Hello, I am working on network traffic analyser for DLP. The solution is based on NETransparentProxyProvider due to necessity data modifying. To my knowledge, the Transparent Proxy API does not have a concept of an "asynchronous/delayed verdict" for flow authorization. The handleNewFlow(_:) method appears to be invoked sequentially for each new network flow that matches our interception rules. The challenge we are facing is that a portion of our proxy rules and configurations resides in a LaunchDaemon, which the Network Extension communicates with via XPC. Such separation is required by our cross-platform code base. Thus, we are forced to make a synchronous XPC call within handleNewFlow(_:) and block the thread while waiting for the interception verdict from the daemon. This creates a significant bottleneck when establishing new network flows. The current implementation works without issues, but we are always looking for ways to improve performance. Are there any best practices or recommended approaches for parallelizing handleNewFlow(_:)? Thank you in advance.

I’m working on an open-source React Native library for Wi-Fi Aware / NAN: https://github.com/dcavalcante/react-native-wifi-aware The Android implementation has already been physically validated for capability detection, discovery, follow-up messaging, and data paths. The Apple implementation is in place and passes the current simulator/static compilation gates, but I don’t currently have the Apple hardware and Developer Program setup needed to validate it on physical devices. I’m looking for someone with an Apple Developer account and preferably two iOS/iPadOS 26 devices who can help test: Wi-Fi Aware entitlement/signing declared WiFiAwareServices publish / subscribe discovery system pairing Apple-to-Apple connectivity Android ↔ Apple discovery and interoperability The biggest unknown I want to validate is the cross-platform path between Android Wi-Fi Aware and Apple’s iOS 26 implementation. Testing results, fixes, documentation, and implementation contributions are all welcome.

Hi Everyone, We are tinkering on an App using associated domains with the working name "uff2.de". We have configured our Webserver (Caddy) to restrict all URIs except for /.well-known/apple-app-site-association using Www-Authenticate. Recently our associated domains started becoming flaky, which we believe has to do with requests from Apple’s CDN failing: The following example uses a query string to trigger a fresh request by Apple’s CDN. curl -sD - "https://app-site-association.cdn-apple.com/a/v1/uff2.de?foobar" -o /dev/null HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found Server: AppleHttpServer/7b3d349ae60c243cdd677edbde3e93e460f75820 Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2026 12:01:16 GMT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Length: 10 Apple-Failure-Details: {"cause":"Connection timed out"} Apple-Failure-Reason: SWCERR00301 Timeout Apple-From: https://uff2.de/.well-known/apple-app-site-association Apple-Try-Direct: true Cache-Control: max-age=3600,public Vary: Accept-Encoding X-B3-TraceId: 457b6172513a930f Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000 Age: 32 Via: https/1.1 defra2-vp-vst-018.ts.apple.com (acdn/331.16659), https/1.1 defra2-vp-vfe-016.ts.apple.com (acdn/331.16659), https/1.1 gbslo5-xdc-mx-020.ts.apple.com (acdn/331.16659), https/1.1 uklon5-edge-fx-024.ts.apple.com (acdn/331.16659) X-Cache: miss, miss, miss, miss CDNUUID: df5ac203-4188-4722-8bbc-68e9d9fd0b33-1118024500 Connection: keep-alive To investigate this further we enabled access logging and are seeing the following request that is blocked by us: 2026/09/05 12:01:16.824 INFO http.log.access.log0 handled request {"request": {"remote_ip": "57.103.82.202", "remote_port": "48366", "client_ip": "57.103.82.202", "proto": "HTTP/1.1", "method": "GET", "host": "uff2.de", "uri": "/apple-app-site-association", "headers": {"User-Agent": ["AASA-Bot/1.0.0"], "Accept-Encoding": ["gzip"]}, "tls": {"resumed": false, "version": 772, "cipher_suite": 4865, "proto": "", "server_name": "uff2.de"}}, "bytes_read": 0, "user_id": "", "duration": 0.000083782, "size": 0, "status": 401, "resp_headers": {"Server": ["Caddy"], "Alt-Svc": ["h3=\":443\"; ma=2592000"], "Www-Authenticate": ["Basic realm=\"restricted\""]}} But this seems to be the wrong URI (/apple-app-site-association instead of /.well-known/apple-app-site-association). When swapping ?foobar for other query strings like ?foobar2 or ?foobar3, some requests randomly work and some don’t. We’re also seeing flakiness for the same path (both with and without a query string) across time, but this is harder to test due to caching. For reference this is a correct request: 2026/09/05 17:54:26.075 INFO http.log.access.log0 handled request {"request": {"remote_ip": "57.103.81.17", "remote_port": "8692", "client_ip": "57.103.81.17", "proto": "HTTP/1.1", "method": "GET", "host": "uff2.de", "uri": "/.well-known/apple-app-site-association", "headers": {"User-Agent": ["AASA-Bot/1.0.0"], "Accept-Encoding": ["gzip"]}, "tls": {"resumed": false, "version": 772, "cipher_suite": 4865, "proto": "", "server_name": "uff2.de"}}, "bytes_read": 0, "user_id": "", "duration": 0.000088472, "size": 469, "status": 200, "resp_headers": {"Accept-Ranges": ["bytes"], "Content-Length": ["469"], "Server": ["Caddy"], "Alt-Svc": ["h3=\":443\"; ma=2592000"], "Vary": ["Accept-Encoding"], "Etag": ["\"dgrdbiykgv3ad1\""], "Content-Type": [], "Last-Modified": ["Sun, 01 Mar 2026 10:19:41 GMT"]}} Did we misread the documentation and should also serve /apple-app-site-association? Why would requests sometimes be made to /.well-known/apple-app-site-association and sometimes to /apple-app-site-association? Thank you!

