed this flaw since a long time, and here I am, getting it out and loud to Apple in WWDC. Please do not count this as spam, or a repost of my original idea, I am conscious of what im currently doing, so please give this a good read and a caring, useful reply. I really hope you consider this and make MagSafe stand out, alongside the MacBook Neo. It was amazing. Unstoppable. But why not the MagSafe be as well? All the best, Alyaman
Topic: Design SubTopic: General Tags:
Replies
9
Boosts
0
Views
2.8k
Activity
6h
App Store Connect: Can't change Primary Locale to nl-NL — 19 historical versions blocked by missing screenshots, API returns 409
I'm trying to change an app's Primary Language in App Store Connect from de-DE to nl-NL and hitting a state I can't resolve through any interface available to me. Environment App Store Connect (web UI) and App Store Connect API v1 Problem UI: App Information → Primary Language → nl-NL → Save fails with: "Primary Locale couldn't be saved because you must first provide all the required screenshots for each version in this language." API: PATCH /v1/apps/1669670490 with attributes.primaryLocale = "nl-NL" returns HTTP 409: ENTITY_ERROR.ATTRIBUTE.INVALID.INVALID_STATE.MISSING_SCREENSHOTS_PRIMARY_LOCALE Error detail contains an unsubstituted placeholder: "...you must first provide all the required @@LANGUAGE_VALUE@@ screenshots..." What I've verified Current live version (3.7.6) and current editable version (3.7.11) both have complete nl-NL screenshot sets for all required device sizes (6.9" iPhone, 13" iPad). No Watch app, iMessage extension, Custom Product Pages, In-App Events, or IAPs. Enumerated all 23 versions via the API (1.0 → 4.1.0). 19 of them have an nl-NL appStoreVersionLocalization (with real historical description/keywords/support URL) but zero nl-NL screenshots attached. Tried POSTing an nl-NL screenshot set to one historical version (4.1.0) directly via the API to confirm this isn't just a UI restriction. Also returns 409 ENTITY_ERROR.ATTRIBUTE.INVALID.INVALID_STATE — historical versions are locked against edits (including screenshots) at the API level, not just the UI. Question Since these historical versions can't be edited through any supported interface, is there a documented way to satisfy or bypass the "screenshots for each version" check for locked historical versions when changing Primary Locale? Filed as case 20000130035264 with Developer Support, who pointed me here for the technical side.
Replies
9
Boosts
0
Views
378
Activity
7h
Subject: SecKeychainUnlock fails with -25293 for login.keychain-db in Authorization Plugin pre-session context on macOS 26.6
We have a macOS Authorization Plugin that reads and writes data from login.keychain-db during the login flow (logout→login scenario). On macOS 26.6, SecKeychainUnlock consistently fails in the pre-session context — before the user session is established. Error returned: Error Domain=NSOSStatusErrorDomain Code=-25293 "errSecAuthFailed: The username or passphrase you entered is not correct." However, the error message is misleading. We tested four combinations on macOS 26.6 to isolate the exact cause: Active session + correct password → Success Active session + wrong password → -25293 Pre-session + correct password → -25293 Pre-session + wrong password → -25293 In the pre-session context, macOS 26.6 returns -25293 for both correct and wrong passwords identically. This strongly suggests macOS is not evaluating the password at all in that context — the failure happens before password validation, likely because the session-bound material required to unlock login.keychain-db does not exist yet when the auth plugin runs. Key observations: The same code works correctly on macOS 26.3.1 and 26.5.1 — SecKeychainUnlock succeeds with the correct password in the pre-session context on those versions. The issue is specific to macOS 26.6. The file path /Users//Library/Keychains/login.keychain-db is unchanged — we get -25293 (auth failed), not -25294 (no such keychain), confirming the file is found and opened correctly. SecKeychainUnlock(ref, 0, NULL, NO) also fails for login.keychain-db in both pre-session and active session contexts. System.keychain with SecKeychainUnlock(ref, 0, NULL, NO) continues to work correctly in the pre-session context on macOS 26.6. Questions: Has the protection model for login.keychain-db changed in macOS 26.6 such that it can no longer be unlocked viaSecKeychainUnlock in a pre-session authorization plugin context? Is this an intentional security hardening change, or a regression? Is there a supported API or entitlement for authorization plugins to access login.keychain-db before the user session is established? Does the modern Data Protection Keychain (SecItemCopyMatching/SecItemAdd with kSecUseDataProtectionKeychain: @YES) work correctly in the authorization plugin pre-session context on macOS 26.6? If yes, is migrating to that API the recommended approach? Note: We are aware that SecKeychainUnlock is deprecated. We are actively evaluating migration to the modern Data Protection Keychain API, but understanding whether this is an intentional change, would help us choose the right fix approach.
Replies
0
Boosts
0
Views
20
Activity
7h
Does the supported app group transfer preserve the container's existing data?
I am planning an app transfer between two developer teams, iOS only, no macOS app. The app shares an app group with a notification service extension and a share extension. The container holds a SQLite database, message attachments and user avatars. The database encryption key is in the keychain. I have read thread https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/706128 (including the 2026-03-31 revision), and the plan is to follow it: a pre-transfer release moving keychain items into the AGI keychain access group, time for adoption, then the app transfer, then the app group transfer. I've also read https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/774831, https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/782132 and https://developer.apple.com/forums/thread/815779. My questions are about the container rather than the keychain: Step 7 of 706128 says that when a user installs the post-transfer version, "it will have access to your app group, and hence your keychain items". Does that access include the files already in the app group container, written while the app was signed by the old team? Or does the transfer restore only AGI keychain access group membership, leaving the container's prior contents inaccessible? If those files are not preserved, is there a supported way to migrate them, or should I relocate that data into the app's own container before the transfer? Thread 815779 asked this and I do not think it was answered. While the app group transfer is in progress, do already installed builds signed by the old team, which the user has not updated, keep working against the original container? App Store Connect Help (Transfer an app > Overview of app transfer > Apps using App Groups) says the app group "can be deleted from the transferor's account and registered to the recipient's account". Is that the same operation as step 5 of 706128, "transfer the app group ID", or two different things? I ask because the developer in thread 774831, who lost shared container data for roughly 25% of users, deleted and recreated the group during the transfer, whereas 706128 step 5 says to do it once the app transfer is complete.
Replies
1
Boosts
0
Views
209
Activity
7h