Recently I am trying to implement apple oauth in expo web version, I created the service id and other related info, i have issue @PostMapping("/callback") public ResponseEntity handleAppleCallback(@RequestParam Map<String, String> body) { String code = body.get("code"); String idToken = body.get("id_token"); if (code == null) { return ResponseEntity.badRequest().build(); } // Redirect to your Expo Web app with the code in query String frontendUrl = "https://mobile-dot-dev-epicportal.uc.r.appspot.com/apple-callback?code=" + code; return ResponseEntity.status(HttpStatus.FOUND) .header("Location", frontendUrl) .build(); } when i pass the code recived from apple to this route i am getting invalid_grant i am not sure what is wrong here

Hi, we are having Sign in with Apple issues. For a large % of new users on our app which select this option, the first name and last name values are not being passed to us. This is the case in both scenarios - where the user shares their email address or hides it, and happens on iPhone when the user selects the default iCloud account. We're unclear why this is occurring.

Dear Apple Developer Support Team, We are experiencing a recurring issue with the DeviceCheck API where the following error is being returned: com.apple.devicecheck.error 0 Upon analyzing our logs, we have noticed that this error occurs significantly more often when users are connected to Wi-Fi networks, compared to mobile networks. This leads us to suspect that there might be a relationship between Wi-Fi configuration and the DeviceCheck service’s ability to generate or validate tokens. We would like to know: Is this error code (0) known to be caused by specific types of network behavior or misconfigurations on Wi-Fi networks (e.g., DNS filtering, firewall restrictions, proxy servers)? Are there any recommended best practices for ensuring reliable DeviceCheck API communication over Wi-Fi networks? Additionally, could you please clarify what general conditions could trigger this com.apple.devicecheck.error 0? The lack of specific documentation makes debugging this issue difficult from our side. Any guidance or internal documentation on this error code and its potential causes would be greatly appreciated. IDE: Xcode 16.3 Looking forward to your support. Best regards,

Hello everyone! We are from Russia, and we no longer have an official Apple store. All phones are imported through parallel imports. Yesterday, my wife logged out of her Apple ID and logged in to someone else's account, and as a result, her phone was in lost and locked mode. We have a sales receipt confirming the purchase, but it is from a Russian store. Can you please tell me if there is a way to unlock the phone or if it is already a brick? Scammers are asking for money to unlock the phone. Thank you in advance for your reply!

Hi everyone, I have followed all the Apple procedures, read the forums, and looked at various experiences of other users who had my problem, but I haven’t found a solution. On my site, I have added login with all the “big” providers, and Apple is the only one missing. I’ve tried everything, but when the user logs in and is authenticated, I get an error. In order, here’s what I receive: Received Apple code: cfbf091dd6... JWT generated correctly HTTP Error (400): {"error":"invalid_client"} I’ve read all sorts of things, including that you have to wait up to 48 hours for the Key to be enabled. Any ideas? I’ve read that this is a common problem, but I haven’t found a valid solution. Thanks in advance to anyone who can help me.

I no longer have an app on the store. I do have an apple books account on the same login but there's no need for me to have the appstore connect account or whatever you call it and keep getting notifications when I don't have an app, don't want an app, will never do another app.

Hello, I'm receiving an unknown error instead of the excluded credentials error when using the "Save on another device" option for Passkey creation. When creating the ASAuthorizationPlatformPublicKeyCredentialProvider request to pass to the ASAuthorizationController. The excludedCredentials property is used to add a list of credentials to exclude in the registration process. This is to prevent duplicate passkeys from being created if one already exists for the user. When trying to create a duplicate passkey using the same device, the ASAuthorizationControllerDelegate method authorizationController(controller, didCompleteWithError:) is called. The error received has localized description “At least one credential matches an entry of the excludeCredentials list in the platform attached authenticator." When trying to create a duplicate passkey using the “Save on another device” option. The delegate method is called, but the error received has code 1000 ("com.apple.AuthenticationServices.AuthorizationError" - code: 1000). Which maps to the unknown error case in ASAuthorization error type.

