- Tone of my iris:
- I’ve got dark brown eyes but I use colored contact lenses
- My body features:
- My body type is athletic
- What is my favourite drink:
- What I prefer to listen:
In a blog postGuy Rosen, Facebook VP of product management, acknowledged that some third-party apps using Facebookincluding those not using official Facebook SDKs or regularly checking whether Facebook access tokens are valid, may still be exposing users. He did not mention when the tool will be available. Facebook discovered the breach Tuesday, Sept.
I have an existing dating app in the App Store which uses Facebook for quick registration and subsequent s - the app captures the users DOB and gender for age restrictions and match filtering. The initial version of the app was approved by Apple without any issues, but an update submission was rejected for the following reason:.
Your app uses Facebook for authentication purposes but does not include -based features offered by that site, which is not allowed on the App Store. In order for Facebook to be the only authentication mechanism available, your app must include ificant -specific functionality from Facebook. Pulling profile information, or sharing, are not sufficient -based features for Facebook to be the only authentication mechanism available. Based on this response I added an 'Invite Facebook friends' feature, but the app was rejected again with the same response.
I have since asked for clarification on Facebook log uin Apple deems to be 'ificant -based features' in order to satisfy the App Store guidelines, but they are refusing to provide any feedback on app concepts or features, which leaves me in the difficult position of not knowing what I need to do to get my app approved!
It seems as though the App Store Review Guidelines have changed in the 2 months between app submissions, which is frustrating as my existing users are having to wait for critical updates whilst I try to figure out what I can do to get my app approved. I'm ready to punch someone in the face.
So frustrating when you work so hard on something and then they reject you for a rule you're not breaking. My app was rejected by the same issue. My app need to log in using facebookand no other option. If you use Facebook for authentication, your app actually has to do something with Facebook, like post a high score or a photo or something. Only App Review can tell you for sure, but I think it comes down to this more than the Facebook functionality:.
Adding features will not help with that. The App Review team may start enforcing restrictions that were not ly there or not ly enforced at any time. Unfortunately, unless they respond to an appeal, you may have a problem submitting further updates.
They gave me a more detailed response. Basically if you ask for information you have to use it for some functionality. My app does use the information for core functionality but apparently is wasn't clear enough for them to see how it relates.
So my advice would be that you only ask for information that you use and that you give an explanation in the review notes of how you are using the information. I would also ecommend presenting an explanation on how the information will be used inside the app when you request it as well. It is interesting that this rule has been around since the beginning of the app guidelines and now they are enforcing it like this. I think that the rule originally had a different intention which was to prevent apps from becoming like those landing s that force you to give up or or birthday before anything works.
For example the "put here" in order to get a free video.
Group-ib unearths facebook messenger scam run using fake
Or "put birthday here" to take a survey. However, now they are using the same law with the same wording in this new way where apps can't ask people for information during a voluntary up. If an app forced up to work that'd be one thing If they do want to enforce it like that they need to rewrite rule and alert everyone of the change instead of just surprising people with it. If they want people to take the app store seriously there needs to be some mutual respect for our businesses. Otherwise, it will continue to make open platforms like the web more appealing for innovation.
What App store review staff is unable to explain is the difference between asking a user via facebook and asking a user during a registration process.
App rejected due to facebook
In both case, The app will ask for the user What seems crasy is their use of the They are confusing identity with authentication. While it is possible that low security apps can use identity as authentication. There are other apps, for e. One way to get around this is to use " anonymously" with Facebook. And request an later.
In summary, this is not good. Facebook should step in to straighten things out. Apple cannot be judge, jury and executioner regarding Facebook matters. Any such move would violate Anti-Trust laws. I hope some over zealous Product manager at Apple is not putting Apple into a legal problem unnecessarily. And request an later". You are absolutely right, Facebook should step in to straighten things out and speak about the rejection risk in their documentation.
I don't think this is accurate. I am facing this same issue and users are able to share stats and whatnot to facebook, twitter, etc and that is not considered sufficient.
Can I ask what 'core functionality' you have that made this sufficient in their eyes? I am facing the same issue and have failed an attempt to appeal as well. Users are able to do plenty of other things without ing in, but if they want to create a 'portfolio' Facebook log uin my app they need to through facebook, google, or twitter I'm using Azure Mobile Services built in OAuth.
I use some of their social info for their 'portfolio', but it's mostly a way of authenticating users which seems like the standard based on the of apps that use it and the fact that it's built into azure. They are also able to share their stats to facebook, twitter, etc. Hi whatsyetanothernamehow use " anonymously" of Facebook for my app? I don't understand. Thank you very much for your reply. This is absolutely ridiculus I just had this happen to me.
My app uses facebook twitter and linkedin optionally to in, they dont have to use it there is also a local authentication system. Single on is almost a demand in any app these days by users. The app then syncs profile imformation so users dont have to type it in. The app also allows people to share there videos to there facebook. As far as I have seen these are the main reasons to integrate a social media sdk in any app!!!
To top it off my app uses the graph api on facebook and others to track analytics. Yet this is not sufficient reason to use facebook twitter authentication!? Lately my apps have been rejected for ridiculus things every time Im not sure whats changed but until now I have had 0 rejections and been submitting apps for over 3 years. I am not impressed Apple.
Ive had 4 other apps and apple just registered s. Things are really going down hill in apple review land. Cook will get on the stage. The will say: "Apple disrespect its developers" and i'm going to attache detailed flyers. Search by keywords or tags Submit Search Clear search query Additional Facebook log uin about Search by keywords or tags Supported Searches:. App rejected due to Facebook. Click again to start watching. The initial version of the app was approved by Apple without any issues, but an update submission was rejected for the following reason: Has anyone else had a similar issue?
What Facebook feature s do I need to add to get my app approved? Thanks in advance!
App Review. Asked by JamieT. Copy to clipboard Share this post.
How can we help you?
Copied to Clipboard. Add a Comment. Dude I had the same exact thing. App has been approved every month for a year and then this. It makes no sense. Maybe it's some sort of automation error.
My app doesn't require users to up, so therefore it doesn't break this rule. It's been two days and they still haven't responded to my resolution center.