On 16 October Apple published a new version of the guidelines it uses to assess apps for the App Store. Two changes stand out: a brand-new rule against apps that hide features during review, and sharper wording on non-consensual intimate images, including those created with artificial intelligence tools.
For iPhone users nothing changes overnight. What does change is the room for manoeuvre of developers who have so far exploited the grey areas of pre-release checks.
What changes in practice
Section 1.2, user-generated content. The rule covers apps in which people can create or share content. Apple now makes clear that moderation must explicitly cover non-consensual intimate images, including those produced with AI. Apps must actively prevent and remove them. Anyone who fails to put adequate safeguards in place, or doesn’t fix violations after they are reported, risks breaching the Developer Code of Conduct and being removed from the store.
New section 2.5.19, hidden features. This is the most discussed novelty. Apple forbids apps from presenting themselves one way during review and changing after approval, for example by adding features that weren’t in the submitted version. The company describes it as a clarification of an existing ban, previously covered by rule 2.3.1. The text refers to “hidden, dormant or undocumented” features. According to 9to5Mac’s reading, concealing such features through code obfuscation is grounds for removing the app and closing the developer account. Apple speaks of removal from the App Store and from the Apple Developer Program.
Section 5, safety. Apple makes clear that apps that facilitate human trafficking or the exploitation of minors are removed from the App Store and also blocked from alternative distribution. That last detail is interesting: it indicates the ban applies outside the official store too, where Apple allows that distribution.
In the same update Apple also changed rules 2.3.14, on images and creative materials, and 3.1.1(a). Translations of the guidelines are expected within a month.
Why now
The backdrop is a year of investigations into so-called “nudify” apps, which promise to digitally undress a person from a photo. According to 9to5Mac, the new rules follow several reports: investigations into these very apps, cases of disguised gambling apps in Brazil, and the controversy over sexualised images generated by Grok. An investigation by the San Francisco City Attorney’s office identified 13 apps, eight of them on the App Store, that presented themselves as simple face-swapping tools.
That is the point of rule 2.5.19. Many of these apps passed review by appearing to be something harmless, and only after approval made the problematic feature accessible. Apps for undressing people were already banned because they were treated as pornography; what was missing was a clear tool to target the mechanism by which they were slipped through.
What it means for users in Italy
The guidelines are global, so they also apply to the stores serving Italy and Switzerland. European users won’t see a different interface: the intended effect is a catalogue with fewer deceptive apps and faster removal of those that are reported.
For Italian developers the rule has a practical consequence. Anyone publishing apps with user-generated photos, videos or messages should check that they have working reporting and removal tools. Anyone using generative AI features must describe in the review metadata everything the app can do, including features that can be activated later.
What we think
The clarification was needed, but enforcement remains the issue. The ban on changing an app after approval already existed, and “nudify” apps reached the store anyway. Adding a section number isn’t enough to solve a problem that stems from the difficulty of verifying what an app really does after release, especially when features come from a remote server and can change without a new update.
The most concrete signal is the risk to the developer account: losing access to the Apple Developer Program weighs far more than a single app being pulled. If Apple really enforces it, it will discourage those who today regard removal as an acceptable cost.
There is also a limit to bear in mind. The text stresses safeguards, not an obligation to achieve a result: for apps with user content, what will matter is how adequate Apple considers the moderation systems. We will see in the coming months how many removals follow and on what grounds. That is the figure that will tell us whether the new version changes things or remains a statement of principle.
Written by the SpazioiTech newsroom with the help of AI tools, from facts verified across at least two independent outlets, and checked before publication. Spotted a mistake? Tell us.
Translated from the Italian original. Read in Italian