I can't find any information about why this is happening, nor can I reproduce the 'successful' state on this device. My team needs to understand this behavior, so any insight would be greatly appreciated! The expected behavior: If I delete both apps and reinstall them, attempting to open the second app from my app should trigger the system confirmation dialog. The specifics: I'm using the MSAL library. It navigates the user to the Microsoft Authenticator app and then returns to my app. However, even after resetting the phone and reinstalling both apps, the dialog never shows up (it just opens the app directly). Does anyone know the logic behind how iOS handles these prompts or why it might be persistent even after a reset? Thanks in advance!

I regularly help developers with keychain problems, both here on DevForums and for my Day Job™ in DTS. Many of these problems are caused by a fundamental misunderstanding of how the keychain works. This post is my attempt to explain that. I wrote it primarily so that Future Quinn™ can direct folks here rather than explain everything from scratch (-: If you have questions or comments about any of this, put them in a new thread and apply the Security tag so that I see it. Share and Enjoy — Quinn “The Eskimo!” @ Developer Technical Support @ Apple let myEmail = "eskimo" + "1" + "@" + "apple.com" SecItem: Fundamentals or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the SecItem API The SecItem API seems very simple. After all, it only has four function calls, how hard can it be? In reality, things are not that easy. Various factors contribute to making this API much trickier than it might seem at first glance. This post explains the fundamental underpinnings of the keychain. For information about specific issues, see its companion post, SecItem: Pitfalls and Best Practices. Keychain Documentation Your basic starting point should be Keychain Items. If your code runs on the Mac, also read TN3137 On Mac keychain APIs and implementations. Read the doc comments in <Security/SecItem.h>. In many cases those doc comments contain critical tidbits. When you read keychain documentation [1] and doc comments, keep in mind that statements specific to iOS typically apply to iPadOS, tvOS, and watchOS as well (r. 102786959). Also, they typically apply to macOS when you target the data protection keychain. Conversely, statements specific to macOS may not apply when you target the data protection keychain. [1] Except TN3137, which is very clear about this (-: Caveat Mac Developer macOS supports two different keychain implementations: the original file-based keychain and the iOS-style data protection keychain. IMPORTANT If you’re able to use the data protection keychain, do so. It’ll make your life easier. See the Careful With that Shim, Mac Developer section of SecItem: Pitfalls and Best Practices for more about this. TN3137 On Mac keychain APIs and implementations explains this distinction. It also says: The file-based keychain is on the road to deprecation. This is talking about the implementation, not any specific API. The SecItem API can’t be deprecated because it works with both the data protection keychain and the file-based keychain. However, Apple has deprecated many APIs that are specific to the file-based keychain, for example, SecKeychainCreate. TN3137 also notes that some programs, like launchd daemons, can’t use the file-based keychain. If you’re working on such a program then you don’t have to worry about the deprecation of these file-based keychain APIs. You’re already stuck with the file-based keychain implementation, so using a deprecated file-based keychain API doesn’t make things worse. The Four Freedoms^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Functions The SecItem API contains just four functions: SecItemAdd(_:_:) SecItemCopyMatching(_:_:) SecItemUpdate(_:_:) SecItemDelete(_:) These directly map to standard SQL database operations: SecItemAdd(_:_:) maps to INSERT. SecItemCopyMatching(_:_:) maps to SELECT. SecItemUpdate(_:_:) maps to UPDATE. SecItemDelete(_:) maps to DELETE. You can think of each keychain item class (generic password, certificate, and so on) as a separate SQL table within the database. The rows of that table are the individual keychain items for that class and the columns are the attributes of those items. Note Except for the digital identity class, kSecClassIdentity, where the values are split across the certificate and key tables. See Digital Identities Aren’t Real in SecItem: Pitfalls and Best Practices. This is not an accident. The data protection keychain is actually implemented as an SQLite database. If you’re curious about its structure, examine it on the Mac by pointing your favourite SQLite inspection tool — for example, the sqlite3 command-line tool — at the keychain database in ~/Library/Keychains/UUU/keychain-2.db, where UUU is a UUID. WARNING Do not depend on the location and structure of this file. These have changed in the past and are likely to change again in the future. If you embed knowledge of them into a shipping product, it’s likely that your product will have binary compatibility problems at some point in the future. The only reason I’m mentioning them here is because I find it helpful to poke around in the file to get a better understanding of how the API works. For information about which attributes are supported by each keychain item class — that is, what columns are in each table — see the Note box at the top of Item Attribute Keys and Values. Alternatively, look at the Attribute Key Constants doc comment in <Security/SecItem.h>. Uniqueness A critical part of the keychain model is uniqueness. How does the keychain determine