An ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest rejection email looks as follows: ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest- Your app includes "<path/to/SDK>", which includes , an SDK that was identified in the documentation as a privacy-impacting third-party SDK. Starting February 12, 2025, if a new app includes a privacy-impacting SDK, or an app update adds a new privacy-impacting SDK, the SDK must include a privacy manifest file. Please contact the provider of the SDK that includes this file to get an updated SDK version with a privacy manifest. For more details about this policy, including a list of SDKs that are required to include signatures and manifests, visit: https://developer.apple.com/support/third-party-SDK-requirements. Glossary ITMS-91061: Missing privacy manifest: An email that includes the name and path of privacy-impacting SDK(s) with no privacy manifest files in your app bundle. For more information, see https://developer.apple.com/support/third-party-SDK-requirements. : The specified privacy-impacting SDK that doesn't include a privacy manifest file. If you are the developer of the rejected app, gather the name of the SDK from the email you received from Apple, then contact the SDK's provider for an updated version that includes a valid privacy manifest. After receiving an updated version of the SDK, verify the SDK includes a valid privacy manifest file at the expected location. For more information, see Adding a privacy manifest to your app or third-party SDK. If your app includes a privacy manifest file, make sure the file only describes the privacy practices of your app. Do not add the privacy practices of the SDK to your app's privacy manifest. If the email lists multiple SDKs, repeat the above process for all of them. If you are the developer of an SDK listed in the email, publish an updated version of your SDK that includes a privacy manifest file with valid keys and values. Every privacy-impacting SDK must contain a privacy manifest file that only describes its privacy practices. To learn how to add a valid privacy manifest to your SDK, see the Additional resources section below. Additional resources Privacy manifest files Describing data use in privacy manifests Describing use of required reason API Adding a privacy manifest to your app or third-party SDK TN3182: Adding privacy tracking keys to your privacy manifest TN3183: Adding required reason API entries to your privacy manifest TN3184: Adding data collection details to your privacy manifest TN3181: Debugging an invalid privacy manifest

In this post, we'll share tips to help you submit apps that deliver original ideas to your users. When working on your app, focus on creating interesting, unique experiences that aren't already available. Apps that actively try to copy other apps won't pass review, and accounts that repeatedly submit copycat apps or attempt to impersonate a service will be closed. The rules that prevent copycat and impersonator apps from being distributed on the App Store are described in App Review Guideline 4.1: 4.1 Copycats (a) Come up with your own ideas. We know you have them, so make yours come to life. Don’t simply copy the latest popular app on the App Store, or make some minor changes to another app’s name or UI and pass it off as your own. In addition to risking an intellectual property infringement claim, it makes the App Store harder to navigate and just isn’t fair to your fellow developers. (b) Submitting apps which impersonate other apps or services is considered a violation of the Developer Code of Conduct and may result in removal from the Apple Developer Program. These requirements help make the App Store both a safe place for people to discover apps and a platform for all developers to be successful. Best Practices Here are three best practices that will help you submit apps that follow App Review Guideline 4.1: 1. Submit apps with unique content and features. People want apps that provide unique experiences. Find areas that aren't currently being served and build compelling apps for those audiences. Do: Create apps that provide a new experience or a unique spin on an existing concept. Design original, delightful interfaces that elegantly meet your user's needs. Don't: Don’t imitate the features and functionality of other apps. Don’t copy the look and feel of other apps, such as using an identical user interface design. 2. Make sure App Store metadata only contains relevant information and content you either own or have permission to use. The metadata provided in App Store Connect is used to populate your app's product page on the App Store. People rely on this metadata to learn about your app and what it has to offer. Leveraging the popularity of another brand or app, either by including irrelevant references or protected content, is misleading and won't help your app succeed. Do: Use engaging, descriptive language to describe your unique app. Create original content that best represents your app, such as screenshots showing the actual app in use. Don't: Don't use protected material you do not have the necessary permission to use, such as app icons that are similar to icons of a popular app. Don’t include irrelevant references, such as popular app names or trademarked terms, in any metadata fields. 3. Provide information that is authentic and verifiable. People want to know the developers behind their favorite apps are who they say they are. It's important to continually review and provide up-to-date information, including the developer or company name listed on your Apple Developer Program account, the Support URL listed on your app's product page, and other helpful information. This will enable your users to contact you when they need help and it will also hinder people who may try to impersonate you, your app, or your service. Do: Make sure all information, resources, and documentation related to your account and apps are current and accurate. Don't: Don’t provide inaccurate information or resources, such as directing people to outdated support pages. Don’t provide fraudulent documentation. Accounts that submit fraudulent documentation will be removed from the Apple Developer Program. Support Incorporating these best practices into your app's development will help you submit apps that follow App Review Guideline 4.1. If you need additional assistance, consider taking advantage of one of the following support options available from App Review: If your submission has been rejected, reply to the message from App Review in App Store Connect and request clarification. Request an App Review Appointment to discuss the results of our review. Appointments are subject to availability, and take place during local business hours in your region on Tuesdays and Thursdays. If you believe your app follows the App Review Guidelines, consider submitting an appeal to the App Review Board. Resources Learn about foundational design principles from Apple designers and the developer community. Learn how to create engaging App Store product pages. Note that apps that violate intellectual property rights are subject to removal through the App Store Content Dispute process. If you believe an app on the App Store violates your intellectual property rights, you can submit a claim.

