A Guideline 2.1 "Information Needed" message is not a real rejection, even though it stops your review. It means the reviewer cannot fully evaluate your app and needs something from you to continue, and by far the most common cause is a login wall they cannot get past. The fix is usually simple: give them a working demo account. The mistakes are equally simple, like credentials that expired or an account that cannot reach the features. Here is how to clear a 2.1 login request and get the review moving again.
Short answer
Guideline 2.1, App Completeness, with an "Information Needed" message means App Review needs more information to evaluate your app, most often working login credentials to get past a sign-in screen. Per Apple's guidance on providing review information, the fix is to add a valid demo account, username and password, in the App Review Information section, make sure it does not expire and can reach every feature, and reply in Resolution Center confirming the details. You usually do not need to submit a new build, since this is a request for information, not a rejection of the binary. Provide complete, current access and the review continues.
What you should know
- 2.1 is a request, not a rejection: review needs information to proceed.
- Login walls are the top cause: reviewers cannot get past sign-in without credentials.
- Provide a demo account: add username and password in App Review Information.
- Keep it working: the account must not expire and must reach all features.
- Reply in Resolution Center: confirm the details so review can continue.
What does a Guideline 2.1 "Information Needed" mean?
That the reviewer hit something they cannot evaluate without your help. Guideline 2.1 covers app completeness, and the "Information Needed" variant is Apple asking for what they need to finish the review rather than rejecting your app outright. The classic trigger is a login screen: if the app requires an account and the reviewer has no way in, they cannot see the functionality, so they pause and request credentials. Because it is a request for information, your status reflects that review is waiting on you, and supplying what they asked for resumes the process. So treat a 2.1 as a quick unblock, not a verdict on your app, and respond promptly with exactly what was requested.
How do you provide login details?
Put a working demo account where the reviewer expects it. The steps below cover it.
| Step | What to do |
|---|---|
| Create a demo account | A real, working account with full access to the app |
| Add it to App Review Information | Enter the username and password in that section |
| Confirm it reaches everything | Make sure the account can open every feature being reviewed |
| Keep it active | Ensure it does not expire or get rate-limited during review |
| Reply in Resolution Center | Note the credentials and any steps to reach gated features |
The key is that the account must actually work for the duration of the review and must reach the full functionality, since a demo account that cannot access a paywalled or role-gated feature leads straight back to another 2.1. Add any steps the reviewer needs, like a code to enter or a path to a specific screen, in the notes.
What else might a 2.1 ask for?
More than just login, depending on what the reviewer could not assess. A 2.1 can request an explanation of how a feature works, a demo video for functionality that needs specific conditions, details about hardware your app pairs with, or confirmation that a backend the app depends on is running. The common thread is access or understanding: the reviewer needs to either reach the functionality or understand it. So read the message for the specific ask, and respond with that exact thing, credentials, a video, or an explanation, rather than a generic reply. Providing precisely what was requested, in Resolution Center, is what moves the review forward fastest.
What to watch out for
The first trap is a demo account that expires or gets locked mid-review, which causes a repeat 2.1, so use a stable account and check it. The second is credentials that cannot reach a gated feature, leaving the reviewer stuck again; make sure the account has full access. The third is responding vaguely instead of providing the exact item requested. A 2.1 login issue is about access rather than your app's security, so it sits apart from a pre-submission scan such as PTKD.com (https://ptkd.com), which reads the binary against OWASP MASVS to catch the security causes of other rejections before they happen. The login fix is purely about giving review a working way in.
What to take away
- Guideline 2.1 "Information Needed" is a request for information, not a rejection, and a login wall is the most common cause.
- Add a working demo account, username and password, in App Review Information, and confirm it reaches every feature.
- Keep the account active and unexpired for the whole review, and reply in Resolution Center with the details and any steps.
- A 2.1 can also ask for a demo video, a feature explanation, or backend status, so respond with the exact item requested.
