A new report from a tech watchdog group has cast a harsh light on the efficacy of app store review processes, revealing that dozens of applications from entities under U.S. sanctions have been available for download. The findings suggest a significant gap in compliance screening, with Apple's platform appearing notably more vulnerable than its main competitor's.
Watchdog Report Exposes Compliance Gaps in Major App Stores
The Tech Transparency Project (TTP), a non-profit watchdog, has published a report detailing the presence of apps from U.S.-sanctioned entities on both the Apple App Store and Google Play Store. The investigation, which concluded in November 2025, identified a total of 70 such apps across the two platforms. The methodology involved cross-referencing the U.S. Treasury Department's Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list—a roster of individuals and companies blocked from the U.S. financial system—with the app store directories using automated scripts and manual verification. The results were starkly imbalanced, pointing to a more systemic issue on one side of the mobile ecosystem duopoly.
Report Findings (As of November 2025):
- Apple App Store: 52 apps from sanctioned entities identified.
- Google Play Store: 18 apps from sanctioned entities identified.
- Entities Cited: Included Russian banks (Gazprombank, National Standard Bank) and China's Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (XPCC).
Apple's App Store Shows Higher Concentration of Problematic Apps
The core finding of the TTP report is the disparity between the two tech giants. Apple's App Store was found to be hosting 52 apps linked to sanctioned entities, a figure nearly three times higher than the 18 identified on Google's Play Store. These apps were connected to a range of proscribed organizations, including Russian financial institutions like Gazprombank and National Standard Bank, which have been sanctioned for their role in facilitating the war in Ukraine. Also identified were apps linked to China's Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (XPCC), an entity under U.S. sanctions for human rights abuses against the Uyghur minority.
Divergent Corporate Responses Highlight Different Approaches
The response from Apple and Google to the TTP's findings further underscored their differing situations. Upon being informed of the report, Google moved swiftly to remove all but one of the 18 identified apps from its Play Store. Apple's response was more measured and less comprehensive. During the TTP's research period from mid-2025 to November 2025, 17 apps disappeared from the App Store. Following discussions with the watchdog, Apple removed an additional 18 apps. However, this left 17 sanctioned apps reportedly still available for download at the time of the report's publication. Apple has stated it does not agree that all 52 apps cited were in violation of sanctions but has committed to strengthening its review processes.
Corporate Response to TTP Report:
| Company | Initial Action (During Research) | Action After Notification | Apps Remaining (Per TTP) |
|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Removed 17 of 18 apps | 1 | |
| Apple | 17 apps removed | Removed an additional 18 apps | 17 |
| Apple disputes that all 52 apps violated sanctions. |
Historical Context and Potential Legal Repercussions
This is not Apple's first encounter with sanctions enforcement issues. In 2019, the company was fined USD 466,912 by the U.S. government for failing to remove an app linked to a sanctioned Slovenian drug trafficker. As part of that settlement, Apple pledged to enhance its sanctions screening tools. The latest report from the TTP suggests those improvements may have been insufficient, potentially exposing Apple to renewed legal scrutiny and financial penalties. The 2019 incident was partly mitigated because Apple self-reported the violation; a repeat offense could result in a more severe response from regulators.
Historical Precedent:
- Year: 2019
- Incident: Apple fined for hosting an app linked to a sanctioned Slovenian drug trafficker.
- Penalty: USD 466,912 settlement with the U.S. government.
- Outcome: Apple pledged to improve its sanctions screening tools.
Implications for User Trust and Platform Security
The presence of these apps challenges the foundational promise of safety and security that curated app stores are built upon. For users, it introduces an element of doubt, forcing them to question whether the platforms they trust are conducting adequate due diligence. The TTP noted that some developers employed simple tactics to evade detection, such as slightly altering their registered names by adding suffixes like "OOO." This raises serious questions about the depth and sophistication of the vetting algorithms and human review processes employed by these multi-trillion-dollar companies. The episode serves as a reminder that even the most walled gardens can have cracks in their walls.
The Broader Landscape for Apple's App Store
This compliance failure arrives at a challenging time for Apple's App Store business model, particularly in Europe. New regulations have forced Apple to allow third-party app stores on iOS devices in the EU, fragmenting its once-unassailable control and revenue stream. The TTP report adds another layer of pressure, portraying an App Store that is not only facing competitive erosion but also struggling with fundamental regulatory oversight. It paints a picture of a service besieged on multiple fronts, fighting to maintain its reputation for meticulous control in an increasingly complex and scrutinized digital environment.