My application (App ID: 6746629090) has been in “Waiting for Review” for nine (9) days without any status change. To investigate, I opened a support case via App Store Connect 4 days ago, but I have not yet received a response or update. Because the delay is now impacting our release timeline and customer commitments, I respectfully request: A status update on the current review of App ID 6746629090. Confirmation that there are no outstanding compliance items or additional information required from my side. If possible, expedited processing or guidance on next steps to resolve the hold-up. Key details • App ID: 6746629090 • Current version / build: 1.2.1(22) • Date submitted: Jul 6, 2025 • Support Case #: 102641999315

Dear Apple Support Team, I am writing to urgently request attention and a clear resolution timeline regarding a critical issue with my Apple Developer Account, which has been ongoing since June 18, 2025. Despite acknowledging that the issue is caused by a backend bug related to the Developer Program contract, and after ticket number 102625528685 was opened, there has been no meaningful progress or timeline provided. My account is currently restricted in a way that prevents me from: Submitting new apps Sending apps for review or updates Creating or managing subscriptions Fully using App Store Connect features For nearly a month now, I have only received generic replies saying that “engineering is investigating.” However, there have been no updates, no estimated timelines, and no temporary solutions offered. This issue is seriously impacting my work and business operations. I am kindly requesting that a senior support representative or engineer directly review this case and provide: A clear explanation of the root cause A realistic timeframe for a solution An interim workaround if the final fix will take more time Please escalate this matter urgently, as my business has already suffered due to this extended delay. I appreciate your understanding and hope to receive a concrete update as soon as possible. Thank you for your support. Sincerely, Soheil

Hi everyone, Our app (Apple IDs: 6744840952 and 6746964086) has been under review for three weeks now, and during this time we’ve made several attempts to follow up: We submitted an expedited review request We used the Contact Us form to inquire about the status We tried reaching out by phone We spoke with Apple representatives during a Meet with Apple Experts event Unfortunately, none of these actions have resulted in any progress. The responses we received have all been variations of “please wait patiently,” and we haven’t been proactively contacted through App Store Connect either. We are feeling deeply discouraged, and the emails from our users have shifted from initial understanding to increasing frustration and complaints. We fully understand that the review process can vary in complexity, but the app has now been in review for 20 days. We would deeply appreciate any assistance or suggestions that might help move the process forward. Original feedback link

Hi guys, I am new to publishing applications on Apple Store. Now, I have a standalone application built by Python and packaged to an .app file by PyInstaller. I used PyCharm as IDE instead of Xcode. So far, I did codesign and notarization processes. How can I prepare it to release it on Apple Store? Is there any guide that I can follow to do it?