Inquiry) A Linux-based embedded device is connected to an iPhone using a USB-C cable. The device operates as a USB device and presents a standard CDC-ECM Ethernet interface. The iPhone operates as the USB host. When the iPhone screen is on: 以太网接口被正确识别。 分配IPv4和IPv6地址。 互联网接入正常。 大约在 iPhone 被锁定 30 秒后，USB 连接进入暂停状态，以太网数据传输停止。 我们启用了USB远程唤醒。定期触发它有助于保持以太网接口的可用，当 iPhone 屏幕开启时网络会恢复。然而，屏幕关闭时以太网数据仍然无法保持活跃状态。 问题） 这在iOS上是正常的行为吗？ 有没有支持的方法可以在 iPhone 锁定时保持 USB 以太网数据活跃？ USB远程唤醒是否支持输入网络流量？ 助理在恢复后是否需要发送任何CDC链接通知？ 这需要支持MFi还是特定的iOS权限？ 谢谢。

I heard that the Network framework can help using networking with Swift concurrency. I read up on "NWConnection," which uses a DispatchQueue. I was wondering how queues fit together with concurrency, then I heard about a related class, "NetworkConnection." I realized that the new class is in the same module, but introduced for macOS 26. I saw the WWDC25 video about it, but it assumed that I already knew about its result-builder connection setup. I don't; was it introduced in an earlier video? A lot of times, I find a web article soon after some WWDC that explains how to actually a new API. The problem is that the class' name is un-Google-able, being two actual words concatenated together that can reasonably be found together. Does anyone have a link of a post-WWDC25 article explaining NetworkConnection?