if item A is the same as item B? It turns out that this is class dependent. For each keychain item class there is a set of attributes that form the uniqueness constraint for items of that class. That is, if you try to add item A where all of its attributes are the same as item B, the add fails with errSecDuplicateItem. For more information, see the errSecDuplicateItem page. It has lists of attributes that make up this uniqueness constraint, one for each class. These uniqueness constraints are a major source of confusion, as discussed in the Queries and the Uniqueness Constraints section of SecItem: Pitfalls and Best Practices. Parameter Blocks Understanding The SecItem API is a classic ‘parameter block’ API. All of its inputs are dictionaries, and you have to know which properties to set in each dictionary to achieve your desired result. Likewise for when you read properties in output dictionaries. There are five different property groups: The item class property, kSecClass, determines the class of item you’re operating on: kSecClassGenericPassword, kSecClassCertificate, and so on. The item attribute properties, like kSecAttrAccessGroup, map directly to keychain item attributes. The search properties, like kSecMatchLimit, control how the system runs a query. The return type properties, like kSecReturnAttributes, determine what values the query returns. The value type properties, like kSecValueRef perform multiple duties, as explained below. There are other properties that perform a variety of specific functions. For example, kSecUseDataProtectionKeychain tells macOS to use the data protection keychain instead of the file-based keychain. These properties are hard to describe in general; for the details, see the documentation for each such property. Inputs Each of the four SecItem functions take dictionary input parameters of the same type, CFDictionary, but these dictionaries are not the same. Different dictionaries support different property groups: The first parameter of SecItemAdd(_:_:) is an add dictionary. It supports all property groups except the search properties. The first parameter of SecItemCopyMatching(_:_:) is a query and return dictionary. It supports all property groups. The first parameter of SecItemUpdate(_:_:) is a pure query dictionary. It supports all property groups except the return type properties. Likewise for the only parameter of SecItemDelete(_:). The second parameter of SecItemUpdate(_:_:) is an update dictionary. It supports the item attribute and value type property groups. Outputs Two of the SecItem functions, SecItemAdd(_:_:) and SecItemCopyMatching(_:_:), return values. These output parameters are of type CFTypeRef because the type of value you get back depends on the return type properties you supply in the input dictionary: If you supply a single return type property, except kSecReturnAttributes, you get back a value appropriate for that return type. If you supply multiple return type properties or kSecReturnAttributes, you get back a dictionary. This supports the item attribute and value type property groups. To get a non-attribute value from this dictionary, use the value type property that corresponds to its return type property. For example, if you set kSecReturnPersistentRef in the input dictionary, use kSecValuePersistentRef to get the persistent reference from the output dictionary. In the single item case, the type of value you get back depends on the return type property and the keychain item class: For kSecReturnData you get back the keychain item’s data. This makes most sense for password items, where the data holds the password. It also works for certificate items, where you get back the DER-encoded certificate. Using this for key items is kinda sketchy. If you want to export a key, called SecKeyCopyExternalRepresentation. Using this for digital identity items is nonsensical. For kSecReturnRef you get back an object reference. This only works for keychain item classes that have an object representation, namely certificates, keys, and digital identities. You get back a SecCertificate, a SecKey, or a SecIdentity, respectively. For kSecReturnPersistentRef you get back a data value that holds the persistent reference. Value Type Subtleties There are three properties in the value type property group: kSecValueData kSecValueRef kSecValuePersistentRef Their semantics vary based on the dictionary type. For kSecValueData: In an add dictionary, this is the value of the item to add. For example, when adding a generic password item (kSecClassGenericPassword), the value of this key is a Data value containing the password. This is not supported in a query dictionary. In an update dictionary, this is the new value for the item. For kSecValueRef: In add and query dictionaries, the system infers the class property and attribute properties from the supplied object. For example, if you supply a certificate object (SecCertificate, created using SecCertificateCreateWithData), the system will infer a kSecClass value of kSecClassCertificate and various attribute values, like kSecAttrSerialNumber, from that certificate object. This is not supported in an update dictionary. For kSecValuePersistentRef: For query dictionaries, this uniquely identifies the item to operate on. This is not supported in add and update dictionaries. Revision History 2025-05-28 Expanded the Caveat Mac Developer section to cover some subtleties associated with the deprecation of the file-based keychain. 2023-09-12 Fixed various bugs in the revision history. Added a paragraph explaining how to determine which attributes are supported by each keychain item class. 2023-02-22 Made minor editorial changes. 2023-01-28 First posted.

