The Center for Innovation in Education created a reading program designed to teach every single child to read, regardless of any supposed difficulty in learning. The Center conducted a ten-year study of its Reading Program’s effectiveness. Over those ten years, the Center placed 2,048 Reading Program kits in classrooms across America. More than 300,000 children took part in the Center’s study. Results: The Reading Program taught every single child to read in every single classroom, every single year, regardless of any child’s supposed reading readiness - including dyslexic, autistic, and even Down syndrome children. No failures then or in any of the many years that have followed. Despite the Program’s success, educational publishers refused to publish it. Their refusals will be explained and hopefully counteracted in a book that is scheduled to be published in 2026. In response to publishers’ refusal to make the program available, the Center made it available as a free download from its website. The Center also made its program available as 14 free iPad apps. While the apps can be searched for individually by their unique names, since the apps are interrelated and meant to complement one another, the first keyword assigned to all 14 apps was the same. That same keyword is still in its first position for every app. The first keyword listed for each of the 14 apps is the word “Dekodiphukan”. That meant-to-be hard-to-read search word has worked well every year since the apps were introduced. However, in June of this year, that search term could find only 1 of the 14 apps. We reported this problem to Apple Support on June 26th. It is now November, and the problem remains unresolved. The only response we receive each time we ask for an update on the resolution of this problem the answer every time is: Reported search issues of this type require extensive review by Apple to determine whether it is valid and to confirm the appropriate action. There is no other response. No update has ever been sent to us. There is no phone number I can find to call. It was suggested to me by someone I spoke with in a different department at Apple Developers that I post my problem on the Developer Forum, in hopes that someone here can provide a suggestion for a way around this problem. Parents and teachers wishing to use our Reading Program with their children should not have to enter 14 different names to access our Reading Program.

I'm currently testing app updates using the App:Managed declarative device management payload, and I have a question regarding app update status reporting. Presently, by subscribing to the app.managed.list status item, we can retrieve a list of managed applications along with their installation status. Additionally, we enable automatic updates for managed App Store apps using the UpdateBehavior.AutomaticAppUpdates key. However, especially when a critical application update is initiated, we frequently find ourselves needing more detailed information about the update process. For instance, having status items similar to softwareupdate.install-state and softwareupdate.failure-reason would be incredibly helpful for user troubleshooting. My question is: Is there a way to obtain a similar level of detailed, real-time status updates for app updates? Any insights you might have, or existing methods to achieve this, would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Dear Apple Developer Team, Following the rollout of iOS 26.x and the introduction of the iPhone 17, we have identified a critical issue affecting Mobile Device Management (MDM) enrolment and restore operations. The issue appears to stem from the Device Management Profile configuration 'do_not_use_profile_from_backup' within Apple Business Manager (ABM), which currently defaults to False. This setting should be modified to True to ensure proper functionality. When the profile remains set to False, organisations leveraging MDM encounter repeated failures during device backup and restore operations. Specifically, restoring a supervised or managed device triggers a persistent MDM registration loop, effectively preventing deployment of iPhone 17 devices in managed environments. We recommend that Apple review and adjust the default Device Management Profile property within ABM to address this issue and restore full MDM compatibility for iOS 26.x and later.

Our organization is deploying passwordless authentication. Instead of using a password, employees must use the Microsoft Authenticator app to complete the login process. Unfortunately, employees with passwordless authentication can't complete the login on the Wi-Fi Captive portal with SAML authentication. The reason is that when an employee switches to the Microsoft Authenticator app, the Apple CNA (Apple Network Captive Assistant) disappears. As a result, the authentication process breaks. According to the https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=q78sq5rv source, iOS 14+ devices support the RFC-8908 standard. Unfortunately, we couldn't find a reliable source on how this feature works on iOS devices. The question is: Is it possible to automatically forward Wi-Fi clients to the SAML authentication portal in the default browser app (for example, Safari) after connecting an employee to Wi-Fi?

I applied over a month ago and haven't heard back to the Apple Small Business Program. What should I do to speed things up?

I want to install Chrome extension via configuration profile without user needing to go to System Settings and install profile manually. Can i install configuraation profile by making user only interact with my app?

