Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: No recovery codes in 2FA page #44635

Merged
merged 29 commits into from
Aug 20, 2024

Conversation

etCoderDysto
Copy link
Contributor

@etCoderDysto etCoderDysto commented Jun 28, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #43603
PROPOSAL: #43603 (comment)

Tests

Two Factor Auth Page

Unvalidated account:

  1. Sign up with a new account > click on Settings > Security > Two-factor authentication.
  • Verify that there is an error message saying validate your account first
  • Verify that Next button is disabled on RHP footer

Unvalidated account > validate your account in Contact methods:

  1. Sign up with a new account > click on Settings > Security > Two-factor authentication.
  2. Click on 'Verify your account here' link
  • Verify that you are navigated to contact methods details page
  1. Validate your account
  • Verify that you are redirected to 2FA page
  • Verify that 2FA code is displayed
  • Verify that that there is no error message
  1. Click on Copy > click on Next button
  • Verify that you can proceed to step 2 of adding 2FA

Unvalidated account > Sign out scenario:

  1. Sign up with a new account > click on Settings > Security > Two-factor authentication.
  2. Click on 'Sign back with a magic code' link
  • Verify that you are navigated to sign in page
  1. Sign back in with the same account > navigate to Two-factor authentication
  • Verify that 2FA code is displayed
  1. Click on Copy > click on Next button
  • Verify that you can proceed to step 2 of adding 2FA

Connect To BankAccount Page

  1. Sign up with a new account
  2. Create a Workspace
  3. Enable Workflows
  4. Go to Workflows
  5. Click on Connect bank account
  6. Click on 'Verify your account here' link
  • Verify that you are navigated to contact methods details page
  1. Navigate back
  2. Click on 'Sign back with a magic code' link
  3. Sign in back with the same account
  4. Navigate back to Connect bank account page
  • Verify that you don't see validate your account first message

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as test steps

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Security

Security.android.mp4

Bank

Bank.android.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome

Security

security.android.chrome.mp4

Bank

chrome.android.bank.mp4
iOS: Native

Security

Security.ios.mp4

Bank

bank.ios.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari

Security

Security.safari.mp4

Bank

bank.safari.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Security

Web.security.mp4

Bank

Web.Bank.account.mp4
MacOS: Desktop

Security

Desktop.security.mp4

Bank

Desktop.Bank.account.mp4

@etCoderDysto
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note: Video is added for only desktop web since there is navigation issue that I haven't fixed yet.

@etCoderDysto etCoderDysto marked this pull request as ready for review July 2, 2024 09:19
@etCoderDysto etCoderDysto requested a review from a team as a code owner July 2, 2024 09:19
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from mollfpr and removed request for a team July 2, 2024 09:19
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jul 2, 2024

@mollfpr Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

@etCoderDysto
Copy link
Contributor Author

etCoderDysto commented Jul 2, 2024

Error to fix

  • User is not navigated back to 2FA page when clicking browser back button from contact methods section
  • Background below RHP turns to profile section when clicking 'verify your account here' link
Navigation.error.mp4

Expected behaviour for navigation error

  • User should be able to navigate back to 2fa page when clicking browser's back button
  • On clicking validate your account here link, only the rhp should navigate to contact details page, and the background below RHP shouldn't change to profile page.
Expected.navigation.behaviour.mp4

Note: After fixing the issue. I will remove the error component form BankAccountStep and use the new ValidateAccountMessage there

@etCoderDysto
Copy link
Contributor Author

image

Above is the console log error I am having on back navigation.

@mollfpr
Copy link
Contributor

mollfpr commented Jul 2, 2024

@etCoderDysto I'm not sure what the issue is, but I think the screen for Settings_Security is not stacked correctly.

App/src/SCREENS.ts

Lines 35 to 47 in 519d096

SETTINGS: {
ROOT: 'Settings_Root',
SHARE_CODE: 'Settings_Share_Code',
WORKSPACES: 'Settings_Workspaces',
SECURITY: 'Settings_Security',
ABOUT: 'Settings_About',
SAVE_THE_WORLD: 'Settings_TeachersUnite',
APP_DOWNLOAD_LINKS: 'Settings_App_Download_Links',
ADD_DEBIT_CARD: 'Settings_Add_Debit_Card',
ADD_PAYMENT_CARD_CHANGE_CURRENCY: 'Settings_Add_Payment_Card_Change_Currency',
ADD_BANK_ACCOUNT: 'Settings_Add_Bank_Account',
CLOSE: 'Settings_Close',
TWO_FACTOR_AUTH: 'Settings_TwoFactorAuth',

The screen for security and the 2FA page should be stacked together.

        SECURITY: {
            ROOT: 'Settings_Security',
            TWO_FACTOR_AUTH: 'Settings_TwoFactorAuth',
        },

@mollfpr
Copy link
Contributor

mollfpr commented Jul 2, 2024

I got the same error #44635 (comment) after try fixing the screen stack.