Hello, I’m an iOS developer and the original creator of the app "Instant Save: Reels story" (App Apple ID: 6469411763). On July 5, 2025, I received two Apple emails saying the app was transferred to another developer account. However, I did not initiate or approve this transfer. My Apple Developer account has Two-Factor Authentication enabled, and I received no OTP or request for approval. I submitted a legal dispute form via Apple’s Intellectual Property page on July 7, 2025, but I’ve only received an automated acknowledgment — no dispute number or follow-up. I’ve also contacted Apple Developer Support multiple times by phone, but they confirmed they cannot escalate legal cases or access my dispute status. Has anyone else faced this issue recently? I’m looking for any guidance or similar experiences while I await a response from Apple Legal. Thanks in advance,
 Bhautik Amipara

My app published 6 hours ago this is first version and IAP is still in review. My app is hard paywall app so people cannot continue in app and this is all happening during initial boost. I contacted with apple but they say they send message to review time and hours passed nothing changed. People downloading the app and I'm watching it without able to do anything :( Are there anyone experienced same thing ? Do you have any advice ?

Hello Apple Developer Support & Community, I’m reaching out regarding the unexpected termination of my Apple Developer Program account, associated with App ID: 6744330283. Recently, my app was flagged under Guideline 4.3 - Spam, and I was asked to make necessary changes. I followed all guidance provided by Apple, including a phone call with an App Review team member, who clarified the steps I should take. I did not submit any further update after that call. However, before I had the chance to upload the new, compliant version of my app, my entire developer account was terminated without a clear explanation or additional warning. I believe this was a misunderstanding, as I was actively working on compliance and fully committed to resolving the issue. My app is not spam I only followed Apple’s instructions I never uploaded a new version after my call with App Review No specific violation or example of “spam” was shown to me I’ve submitted an official appeal via the App Review Board, but I’m hoping someone here can also assist or escalate this matter. My developer account and years of effort are at risk over what seems to be a miscommunication. Thank you for any guidance or assistance you can provide.

Hello App Review Team, Our app has now been in “In Review” for 7 days. Could you please advise on the expected timeline for completion or let us know if any further details are needed to move forward? Thank you for your assistance.

Hello, I’ve received feedback from the App Review team for my app, indicating that the auto-renewing subscription violates guideline 3.1.2 due to inappropriate use of the service. They noted that such subscriptions should provide dynamic, ongoing value over an extended period and requested a revision or removal. My app offers cloud backup for user app data and cross-device sync via Apple Sign-In and Google Sign-In, with unlimited uploads and downloads. Additionally, we limit free users and provide premium features like more stylish cosmetics to paid users and more upcoming. Despite my previous response, the feedback remains unchanged. I’d like to ask: Does a simple cloud backup for user app data suffice to meet the ongoing value requirement of 3.1.2? I also suspect that providing clear instructions for reviewers to test this cloud feature—such as screenshots and a step-by-step guide—might help clarify its value. I zeroed in on the cloud aspect based on reading that it could address this issue, but I’m unsure if mentioning the user limits and premium features is relevant here. Any guidance or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Jack

Hi all, I submitted a healthcare-related iOS app on June 19 that integrates with a health monitoring device. It had a few prior rejections due to compliance concerns, which we addressed. Apple Developer Support confirmed the review is still in progress and that it requires additional time. I'm wondering if others have experienced similarly extended review timelines for healthcare or medical device-integrated apps, and how long it took for resolution. Would appreciate any advice or shared experiences on this. Thanks!