I have an Autofill Passkey Provider working for Safari and Chrome via WebAuthn protocol. Unfortunately, Chrome will not offer my extension as a logon credential provider unless I add the credential to the ASCredentialIdentityStore. I wonder what is the best way to access the ASCredentialIdentityStore from an AutoFill extension? I understand I cannot access it directly from the extension context, so what is the best way to trigger my container app to run, based on a new WebAuthn registration? The best I can think of so far is for the www site to provide an App Link to launch my container app as part of the registration ceremony. Safari will offer my extension even without adding it to the ASCredentialIdentityStore, so I guess I should file a request with Chrome to work this way too, given difficulty of syncing ASCredentialIdentityStore with WebAuthn registration.

Hello Apple Developer Community and Support, Our team is encountering a critical and persistent issue with our backend integration of Sign In with Apple, and we are hoping for some insights or assistance. Problem: We consistently receive an "invalid_client" error (HTTP 400 status) when our backend service attempts to exchange the authorization code for tokens at Apple's https://appleid.apple.com/auth/token endpoint. The error message from Apple's response is simply {"error":"invalid_client"}. Our Setup: Client Application: An iOS native application. Backend Service: A Go backend responsible for server-to-server token exchange and user management. Sign In with Apple Flow: The iOS app initiates the Sign In with Apple flow, obtains an authorization code, and then passes this code to our backend for token exchange. Extensive Troubleshooting Performed (No Success): We have meticulously followed all official Apple documentation (including TN3107: Resolving Sign In with Apple Response Errors) and industry best practices. Here's a summary of our verification steps, all of which currently show correct configurations and parameters: Backend client_secret JWT Construction: We generate a client_secret JWT as required for server-to-server communication. We've confirmed the claims in the generated JWT are correct: iss (Issuer): Our Team ID (e.g., XXXXXXXXXX). sub (Subject): Our Service ID (e.g., com.example.service.backendauth). aud (Audience): https://appleid.apple.com. kid (Key ID): The Key ID associated with our .p8 private key (e.g., YYYYYYYYYY). We have performed rigorous verification of the .p8 private key content itself, ensuring no corruption, extra characters, or formatting issues in the environment variable. Our backend logs confirm it's parsing the correct PEM content. Token Exchange Request Parameters: The client_id parameter sent in the POST request to /auth/token is correctly set to our App Bundle ID (e.g., com.example.app.ios), as this is the identifier for which the code was originally issued. The redirect_uri parameter sent in the POST request to /auth/token is precisely matched to a registered "Return URL" in our Apple Developer Portal (e.g., https://api.example.com:port/api/auth/callback?provider=apple). Apple Developer Portal Configuration (Meticulously Verified): App ID: Enabled for "Sign In with Apple". Service ID: Enabled for "Sign In with Apple". Its "Primary App ID" is correctly linked to our App Bundle ID (e.g., com.example.app.ios). Its "Return URLs" exactly match our backend's redirect_uri (e.g., https://api.example.com:port/api/auth/callback?provider=apple). Key: Our .p8 key has "Sign In with Apple" enabled. Crucially, in its configuration panel, the "Primary App ID" is correctly linked to our App Bundle ID (e.g., com.example.app.ios). We've ensured this key is specifically created for "Sign In with Apple" and not other services like APNs. We have performed multiple full revocations and meticulous re-creations of the App ID, Service ID, and Key in the Apple Developer Portal, ensuring correct linkages and using new identifiers to bypass any potential caching issues. Network & System Health Checks: Network connectivity from our backend server to https://appleid.apple.com (port 443) has been confirmed as fully functional via ping and curl -v. The incoming TLS handshake from our iOS client app to our backend server's callback URL (https://api.example.com:port/...) is successful and verified via openssl s_client -connect. There are no longer any TLS handshake errors (EOF). Our backend server's system clock is accurately synchronized via NTP. Request for Assistance: Given that all our visible configurations, environment variables, and request parameters appear to be correct and align with Apple's documentation, and network connectivity is confirmed, we are at a loss for why the invalid_client error persists. Based on TN3107, this error typically implies an issue with the client secret's signature or its validity for the given client_id. However, our logs confirm correct iss, sub, aud, and kid, and the private key content. Has anyone encountered this persistent invalid_client error when all checks pass? Are there any less common configurations or troubleshooting steps we might be missing? Could this indicate a caching or propagation delay on Apple's servers, even after waiting periods? Any insights or guidance would be greatly appreciated. We are prepared to provide detailed, anonymized logs and screenshots to Apple Developer Support privately if requested. Thank you.