General: Forums subtopic: App & System Services > Networking TN3151 Choosing the right networking API Networking Overview document — Despite the fact that this is in the archive, this is still really useful. TLS for App Developers forums post Choosing a Network Debugging Tool documentation WWDC 2019 Session 712 Advances in Networking, Part 1 — This explains the concept of constrained networking, which is Apple’s preferred solution to questions like How do I check whether I’m on Wi-Fi? TN3135 Low-level networking on watchOS TN3179 Understanding local network privacy Adapt to changing network conditions tech talk TCP and UDP ports used by Apple software products support article Understanding Also-Ran Connections forums post Extra-ordinary Networking forums post Foundation networking: Forums tags: Foundation, CFNetwork URL Loading System documentation — NSURLSession, or URLSession in Swift, is the recommended API for HTTP[S] on Apple platforms. Moving to Fewer, Larger Transfers forums post Testing Background Session Code forums post Network framework: Forums tag: Network Network framework documentation — Network framework is the recommended API for TCP, UDP, and QUIC on Apple platforms. WWDC 2025 Session 250 Use structured concurrency with Network framework — This is a great introduction to the new Network framework API introduced in appleOS 2026. Building a custom peer-to-peer protocol sample code (aka TicTacToe) Implementing netcat with Network Framework sample code (aka nwcat) Configuring a Wi-Fi accessory to join a network sample code Moving from Multipeer Connectivity to Network Framework forums post NWEndpoint History and Advice forums post Wi-Fi (general): How to modernize your captive network developer news post Wi-Fi Fundamentals forums post Filing a Wi-Fi Bug Report forums post Working with a Wi-Fi Accessory forums post — This is part of the Extra-ordinary Networking series. Wi-Fi (iOS): TN3111 iOS Wi-Fi API overview technote Wi-Fi Aware framework documentation Building peer-to-peer apps sample code WirelessInsights framework documentation iOS Network Signal Strength forums post Network Extension Resources Wi-Fi on macOS: Forums tag: Core WLAN Core WLAN framework documentation Secure networking: Forums tags: Security Apple Platform Security support document Preventing Insecure Network Connections documentation — This is all about App Transport Security (ATS). WWDC 2017 Session 701 Your Apps and Evolving Network Security Standards [1] — This is generally interesting, but the section starting at 17:40 is, AFAIK, the best information from Apple about how certificate revocation works on modern systems. WWDC 2025 Session 314 Get ahead with quantum-secure cryptography Available trusted root certificates for Apple operating systems support article Requirements for trusted certificates in iOS 13 and macOS 10.15 support article About upcoming limits on trusted certificates support article Apple’s Certificate Transparency policy support article What’s new for enterprise in iOS 18 support article — This discusses new key usage requirements. Prepare your network environment for stricter security requirements support article — This is primarily of interest to folks developing management software, for example, an MDM server. Technote 2232 HTTPS Server Trust Evaluation Technote 2326 Creating Certificates for TLS Testing QA1948 HTTPS and Test Servers Miscellaneous: More network-related forums tags: 5G, QUIC, Bonjour On FTP forums post Using the Multicast Networking Additional Capability forums post Investigating Network Latency Problems forums post Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" [1] This video is no longer available from Apple, but the URL should help you locate other sources of this info.