Platform SSO not working on macos devices for zscaler application other app like safari / chrome working well. Need help from apple expert on the same. Environment : IDP : Entra ID MDM : Omnissa Workspace one UEM platform : macOS

Hi everyone, I want to enable Single App Mode (SAM) for my custom app that’s installed on the device. However, my device is not supervised. Is there any way to: Enable Single App Mode without supervising the device? Any guidance or workaround would be appreciated. Thanks, Arnab Lahiri

We’re exploring the use of Apple’s Automatic Assessment Configuration entitlement for an iOS app currently in the proof-of-concept stage. We’re enrolled in the Apple Developer Program with an active subscription. Both the Account Holder and team members have accepted all relevant license agreements. However, when we try to access the entitlement request form at: 👉 https://developer.apple.com/contact/request/automatic-assessment-configuration/ We are immediately redirected to: 🚫 https://developer.apple.com/unauthorized/ This happens for all team members, including the Account Holder, so it doesn’t appear to be a role-specific permissions issue. The app is still in the proof-of-concept stage — there’s no App Store listing or App ID yet. We’re trying to confirm entitlement eligibility before proceeding further. Questions: Is an App Store listing or App ID required to access this request form? Are there any hidden prerequisites (account permissions, team roles, prior submissions, etc.) that need to be fulfilled? Has anyone here successfully submitted this form — and if so, what steps or conditions were required? Any guidance or shared experience would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

We are managing VPP license switching operations using Apple's VPP Manage Licenses API. License information is managed by matching the “clientUserIdStr” data with the VPP account ID information managed on the server side. We received an inquiry stating that a VPP license did not activate despite the activation process being performed. Upon checking the API results, the update API returned a success status during execution. However, the “clientUserIdStr” information was missing from the license information field in the response of the information retrieval API. We kindly request your guidance on the reason why the “clientUserIdStr” information is missing when retrieving license information, and the steps to ensure this information is reliably returned. VPPAccoountId:0123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef adamIdStr:521974902 *Some details have been altered from the actual data to protect personal information.

Attempts to programmatically update or add numerous system-installed certificates (a common practice for organizations that rotate certificates regularly) are blocked, forcing manual, insecure, and error-prone workarounds. The root cause lies in the stricter security protocols implemented in macOS 15, specifically: System Integrity Protection (SIP) and Transparency, Consent, and Control (TCC) Command we are using : sudo security authorizationdb write com.apple.trust-settings.admin

I'm are attempting to use the device management migration feature in Apple Business Manager / Apple School Manager (for devices running iOS 26 / iPadOS 26) to re-assign managed devices from one MDM server to another. We followed the published procedure (select device(s) → Assign Device Management → Set deadline → Continue). However, we are observing that on the device side, no notification or prompt appears to the user (such as “Enrollment Required” or “Your organization requires this device to enroll in a different device management service”), even after the migration deadline has passed. Here are the environment details: Device OS version: (iOS 26.1) Device ownership: enrolled via Automated Device Enrollment MDM re-assignment in ABM: old MDM server（name: https://dev5.clomo.com/panel/mackey-dev/ ） → new MDM server (name: https://obliging-bunny-equally.ngrok-free.app/ ) Deadline set: (12/10/2025 12:00 AM) Network connectivity: confirmed online at deadline time We would like to know: Under what exact conditions will the device display the notification/prompt, and what common mis-configurations prevent it from appearing? Is there any device log or activity indicator in ABM/ASM to confirm that the migration instruction has been sent to the device? In cases where the prompt does not appear, what troubleshooting steps can we perform on the device (or in the MDM/ABM configuration) to correct it?

Hi Team, As per this documentation Handling NotNow Status Responses | Apple Developer Documentation, the last command that is delivered to the device on a connection should be the one that the device reported NotNow so that the device will automatically retry when it is ready to consume commands. Our question is it possible to have a fixed command which we can try at the end once all commands are tried and if device has reported NotNow for any of the commands. E.g. If there were 3 commands delivered to the device one by one SSO profile (com.apple.sso ) was delivered and device reported NotNow VPN profile (com.apple.vpn.managed) was delivered and the device reported NotNow DeviceInformation command was delivered and the device reported Acknowledged. As there were NotNow responses earlier, can we try a certificate profile(com.apple.security.pkcs1), with a dummy certificate payload, to ensure that the last command delivered to the device in this connection is responded with NotNow. Questions: Can we use a fixed command e.g. certificate profile(com.apple.security.pkcs1) as in above example to ensure the last command delivered to the device has NotNow response. Or is it better to try one of the commands which the device reported NotNow earlier. As in above example should we try the SSO or VPN profile at step 4 instead of the certificate profile? Following up to above, when a device reports NotNow for any profile installation command, can we say it will always report NotNow for certificate profile(com.apple.security.pkcs1) as well for all iOS and MacOS devices?

Hi everyone, We manage several macs through Microsoft Intune. We've deployed Platform SSO using the password based method (not the Secure Enclave) and have also enforced filevault encryption through policy. What we're trying to achieve is that multiple users can log into the same Mac. For example, I (the initial enrolling user) can log in without issues. However, we want a colleague to be able to log in as well if they're physically in front of the mac. The challenge we've run into is that once filevault is enabled (We're not sure about it but reading on forums it seems that the problem is filevault), it seems the network is not available at the login screen. This means that while the first user can create a mobile account and log in, a second user can't do the same. The moment we try to log in with another set of credentials, we get an immediate error and the password field shakes instantly, suggesting it's not even reaching out to the network or directory to validate the credentials. We'd like to confirm if this behavior is expected when FileVault is active and whether the only solution is to disable FileVault or if there are alternative solutions to allow network connectivity at the login screen. Essentially, we want to know if there's a way to let a second user log in without having to turn off disk encryption. Or if we can pre-authorize a set of users on the mac in order to create all the mobile account needed.. Thanks in advance! Thomas

Im trying to make my own iOS MDM Server with SCEP. I cant send a response to the PKIOperation without the iPad rejecting it. Can someone post the PKIOperation response structure

I've account access level of developer. I want to create app specific password but go through the account but could not get any option to do so. Can somebody help me on this. Thanks in advance.