We are using Apple's PSSO to federate device login to out own IdP. We have developed our own extension app and deployed it using MDM. Things works fine but there are 2 issues that we are trying to get to the root cause - On some devices after restarting we see an error message on the logic screen saying "The registration for this device is invalid and must be repaired" And other error message is "SmartCard configuration is invalid for this account" For the 1st we have figured out that this happens when the registration doesn't happen fully and the key is not tied to the user so when the disk needs to be decrypted at the FileVault screen the issue is raised. For the "SmartCard configuration is invalid for this account" issue also one aspect is invalid registration but there has been other instances as well where the devices were registered completely but then also the the above error was raised. We verified the registration being completed by checking if the SmartCard is visible in the System Report containing the key. Has anyone seen the above issues and any possible resolution around it?

I'm experiencing an issue with Sign In with Apple integration in my React Native Expo app (Bundle ID: com.anonymous.TuZjemyApp). Problem Description: When users attempt to sign in using Sign In with Apple, they successfully complete Face ID/password authentication, but then receive a "Sign-Up not completed" error message. The authentication flow appears to stop at this point and doesn't return the identity token to my app. Technical Details: Frontend Implementation: Using expo-apple-authentication. Requesting scopes: FULL_NAME and EMAIL App is properly configured in app.json with: usesAppleSignIn: true Entitlement: com.apple.developer.applesignin Backend Implementation: Endpoint: POST /api/auth/apple Using apple-signin-auth package for token verification Verifying tokens with audience: com.anonymous.TuZjemyApp Backend creates/updates user accounts based on Apple ID Question: I'm not sure why the authentication flow stops with "Sign-Up not completed" after successful Face ID verification. The identity token never reaches my app. Could you please help me understand: What might cause this specific error message? Are there any additional Apple Developer Portal configurations required? Could this be related to app capabilities or entitlements? Is there a specific setup needed for the app to properly receive identity tokens? I set up provisioning profiles, and added Sign in with Apple as a capability and still it doesn't work.

Hey everyone, I'm hitting a really frustrating issue with App Attest. My app was working perfectly with DCAppAttestService on October 12th, but starting October 13th it started failing with DCError Code 2 "Failed to fetch App UUID" at DCAppAttestController.m:153. The weird part is I didn't change any code - same implementation, same device, same everything. I've tried switching between development and production entitlement modes, re-registered my device in the Developer Portal, created fresh provisioning profiles with App Attest capability, and verified that my App ID has App Attest enabled. DCAppAttestService.isSupported returns true, so the device supports it. Has anyone else run into this? This is blocking my production launch and I'm not sure if it's something on my end or an Apple infrastructure issue.

override func prepareInterface(forPasskeyRegistration registrationRequest: any ASCredentialRequest) int this function how can i get the "challenge" from user agent, the params "challenge" need to be used in webauthn navigator.credentials.create