Hello, I have encountered unexpected behavior when running a Network Extension that implements NETransparentProxyProvider. This extension is part of a DLP (Data Loss Prevention) solution. If the "Auto proxy discovery" option is enabled for the Wi-Fi connection on the managed host, the leaks tool reports memory leaks with the following root cycles: ... 11 (1.03K) ROOT CYCLE: <CFRunLoopSource 0xa430cc540> [192] 10 (864 bytes) ROOT CYCLE: <std::__shared_ptr_emplace<PAC::PACClient> 0xa430f4000> [224] CYCLE BACK TO <CFRunLoopSource 0xa430cc540> [192] 6 (400 bytes) ROOT CYCLE: <std::__shared_ptr_emplace<PAC::PACQuery> 0xa43118080> [128] 2 (80 bytes) ROOT CYCLE: 0xa42ca9000 [32] 1 (48 bytes) ROOT CYCLE: <__NSMallocBlock__ 0xa42804de0> [48] CFNetwork invocation function for block in PAC::PACClient::initialize(void const*, __CFURL cons..." 1 (32 bytes) ROOT CYCLE: <std::__shared_ptr_pointer<BlockHolderVar<__CFString const*, __CFData const*, std::shared_ptr<__CFArray const>, std::shared_ptr<__CFError>>*, SmartBlockWithArgs<__CFString const*, __CFData const*, std::shared_ptr<__CFArray const>, std::shared_ptr<__CFError>>::Deleter> 0xa4343da80> [32] 2 (160 bytes) <NSURL 0xa42840310> [112] 1 (48 bytes) _clients --> <CFString 0xa42c08fc0> [48] 1 (160 bytes) <NWConcrete_nw_pac_resolver 0xa4280cb40> [160] 1 (48 bytes) <CFError 0xa42804ed0> [48] 1 (32 bytes) <std::__shared_ptr_pointer<__CFError*, Deleter_CFRelease> 0xa4343dc20> [32] ... 11 (1.03K) ROOT CYCLE: <CFRunLoopSource 0xa43128540> [192] 10 (864 bytes) ROOT CYCLE: <std::__shared_ptr_emplace<PAC::PACClient> 0xa430f4a80> [224] CYCLE BACK TO <CFRunLoopSource 0xa43128540> [192] 6 (400 bytes) ROOT CYCLE: <std::__shared_ptr_emplace<PAC::PACQuery> 0xa43118880> [128] 2 (80 bytes) ROOT CYCLE: 0xa428105e0 [32] 1 (48 bytes) ROOT CYCLE: <__NSMallocBlock__ 0xa428887b0> [48] CFNetwork invocation function for block in PAC::PACClient::initialize(void const*, __CFURL cons..." 1 (32 bytes) ROOT CYCLE: <std::__shared_ptr_pointer<BlockHolderVar<__CFString const*, __CFData const*, std::shared_ptr<__CFArray const>, std::shared_ptr<__CFError>>*, SmartBlockWithArgs<__CFString const*, __CFData const*, std::shared_ptr<__CFArray const>, std::shared_ptr<__CFError>>::Deleter> 0xa4343f5c0> [32] 2 (160 bytes) <NSURL 0xa428424c0> [112] 1 (48 bytes) _clients --> <CFString 0xa42c0a640> [48] 1 (160 bytes) <NWConcrete_nw_pac_resolver 0xa4280d7c0> [160] 1 (48 bytes) <CFError 0xa42888390> [48] 1 (32 bytes) <std::__shared_ptr_pointer<__CFError*, Deleter_CFRelease> 0xa4343f4c0> [32] ... The extension creates an nw_connection_t to the remote host for each handled flow like this: nw_parameters_t parameters = nw_parameters_create_secure_tcp(NW_PARAMETERS_DISABLE_PROTOCOL, NW_PARAMETERS_DEFAULT_CONFIGURATION); nw_endpoint_t connectTo = nw_endpoint_create_host([endpoint.hostname UTF8String], [endpoint.port UTF8String]); nw_connection_t connection = nw_connection_create(connectTo, parameters); When "Auto proxy discovery" is disabled, everything works as expected, and no memory leaks or issues are observed. Could you please advise on how to resolve or work around this issue? Thank you in advance!

We are developing a consumer digital wellbeing app and are evaluating an optional feature that deliberately slows network traffic when explicitly enabled by the user. The proposed architecture is: NEPacketTunnelProvider device wide traffic no MDM or per-app VPN no remote VPN server packet processing/forwarding performed locally on device no application layer inspection no traffic profiling or advertising use no network data uploaded to our servers bounded latency/bandwidth shaping only user can disable it immediately The goal is user controlled “intentional bandwidth” rather than security, privacy filtering, circumvention, or remote VPN access. I’d like to clarify: Is NEPacketTunnelProvider an appropriate public API for this kind of local device wide bandwidth pacing? Is it supported to consume packets via packetFlow, process/forward them locally, and send them to the public Internet without a remote VPN endpoint? Is intentional bandwidth/latency shaping considered an acceptable use of the Network Extension entitlement? Would this still be treated as a “VPN service” for App Review purposes even though no traffic is routed through a remote VPN service? If so, would the organization-enrollment requirement for VPN apps apply? Is there another public API Apple recommends for this use case? I understand that the App Review questions may ultimately need to be answered by App Review rather than the forums. My main goal here is to validate whether this is a supported NetworkExtension architecture before investing in the packet processing implementation.

Can someone investigate the behavior of VoWiFi? The VoWiFi connection is generally very unstable and is randomly lost, even when the Wi-Fi connection itself is in excellent condition. I suspect this may be a general iOS issue that has been present across several iOS versions. A clear and easy way to reproduce the issue is: Turn off the iPhone screen. Wait 5 minutes. Receive a phone call. The call will not be received over VoWiFi. It will either fall back to the cellular network or be missed entirely. The issue can occur randomly in other situations as well, but putting the iPhone into standby makes the problem particularly easy to reproduce.

My app is using RemoteMediaSessionExtension to control speakers over the local network via the new Now Playing framework. Starting with Beta 6, local network calls from the extension fail with 'Path was denied by NECP policy' error. Is it a bug or an intentional change in the latest beta?

Hi, Do Apps(not carplay) can access USB NCM interface to communicate with the accessory on IOS? I want to develop the APP to communicate with my accessory based on the USB NCM. BR, Carl

We are developing large public Wi-Fi networks with an associated iOS app. The network SSID has OWE security enabled but when an iOS device connects to it the network is still marked as an “Unsecured Network” and the warning “Open networks provide no security and expose all network traffic.” is displayed when getting info on the network in Settings. This has been tested under iOS 26.6 and iOS 27.7 Beta 7. What do we need to do so that our customers know their network traffic is secured by OWE?

Our NEURLFilter (URL Filter) and Live Caller ID Lookup entitlements are both Approved, but on device the URL filter never activates — the NEURLFilter session loops starting → stopped, so no URLs are filtered. App: bundle app.scamzero (App ID 6768433709) URL Filter Config ID: 224e33c9-b03b-44ce-87cd-2153c86908ce Live Caller ID Lookup Config ID: 0abdc42b-c98b-4753-8af4-9334d42abdb8 Device: iPhone on iOS 26. Test account has the paid plan that enables the feature. The system log shows the failure is fetching the Privacy Pass token issuer directory through Apple's relay (gateway.icloud.com), not our backend: ciphermld : Failed to fetch Token Issuer Directory. URL: https://gateway.icloud.com/pat-issuer-directory?issuer=issuer.scamzero.app Status Code: 404 → NEURLFilterPlugin setStatus:error — NEAgentURLFilterErrorDomain Code=3 → NESMURLFilterSession status changed to stopping with error 3 → prefilterCleanup (removes the prefilter mmap) → session restarts → loop This looks like NEURLFilterManager.Error.serverSetupIncomplete (9). What we have already verified on our side (everything conforms): We run Apple's unmodified reference PIRService (from apple/pir-service-example). Our issuer directory at https://issuer.scamzero.app/.well-known/private-token-issuer-directory returns 200 with valid token-keys (token-type 2) and issuer-request-uri. OHTTP gateway (gateway.scamzero.app/ohttp-configs and /gateway), PIR service (service.scamzero.app), use case app.scamzero.url.filtering, bearer token AAAA, DNS TXT apple-url-filter=app.scamzero, and the validation URL apple.com/url-filter-test = 1 are all configured. Our pre-launch checks pass. The precomputed Bloom prefilter loads on device with the correct bit/hash/seed and ~37k domains. Key observation: our OHTTP gateway logs show zero successful OHTTP requests from Apple's infrastructure since Aug 10, and gateway.icloud.com/pat-issuer-directory?issuer=issuer.scamzero.app returns 404 on device. This suggests our Privacy Pass issuer is not registered/validated in Apple's PAT issuer directory, even though both entitlements are Approved. Question: How can we get our Privacy Pass issuer (issuer.scamzero.app) registered/validated in Apple's token issuer directory for the use cases app.scamzero.url.filtering and Live Caller ID Lookup? The entitlements are approved, but the on-device token issuer directory lookup fails with 404, which prevents the filter from ever activating. Happy to file a Feedback with a sysdiagnose if useful.

