Application was rejected because it may do a harm

>The application was rejected as it can do a harm to the user.

What, exactly, did they write?

Hello,

We found that your app has the potential to result in physical harm to the user by claiming to detect the user’s alertness level while driving. We continue to find that your app makes use of the TrueDepth API to ascertain the user’s alertness while driving. This is not in compliance with the App Store Review Guideline 1.4.5.

Please note that all appeal results are final. We encourage you to review the previous rejection correspondence for this app, make the necessary changes to bring it into compliance with the App Store Review Guidelines, and resubmit it for review.

Best regards,

App Store Review

How can this app do harm to the user?

There is a potential that users could use the app to help keep them awake while driving. That seems to be the design.

These apps are all sold on Apple's App Store. Apple is the official Merchant of Record. Apple could bear some responsibility or liability if someone had an accident and their survivors sued Apple for allowing this app in the App Store.

At an abstract level, any app that is designed to be active while the user is driving is probably going to be subject to very close scrutiny. An app that attempts to alert the user in some manner when it suspects the user is distracted is itself a potential source of distraction, and a false alarm could potentially cause an accident that would not otherwise have occurred.

How can we pass then? We do not guarantee that this feature works for 100% as it's dependant on environment user is in now. So shouldn't the user be aware that this app is not designed to keep him awake?
We just want to ping if the user lost the attention of a road. What if there won't be any alerts we will just show statistic at the end of a trip?

But in the same case user can receive push notifications, phone calls, navigator voice etc. So the user should not be distracted with a simple alert.

Yes, there are other possible distractions, but that's why there are settings like Do Not Disturb While Driving to explicitly cut off most of those. Voice navigation is one that is generally allowed, but it's also not as unpredictable. The user is often anticipating potential instructions when approaching the area where there are some turns or exits, the apps often set up a context for when the next instruction will be given (e.g., "proceed 25 km" after merging onto a highway), etc.

Maybe you can set up a call with app review to discuss the issue. They're the only ones who can really tell you what the issues are and what might satisfy them.

They are not giving any response to this issue.

Apple responded:

...your app...claim(s) to detect the user’s alertness level while driving.... use of the TrueDepth API to ascertain the user’s alertness while driving.....is not in compliance with the App Store Review Guideline 1.4.5.

Apple believes that your app will create a hazard to the user because it won't always work as promised and therefore creates a risk if relied upon. It sounds like they are not finding fault with your app but rather with reliance on their TrueDepth API. If you redisigned the app so the user was not relying, and could not rely on it, that might work.

It is unclear whether you could redesign the app (and disclaimers in the app) so that it acted as an aid but was disclaimed as a reliable guarantee of alertness. Look into automatic breathalizers to determine the law and liability regarding 'aids' that can or cannot be relied upon.