Since many users like me use Apple Music on Android, the app is almost as feature-rich as iOS. It would be fantastic if the developers could add the new iOS 26 features to the Android app, along with a minor UI change. I know it’s challenging to implement liquid glass on Android hardware or design, but features like auto-mix, pronunciation, and translation could be added. kindly consider this request !!!!

Hello everyone, We are building an iOS app using React Native that connects to a custom Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) accessory. The accessory continuously sends small chunks of audio data to the app through BLE (basically every time the user speaks), which are then streamed in real time to our server via WebSocket for transcription and processing. We need to know if the following behavior is allowed by iOS runtime and App Store review policies: Can the app open a WebSocket connection in the background (not permanently, just briefly, several times a day) triggered by BLE activity from a registered accessory? Is there a limit to this? Clarifications: The app is not expected to remain permanently awake. Only during accessory-triggered events. WebSocket is required due to the real-time nature of streaming STT and delivering quick responses (via notifications). If allowed, are there any specific Info.plist declarations or entitlements we must include? Thanks in advance! Fran

Our app (app1) was recently transferred from Team A to Team B. While reviewing the Apple login implementation, we discovered that "Sign in with Apple" had been incorrectly set up to use the Service ID and App ID of another app (app2) — specifically, it was using app2.service as the Service ID and app2 as the App ID. In other words, app1’s users were authenticated through app2’s credentials due to a misconfiguration on our part. Now that app1 has been transferred to Team B, we’re trying to preserve those users. However, app2 is still in Team A, and we cannot maintain Team A anymore — meaning app2 must also be transferred to Team B if we want to retain access to the user data. One idea we considered is submitting app2 for App Review (even though it's non-functional) just to fulfill the transfer requirements, and then transferring it to Team B solely to retain the Apple login setup. Is this approach acceptable? Are there any recommended ways to handle this kind of misconfiguration while preserving existing Sign in with Apple users?

Hi, Our recent security scans, performed by Data Theorem, have flagged a potential App Store blocker related to the use of a private iOS class, NSBlock. We are concerned that this identified warning may lead to our apps being rejected during the next App Store submission. Issue Summary: We integrate a library, this SDK is developed using Kotlin Multiplatform, and during compilation, Kotlin automatically generates Objective-C/Swift interoperability code. As a result of this code generation, the compiled framework includes a reference to a private Apple class, NSBlock. It’s important to note that: No methods or functionality from NSBlock are being invoked or used. This reference is auto-generated by Kotlin’s ObjCExport.mm module. For additional context, you may refer to a related discussion on this issue: https://github.com/ricohapi/theta-client/issues/98 https://github.com/JetBrains/kotlin-native/issues/1642 https://github.com/JetBrains/kotlin-native/pull/1652/files We would like to confirm whether the presence of this unused reference to NSBlock will result in the rejection of our application during App Store review. Thankyou

Hi, I would like to sell the app through an annual subscription with automatic renewal, giving the potential customer the opportunity to try it for a week and, if they like it, buy it. I would need you to explain to me how I have to set everything up, I asked the Verification Team how to set it up a couple of times but I could not get any concrete help, they advised me to follow the guidelines. The Team gave me this response: We are unable to complete the review of the app because one or more in-app purchase products were not submitted for review. Specifically, the app includes references to a subscription, but the associated in-app purchase products were not submitted for review. The problem is perhaps that I can't send the subscription for review because I can't access the menu under "Monetization" which is the one I'm attaching the image of. Can anyone help me solve this problem? [Thanks]

Hi everyone, We just received another App Store rejection under Guideline 3.1.3 - Business - Payments - Other Purchase Methods, stating that we are using in-app purchases to sell physical goods — specifically, a physical QR code sent to the user. However, in our latest build, this issue was already addressed: All physical QR code purchases are now handled entirely through Stripe Checkout, outside of the app. No consumable IAPs are used for physical goods. The purchase flow is completely optional - users can tap “Continue” to skip it and still use the app without ever engaging with Stripe or purchasing anything physical. We’re a small team trying to launch and are stuck in a loop where it seems like the rejection feedback might not reflect the latest build with not clear feedback from Apple. Has anyone experienced something similar? Would really appreciate any guidance or insight — or if anyone from Apple is here, we’re happy to jump on a call to clarify. Thanks in advance!