We are using an URLSessionDataTask to download some JSON from a server and lately we sometimes receive NSURLErrorCancelled (code -999) for no apparent reason. After enabling CFNetwork Diagnostic Logging I found that in these cases the request finishes with the error mentioned above instead of HTTP/1.1 200 OK even though the response body seems to be transferred in its entirety. What could be causing this? I am pretty certain that it is not us cancelling the task.

Dear Apple：I am developing an app and I would like to use Apple's AccessorySetupKit to complete the binding with an accessory. My accessory supports both Bluetooth and Wi-Fi Aware. I want to use AccessorySetupKit to complete both the Bluetooth pairing and the Wi-Fi Aware pairing with the accessory in one go. For Bluetooth, we also need to use the ANCS service, so the Bluetooth pairing requires a PIN code pop-up. However, we would like to skip this Bluetooth PIN code pairing, or combine it with the Wi-Fi Aware PIN code pairing into a single step. Is this possible under the current AccessorySetupKit framework? Because having the user confirm the PIN code twice does not seem like a great user experience. I would appreciate your help in answering this. Thank you.

When I set IncludeAllNetworks in my VPN profile along with the excludeRoutes for traffic I want to go outside of the tunnel, I see the exclude routes being added to the the route table but when we try and to connect on those hosts something is setting a route to the TUN interface and ignoring the excluded routes in the settings. I'm assuming that some policy before any route table is being looked at is doing this but does that then mean IncludeAllNetworks=true and excludeRoutes are actually incompatible? Is this documented and I just missed it?

Testing NEURLFilterControlProvider on iOS 26.6, I've measured two behaviours around stop(reason:) that I can't reconcile with the documentation, and I'd like to know whether either is intended. Setup: development-signed build, filter configured and running, instrumented stop(reason:) that logs the reason and then emits elapsed-time markers. All timings below are from device log archives collected with "log collect --device". The reason parameter is always .none nesessionmanager records a specific stop reason for itself, then passes .none (0) to the provider. Two different user actions, two different internal reasons, same .none delivered. Disabling via NEURLFilterManager (isEnabled = false, saveToPreferences): 15:20:12.173 nesessionmanager: Setting last stop reason to 31 15:20:12.175 MyProvider: stop() entered, reason=0 (none) 15:20:14.208 MyProvider: stop() completed after 2032ms 15:20:14.209 nesessionmanager: status changed to disconnected, last stop reason Configuration was disabled Disabling the filter from iOS Settings: 15:25:04.167 nesessionmanager: Setting last stop reason to 1 15:25:04.169 MyProvider: stop() entered, reason=0 (none) 15:25:06.198 MyProvider: stop() completed after 2028ms 15:25:06.200 nesessionmanager: status changed to disconnected, last stop reason Stop command received The system clearly knows why the filter stopped, and the values it uses (31, 1) are outside the NEProviderStopReason range, so there appears to be a richer internal enum that isn't mapped through to the provider. Is .none what a URL filter control provider should expect in all cases? If so, is there any supported way for the provider to distinguish a deliberate user disable from system settings, say, an in-app disable, app update or a configuration reload? Is stop(reason:) guaranteed to be called? I do cleanup work in stop(), so I want to know whether it is a reliable lifecycle callback or a best-effort one. I found at least one teardown path where it is skipped entirely. When the configuration is removed as part of the app being deleted, the session is torn down without the provider ever being invoked. The extension is terminated roughly 355 ms before the configuration removal: 15:33:59.361 launchd: service inactive: MyProvider, leaving extension group 15:33:59.363 runningboardd: Executing termination request 15:33:59.431 launchd: remove all extension instances ... total of 0 extension instances were found to remove 15:33:59.716 nesessionmanager: configuration has been removed, stopping 15:33:59.716 nesessionmanager: Setting last stop reason to 32 15:33:59.717 nesessionmanager: plugin NEURLFilterPlugin(...) disposed 15:33:59.717 nesessionmanager: status changed to disconnected, last stop reason Configuration was removed No stop() call appears anywhere in the archive, and the plugin is disposed rather than stopped. The whole teardown takes one millisecond. The ordering looks like the cause: by the time nesessionmanager removes the configuration, the extension process is already gone, so there is nothing left to call stop() on. Thread 713975 describes stopTunnel being called with .providerDisabled in the equivalent situation for a packet tunnel provider, so the behaviour appears to differ by provider type. So my question is about the contract rather than this specific path: should a URL filter control provider treat stop(reason:) as guaranteed, or as best-effort? If it is best-effort, are there other teardown paths where it is skipped, so I can make sure nothing important depends on it running?