I'm using Apple's MDM protocol InstalledApplicationListCommand to get information about installed apps. From iOS/iPadOS 26, the app information obtained by InstalledApplicationListCommand includes information on all apps including system apps (apps that come standard with iOS/iPadOS). https://developer.apple.com/documentation/devicemanagement/installed-application-list-command I want iOS/iPadOS26 to get the same information as the app information I get from the previous iOS/iPadOS, and I want to exclude system apps from the app information I get with the InstalledApplicationListCommand. As a way to exclude system apps, you can use the app ID I'm thinking of a way to exclude anything that starts with "com.apple" (the Identifier key value of the InstalledApplicationListResponse.InstalledApplicationListItem object). As a way to exclude system apps, please tell us whether the above method is appropriate and whether there will be any problems in the future.

Hi, I developed a Platform Single Sign-On extension and a corresponding extension for my IdP, which is Keycloak based. The code for both projects are here: https://github.com/unioslo/keycloak-psso-extension and https://github.com/unioslo/weblogin-mac-sso-extension I realized that, when using the Secure Enclave as the AuthenticationMethod, and according to Apple's documentation, the Extension doesn’t obtain fresh ID Tokens when they expire if the refresh token is still valid. When using password as the Authentication Method, it fetches new ID tokens when they expire, without prompting the user for credentials, by using the refresh token. My suggestion is that the same behavior should be implemented for Secure Enclave keys. The thing here is that usually, on OIDC flows, the ID/Access tokens are short-lived. It would make sense for the extension to provide fresh ID tokens. It doesn’t seem to make sense for me that, when using passwords, the extension would fetch these tokens, and not when having the Secure Enclave key. By not doing this, Apple almost forces the developer of an extension to fetch new ID tokens themselves, which doens’t make sense when it clearly provides fresh tokens when using passwords. It almost forces the developers to either implement that logic themselves, or to issue longer tokens, which is not so nice. How so you deal with this? Do you simply use the refresh token as an authentication token, or do you do some sort of manual refresh on the extension?

The result Plist for the InstalledApplicationList MDM command is reporting duplicate Application identifiers. Sometimes with different version, other times with the same version. The device is MacOS 15.5, Enrolled via ABM (Supervised). Here are a couple samples from the returned list. Duplicate app: <key>BundleSize</key> <integer>398051</integer> <key>Identifier</key> <string>com.adobe.Acrobat.NativeMessagingHost</string> <key>Installing</key> <false/> <key>Name</key> <string>NativeMessagingHost</string> <key>ShortVersion</key> <string>5.0</string> <key>Version</key> <string>5.0</string> </dict> <dict> <key>BundleSize</key> <integer>398051</integer> <key>Identifier</key> <string>com.adobe.Acrobat.NativeMessagingHost</string> <key>Installing</key> <false/> <key>Name</key> <string>NativeMessagingHost</string> <key>ShortVersion</key> <string>5.0</string> <key>Version</key> <string>5.0</string> </dict> Different Version: <key>BundleSize</key> <integer>4197200</integer> <key>Identifier</key> <string>com.adobe.adobe_licutil</string> <key>Installing</key> <false/> <key>Name</key> <string>adobe_licutil</string> <key>ShortVersion</key> <string>11.0.0.39</string> <key>Version</key> <string>11.0.0.39</string> </dict> <dict> <key>BundleSize</key> <integer>4443177</integer> <key>Identifier</key> <string>com.adobe.AcroLicApp</string> <key>Installing</key> <false/> <key>Name</key> <string>AcroLicApp</string> <key>ShortVersion</key> <string>25.001.20432</string> <key>Version</key> <string>25.001.20432</string> </dict> <dict> <key>BundleSize</key> <integer>7380980</integer> <key>Identifier</key> <string>com.adobe.adobe_licutil</string> <key>Installing</key> <false/> <key>Name</key> <string>adobe_licutil</string> <key>ShortVersion</key> <string>10.0.0.274</string> <key>Version</key> <string>10.0.0.274</string> </dict>

Hi, We developed a Platform SSO extension for our IdP, Keycloak. It would be great to get some feedback on it: https://francisaugusto.com/2025/Platform_single_sign_on_diy/