Beyond just moderating what gets posted, Apple requires the app itself to ship with a working content filter, an in-app way to report objectionable content or users, and the ability to block another user — in place before launch, not added after complaints.
Why apps actually get flagged
Very commonly caught in social, chat, or dating apps that launch with a "report" button that doesn't actually route anywhere, or without any block feature at all.
A real example
"Your app includes user-generated content but does not have the required content moderation tools in place, per guideline 1.2. Apps with UGC must include a way to filter objectionable content, report it, and block abusive users."
The short version, in more detail
If people can post, upload or message other people in an app, Apple expects the developer to keep that content safe. Guideline 1.2 lists specific safeguards a reviewer looks for: a way to filter objectionable content, a way to report it, a way to block abusive users, and published contact information. Apps with chat, comments, profiles, photo sharing or user-submitted places and photos all fall in scope.
What this guideline covers
Content created by users that other users can see.
Mechanisms for filtering or moderating objectionable material.
Reporting tools and a timely response process for reports.
The ability to block abusive users.
Published contact information so users can reach the developer.
What usually triggers this rejection
There is no way to report a post, message or user from within the app.
Users cannot block another user.
There are no published contact details for the developer inside the app or listing.
No terms of use or content rules that users agree to before posting.
Moderation is not apparent and the reviewer sees no way to stop abusive content.
Content from other users is shown without any filtering or review step.
How reviewers evaluate it
Reviewers look for report and block options wherever other people's content appears.
They try to post or interact using a test account and see what protections exist.
They read the terms and look for evidence of an actual moderation process.
Apps aimed at younger users or with anonymous posting tend to get more scrutiny.
Common misunderstandings
A terms page on its own does not satisfy 1.2. The safeguards have to exist in the product.
Small or private communities are not automatically exempt if other users can see the content.
Automated filtering is not the only acceptable approach. The point is that abuse can be reported and acted on.
Common questions
Does 1.2 apply if users only share with friends?
If other users can see the content, it is generally in scope. Content visible only to its author is different.
Why do social features get extra attention?
Apple has a history of rejecting apps where abusive or illegal content could spread without any way to report it.
Is there a rule about how fast reports must be handled?
The guideline expects timely responses to concerns, but it does not give a single fixed deadline.
Platform rules change often. This page is a plain-language explanation written by AppReviewFix, not official guidance. Check the current App Store Review Guidelines for the exact wording.
Got this exact rejection?Paste it in and get a diagnosis specific to your app, free.