I am wondering if this is intended by Apple that these lifecycle methods are called upon using TouchID functionality.
Is there any possibility to check if the touchID process is calling these methods (I want to avoid things like a BOOL in app delegate which is set if touchID input is currently shown or not..)
br
Im guessing the problem you're having is that you have code in applicationWillResignActive
and applicationDidBecomeActive
that affects the view controller that requests Touch ID-validation and that it sets off a tricky loop.
What you need to do is move those calls to applicationDidEnterBackground
and applicationWillEnterForeground
, because they're not invoked when the Touch ID-mechanism is called.
To explain the sequence, when your app starts the following sequence executes:
applicationDidBecomeActive
- ..other stuff your app does
- Your app invokes Touch ID, which fires:
applicationWillResignActive
... Your app is disabled until the user verifies fingerprint (fails or
succeeds) ...
applicationDidBecomeActive
If you have code in applicationDidBecomeActive
-or- applicationWillResignActive
that affects Touch ID, you will create an endless loop or worse, you will create code that is riddled with flags and special cases.
Instead you should invoke Touch ID in two cases:
You can create a static bool in your login script that you can check from your AppDelegate!
static var isShowingTouchID = false
Then before your context.evaluatePolicy
call, you can set it to true, and in the callback function, set it to false. I believe you use the reply
argument to set a callback to this.
Then in your AppDelegate
, check the status of this bool.
Originally I was using a public variable in AppDelegate
and setting that, but I feel similarly in that I didn't want to do that. Frankly, I don't like this solution either, but it was the only one I could come up.
I even tried overriding viewDidDisappear
in my login script, but I quickly found out that it was not being called even when I tapped "Cancel" on the touch ID prompt.
If anyone has a better solution, I would love to know.