Hi everyone, We just completed an App Store Connect app transfer between two developer teams and ran into what seems like an inconsistency with TN3159 (Migrating Sign in with Apple users for an app transfer). According to the technote, both the source and destination teams should be able to call /auth/usermigrationinfo for 60 days after the transfer, even if the migration wasn’t run beforehand. However, right after the transfer completed, the source team (Team A) started receiving: {"error":"invalid_client"} on all /auth/usermigrationinfo requests, even though /auth/token with scope=user.migration still works fine. What we verified before transfer: Team A’s Sign in with Apple key (ES256) was linked to the app and Services ID. OAuth flow for com.org.appname.web returned valid tokens, and the decoded ID token showed aud=com.org.appname.web with a valid private relay email, confirming the key was trusted. What happens after transfer: The key now shows “Enabled Services: —” and the App/Services IDs are no longer selectable in the Developer portal. /auth/usermigrationinfo immediately returns invalid_client for Team A, even within the same day of the transfer. This effectively makes Team A unable to generate transfer_sub values, blocking the migration flow TN3159 describes. Questions: Is Team A supposed to retain authorization to call /auth/usermigrationinfo for 60 days post-transfer? If yes, is there any known workaround to re-authorize the key or temporarily re-bind it to the transferred identifiers? If not, does this mean transfer_sub must be generated before transfer acceptance, contrary to how TN3159 reads? Would really appreciate any confirmation or guidance from Apple or anyone who’s gone through this recently. Thanks,

We’ve identified an issue in our app where, upon clicking the "Call Customer Center" button, users are unexpectedly shown a logo and message option on a native pop-up window. However, this wasn't the case before, and it should only display a phone number to dial, which was given inside our code. This is incorrect and misleading for our users, as: We are a Canadian-based service and have no affiliation with US messaging chat. The messaging feature was never enabled or intended for our app. Our app should only initiate a phone call to our customer support center — no messages or branding from third parties should appear

Hi Apple team, For our iPhone app (App Store build), a small subset of devices report DCAppAttestService.isSupported == false, preventing App Attest from being enabled. Approx. impact: 0.23% (352/153,791) iOS observed: Broadly 15.x–18.7 (also saw a few anomalous entries ios/26.0, likely client logging noise) Device models: Multiple generations (iPhone8–iPhone17); a few iPad7 entries present although the app targets iPhone Questions In iPhone main app context, what conditions can make isSupported return false on iOS 14+? Are there known device/iOS cases where temporary false can occur (SEP/TrustChain related)? Any recommended remediation (e.g., DFU restore)? Could you share logging guidance (Console.app subsystem/keywords) to investigate such cases? What fallback policy do you recommend when isSupported == false (e.g., SE-backed signature + DeviceCheck + risk rules), and any limitations? We can provide sysdiagnose/Console logs and more case details upon request. Thank you, —

I would like to make an app that uses Sign in with Apple to provide the users with a very convenient way of authenticating their (anonymous) identity. I'm using the identityToken that the SignInWithAppleButton provides to the onCompletion closure to build an AWS Identity Resolver that will be used to access AWS resources for that user. At the moment, everything works fine, except that the identityToken eventually stops working (I think after 24 hours) and is no longer usable for AWS identity resolvers. Is there a way to refresh the identityToken, or to generate a new one, without user interaction? I don't mind at all, if in some situations (eg logout from another device, deletion of account, etc), it cannot refresh the token, and it directs me to take further action by giving an error. Most importantly, I don't want the user to be forced to deal with the SignInWithAppleButton every time that they interact with web services. From the user's point of view, I would like the experience to be that they simply confirm that they agree to use SignInWithApple on first use (maybe once per device), and are never inconvenienced by it again. P.S. Sorry for posting this here. I tried to set the topic to "Privacy & Security" and ran into form validation errors.

I've come across strange behavior with the userID property on the returned credential from a passkey attestation. When performing a cross-device passkey assertion between iOS and Android by scanning the generated QR code on my iPhone with an Android device the returned credential object contains an empty userID. This does not happen when performing an on device or cross-device assertion using two iPhones. Is this expected behavior, or is there something I'm missing here? I couldn't find any more information on this in the documentation. iOS Version: 26.0.1, Android Version: 13