Hello Apple Team, We're reaching out as part of a wider group of developers and businesses who have seen repeated App Store rejections under Guideline 5.0 - Legal, specifically related to U.S. sanctions on Syria. However, as of July 1, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Treasury (OFAC) has officially lifted those sanctions for commercial activities. This is clearly stated in the latest OFAC FAQ. Also visiting the link that we get from apple reviewers https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/pages/syria.aspx is not any more there and dose not include Syria at all. Despite this, rejections continue for those apps :( . Question: Has the App Review system been updated to reflect the July 1 OFAC decision? If not, is there a timeline for when Apple will begin processing these changes in the review flow? Our community is trying hard to work and build apps for middle east zones and Syria is part, this rejections brin heavy burdens on our community and makes unable to bring great apps for those markets. Thank you for your support.

Hello Apple Developer Team and Community, I’m writing to raise a serious concern regarding my app (App ID: 6744330283) which is now being repeatedly rejected under Guideline 4.3 (A) – Spam, despite being previously approved and published for at least two earlier versions. We have had multiple rounds of communication with the App Review team in the past, carefully addressing every request and making adjustments accordingly. These previous versions were reviewed and approved without any reference to 4.3 issues. However, since a recent update, we’ve been receiving rejections citing Spam 4.3 (A) — without any specific explanation or detailed reasoning. Even more frustrating: Each review now takes over a week to process, making our release cycle extremely difficult to manage. It required dozens of phone calls and emails just to get the app reviewed at all. I even had a meeting with an App Review team member, where I was told: “The recent updates are considered Spam 4.3, while the earlier versions that were approved are not.” But I am truly confused by this, because all the updates share the exact same codebase — there are no material differences between the approved versions and the ones now being rejected. This inconsistency and lack of clarity is making it impossible for us to move forward. We respectfully request: A clear and actionable explanation for why the recent versions are now considered Spam 4.3 (A), while earlier versions were not. Specific guidance or examples to help us understand what triggered this new interpretation. Transparency about what exactly changed — either in review criteria or policy enforcement — so that we can comply properly. We are committed to fully adhering to the App Store Review Guidelines and improving the app accordingly, but we can’t do that without transparency and fair communication. Any insights from the Apple team or other developers who’ve faced similar issues would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Dear Apple reviewer: We are a social media app that has been submitted for review for the first time. I have been waiting for 2 weeks in the 'awaiting review' status. We have applied for expedited review, but have not made any progress; Our users have been anxiously asking when we will launch, and they are very eager to use these features. Apple ID：6746186652. Looking forward to your reply, thank you!

Hello Apple Developer Community, We’re running into a challenge with App Review related to Guideline 5.1.1 (Data Collection and Storage), and are hoping to get insights from others who may have encountered something similar. Our app is built entirely around account-specific functionality. Each user is issued a unique QR code tied to their account, which enables and disables core functionality. This QR code is not generic - it’s unique to the user and is securely stored in our Firebase backend to support cross-device use and persistent access. App Review has flagged that requiring login violates Guideline 5.1.1, despite the fact that we have already moved the login step to occur after the user completes an in-app purchase, as per their previous guidance. Login is not used to gate purchasing, but it is critical for generating and linking the unique QR code to the user’s account. Beyond the QR code, our product roadmap includes multiple account-dependent features like usage tracking, goal setting, emergency unlocks, and cross-device sync. None of this is technically possible without a persistent user account. We’re struggling to understand how to reconcile this rejection with the way our app is fundamentally architected. Account-bound functionality seems essential for delivering a secure and reliable user experience. Is anyone else facing similar confusion with this guideline? Thank you for your time and assistance.