Hi everyone, I’m looking for some clarification regarding "Transparent Proxy configurations on macOS". We have a requirement where multiple security/networking solutions may need to use a "Transparent Proxy" on the same macOS device. For example, one solution may be used for web security/SSL inspection while another solution is required for a different security or network traffic use case. My questions are: 1.Does macOS support configuring and running multiple Transparent Proxy providers simultaneously on the same device? 2. If multiple Transparent Proxy configurations are deployed through MDM, how does macOS determine which proxy handles the traffic? 3.Is there any limitation on the number of Transparent Proxy configurations/providers that can be configured? 4.Can multiple Transparent Proxy providers coexist if they handle different traffic, applications, or network interfaces? 5. If multiple providers are configured, is there a supported mechanism to define priority, ordering, or traffic routing between them? 6. Are there any differences or limitations across recent macOS versions, particularly macOS 15 and macOS 26? 7. Is there any Apple documentation or recommended architecture for deploying multiple Transparent Proxy providers on the same Mac? If anyone has implemented or tested a setup with multiple Transparent Proxy providers on macOS, I’d appreciate any insights, documentation, or real-world experience. Thanks! Vijay

Hello, I am evaluating a technical concept for an airline passenger application and would like to clarify what is possible using public iOS APIs. Is there any supported public API, framework or entitlement that allows an iOS application to reliably determine whether: cellular radio/connectivity has been disabled by the user, while Wi-Fi remains enabled and connected? The goal is only to verify this device state. The application would not attempt to enable or disable Airplane Mode or cellular connectivity itself. I have reviewed Core Telephony, but it does not appear to provide an explicit and reliable Airplane Mode state. Would there be a supported way for an airline application to verify this condition, or is this intentionally unavailable to third-party applications on iOS? Thank you for your guidance. Kind regards, Colin Friedrichs

Hello , We are developing an enterprise iOS application for cellular network benchmarking, performance validation, and analytics. We have reviewed the publicly available iOS APIs, including CoreTelephony, and have not identified a public API that provides access to the following cellular RF/network measurements: ARFCN / EARFCN / NRARFCN Band Bandwidth (BW) Cell ID PCI (Physical Cell Identity) CQI (Channel Quality Indicator) RSRP (Reference Signal Received Power) RSRQ (Reference Signal Received Quality) SINR / SNR RSSI TAC (Tracking Area Code) TA (Timing Advance) Could Apple please clarify whether any of the above measurements can be accessed through an officially supported mechanism, including but not limited to: Public iOS frameworks or APIs Special entitlements Managed or supervised-device capabilities Enterprise-specific capabilities Carrier-partner programs or integrations Apple-approved diagnostic or measurement frameworks Other approved mechanisms or programs We are not seeking to use private APIs, reverse-engineering techniques, or unsupported mechanisms. Our goal is to understand whether Apple provides any legitimate and supported way for an enterprise application to obtain these measurements on iOS devices. If access to any subset of these metrics is supported, could you please point us to the relevant documentation, framework, entitlement, carrier program, or enrollment process? Our use case is limited to cellular network benchmarking, performance validation, and network analytics on iOS devices. Thank you for your guidance.