@etCoderDysto
Copy link
Contributor Author

etCoderDysto commented Jul 2, 2024

I found a documentation in navigation.md that talks about similar issue I am facing. I will try to understand what is casuing the issue.

Back button in the browser resets the navigation state with the state saved in step two.

The full explanation starts here

Copy link
Contributor

@mollfpr mollfpr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me! Just had one issue to fixed.

return;
}
Session.toggleTwoFactorAuth(true);
// eslint-disable-next-line react-compiler/react-compiler, react-hooks/exhaustive-deps -- We want to run this when component mounts
}, []);
}, [isUserValidated]);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it's expected to be called on component mount. Also, I got this issue that the code is not show after refreshing the page.

Screen.Recording.2024-08-12.at.21.04.12.mp4

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It works fine when you refresh the page if you set USE_REACT_STRICT_MODE:false in CONFIG.ts. I added isUserValidated to run the useEffect when the user returns back from validating their account. If the dependency is not added it will fail to run the useEffect.

The result when I add isUserValidated dependency

isvalidated.mp4

The result when I don't add isUserValidated dependency

Screen.Recording.2024-08-13.at.1.08.49.in.the.afternoon.mp4

@mollfpr
Copy link
Contributor

mollfpr commented Aug 15, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
44635.Android.1.mp4
44635.Android.2.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
44635.mWeb-Chrome.1.mp4
44635.mWeb-Chrome.2.mp4
iOS: Native
44635.iOS.1.mov
44635.iOS.2.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
44635.mWeb-Safari.1.mov
44635.mWeb-Safari.2.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
44635.Web.1.mp4
44635.Web.2.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
44635.Desktop.1.mp4
44635.Desktop.2.mp4

Copy link
Contributor

@mollfpr mollfpr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM 👍

@techievivek
Copy link
Contributor

@etCoderDysto Great job on this! ❤️ I just have a quick question about the verify your account here link. When we click on that link, does it trigger a backend request to send a magic code, or does that only happen when you click didn't receive a magic code?

@etCoderDysto
Copy link
Contributor Author

@etCoderDysto Great job on this! ❤️ I just have a quick question about the verify your account here link. When we click on that link, does it trigger a backend request to send a magic code, or does that only happen when you click didn't receive a magic code?

Thanks @techievivek 🙇🏻‍♂️. It doesn't rigger a backend request. The request is triggered only when the user clicks didn't receive a magic code.

@techievivek
Copy link
Contributor

techievivek commented Aug 16, 2024

@etCoderDysto Ok, thanks for confirming. I think we can improve this, as it might be confusing for users who expect a magic code email to arrive in their inbox when we navigate them to that page. Could we call the backend to schedule a magic code email before navigating them to the page? CC @mollfpr @trjExpensify, do you have any thoughts on this?

@mollfpr
Copy link
Contributor

mollfpr commented Aug 16, 2024

Ok, thanks for confirming. I think we can improve this, as it might be confusing for users who expect a magic code email to arrive in their inbox when we navigate them to that page.

+1! But I'm unsure if this is on purpose.

@etCoderDysto
Copy link
Contributor Author

Could we call the backend to schedule a magic code email before navigating them to the page?

@techievivek I thin we can do that. If we have to do that, I believe we should also make the same change to 'Contact methods' page to make the behaviour consistent across pages. Currently, we are not making BE request when a user navigates from contact methods page to Contact methods details page.

Screen.Recording.2024-08-16.at.11.39.02.in.the.morning.mov

@trjExpensify
Copy link
Contributor

Could we call the backend to schedule a magic code email before navigating them to the page? CC @mollfpr @trjExpensify, do you have any thoughts on this?

Yes, that makes sense. I'm on mobile, but I think someone tried to fix this recently with contact methods and we had to revert it because whatever solution was used triggered two API calls. I think that might be because when adding. a secondary login we automatically send an email to verify the login - so it doesn't need a second one sent when navigating to the page. Would be good to check and test that (sorry I can't find it on mobile, and I'm OOO until end of next week).

@techievivek
Copy link
Contributor

. I think that might be because when adding. a secondary login we automatically send an email to verify the login - so it doesn't need a second one sent when navigating to the page.

Yeah, I tested this out and can confirm that we automatically send an email to verify the login when a user adds a new secondary login so for the above case we don't need an another magic email when we navigate the user to the page.

@techievivek
Copy link
Contributor

After revisiting this, I realized that sending a magic code email every time a user clicks on the verify your account here link could lead to confusion. We need a mechanism to avoid resending a new magic code email unless the previous one's timer has expired. In other words, we should send a magic code email the first time the user clicks the link, but if they navigate back and click it again shortly after, we shouldn't resend the email. Given this, I think it's best to leave the current functionality as is, allowing users to request a new magic code explicitly by clicking didn't receive a magic code. We can address this issue separately without blocking this PR.

Copy link
Contributor

@techievivek techievivek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for fixing this up.

@techievivek techievivek merged commit 80236f5 into Expensify:main Aug 20, 2024
16 of 21 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/techievivek in version: 9.0.23-0 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/chiragsalian in version: 9.0.23-0 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants