Replace Matomo Mobile: no ATT prompt

Q: If we remove the ATT prompt, won't App Store Review reject our app?

No. Apple only requires ATT when an app or its SDKs *actually* track users across other apps or websites. If you remove the SDK that does that tracking, you should also remove `NSUserTrackingUsageDescription` from your `Info.plist` — keeping the key when no code calls `ATTrackingManager.requestTrackingAuthorization` is itself a flag Apple's review notes.

▸Example Matomo Mobile call (the "before")

swift Respectlytics

import MatomoTracker

let tracker = MatomoTracker(siteId: "1", baseURL: URL(string: "https://your-matomo.example.com/matomo.php")!)
tracker.userId = userId

let event = Event(
    tracker: tracker,
    action: ["purchase"],
    eventCategory: "ecommerce",
    eventAction: "purchase",
    eventName: "paywall",
    eventValue: NSNumber(value: price).floatValue
)
tracker.track(event)

Apple's App Tracking Transparency dialog is a measurable conversion-rate killer — denial rates of 50-80% are typical, and the wording is mostly outside your control. If an SDK in your app reads IDFA, ATT is required by Apple's App Review. Removing the SDK that needs it is the cleanest way to also remove the prompt.

☑Remove Matomo Mobile cleanly

1
Remove the Matomo SDK from your build (MatomoTracker / org.matomo.sdk:tracker / matomo_tracker)
2
Remove Tracker.builder().build() initialisation and track(...) call sites
3
Decide whether your Matomo server stays online (for web traffic) or gets decommissioned
4
If you used Matomo's visitor segments alongside web data, plan how you'll bridge web ⇄ mobile analytics under Respectlytics (web isn't Respectlytics's primary surface)

⇋Matomo Mobile vs Respectlytics — no att prompt

	Matomo Mobile	Respectlytics
Triggers ATT prompt on iOS	— see tool note above	No (SDK never calls ATTrackingManager)
Reads IDFA	— see tool note above	No
Requires NSUserTrackingUsageDescription in Info.plist	Yes (when reading IDFA)	No
App Store Privacy Label: Identifiers tier	Triggered	Not triggered by Respectlytics
Effect of users denying ATT	Reduced data quality	No effect (no IDFA path)

❓Frequently asked questions

If we remove the ATT prompt, won't App Store Review reject our app?

No. Apple only requires ATT when an app or its SDKs actually track users across other apps or websites. If you remove the SDK that does that tracking, you should also remove NSUserTrackingUsageDescription from your Info.plist — keeping the key when no code calls ATTrackingManager.requestTrackingAuthorization is itself a flag Apple's review notes.

How do we still attribute installs to ad campaigns without IDFA?

Use Apple SKAdNetwork (and the newer AdAttributionKit on iOS 17.4+). Both are first-party Apple frameworks designed exactly for this — no IDFA, no ATT prompt, deterministic install attribution within Apple's privacy boundary. Your ads platform (Apple Search Ads / Google Ads / Meta) supports them directly.

Does Respectlytics still work if some users have ATT denied in other apps?

Yes — Respectlytics doesn't read IDFA at all, so the ATT state is irrelevant to it. Your Respectlytics data quality is the same for users who denied ATT in other apps as for users who allowed it.

What about the conversion-rate hit from showing ATT?

That goes away when you remove the prompt. Anecdotally teams report a measurable engagement lift on first-session retention after removing ATT prompts that were shipped purely for analytics rather than for ad attribution.

⇢Related migration guides

Replace Matomo Mobile to remove the ATT prompt