[CP Staging] Integrate new native biometrics library by mrejdak · Pull Request #86310 · Expensify/App

mrejdak · 2026-03-25T10:19:29Z

Explanation of Change

This PR adds useNativeBiometricsEC256 hook which uses the @sbaiahmed1/react-native-biometrics library for registration and authentication in compliance with the UseBiometricReturn interface.

In case of need to revert to previous implementation:

replace useNativeBiometricsHSM with useNativeBiometrics in:
- src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/biometrics/useBiometrics/index.native.ts
replace CONST.MULTIFACTOR_AUTHENTICATION.TYPE.BIOMETRICS_HSM with CONST.MULTIFACTOR_AUTHENTICATION.TYPE.BIOMETRICS in:
- src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/config/scenarios/AuthorizeTransaction.tsx
- src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/config/scenarios/BiometricsTest.tsx
- src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/config/scenarios/ChangePIN.tsx
- src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/config/scenarios/RevealPIN.tsx
- src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/config/scenarios/SetPINOrderCard.tsx
replace CONST.MULTIFACTOR_AUTHENTICATION.REASON.HSM.KEY_ACCESS_FAILED || result.reason === CONST.MULTIFACTOR_AUTHENTICATION.REASON.HSM.KEY_NOT_FOUND with CONST.MULTIFACTOR_AUTHENTICATION.REASON.KEYSTORE.REGISTRATION_REQUIRED in:
- src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/Context/Main.tsx
replace NATIVE_BIOMETRICS_HSM_VALUES with SECURE_STORE_VALUES in:
- src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/shared/types.ts
- src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/components/AuthenticationMethodDescription.tsx

Fixed Issues

$ #81912
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Open Expensify app on mobile with device credentials or device credentials and biometrics enrolled
Go to settings and scroll down to Troubleshoot
Scroll down to 'Biometrics (...)' and press Test button next to it
Enter the magic code
Press Got it
Authenticate using device credentials or biometrics
Verify that the 'Authentication Successful' screen is displayed
Press Got it and verify that the registration succeeded - 'Biometrics (registered)' is displayed and a Revoke button is shown.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as Test

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-04-03.at.19.05.02.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-04-03.at.19.05.32.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-04-03.at.19.08.14.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-04-03.at.19.08.42.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-04-03.at.20.32.00.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-04-03.at.20.36.12.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-04-03.at.20.37.44.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

github-actions · 2026-03-25T10:19:38Z

⚠️ This PR is possibly changing native code and/or updating libraries, it may cause problems with HybridApp. Please check if any patch updates are required in the HybridApp repo and run an AdHoc build to verify that HybridApp will not break. Ask Contributor Plus for help if you are not sure how to handle this. ⚠️

rafecolton · 2026-03-28T16:56:34Z

Let's get this ready for review 🙏

rafecolton

A few requests please:

Merge Expensify/App main
Add comments to your tests per https://github.com/Expensify/App/tree/main/tests#documenting-tests
Address all CI failures

src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/biometrics/useBiometrics/index.native.ts

src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/biometrics/useNativeBiometricsEC256.ts

src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/biometrics/useNativeBiometricsHSM.ts

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/NativeBiometricsHSM/helpers.ts

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/NativeBiometricsHSM/types.ts

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/NativeBiometricsEC256/VALUES.ts

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/VALUES.ts

dariusz-biela

I'm posting my 1/3 review so we can start working on it sooner

src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/biometrics/useNativeBiometricsHSM.ts

dariusz-biela · 2026-03-30T14:15:06Z

src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/components/AuthenticationMethodDescription.tsx

    const {authenticationMethod} = useMultifactorAuthenticationState();

-    const authType = translate(AUTH_TYPE_TRANSLATION_KEY[authenticationMethod?.name ?? SECURE_STORE_VALUES.AUTH_TYPE.UNKNOWN.NAME]);
+    const authType = translate(AUTH_TYPE_TRANSLATION_KEY[authenticationMethod?.name ?? NATIVE_BIOMETRICS_EC256_VALUES.AUTH_TYPE.UNKNOWN.NAME]);


This change means we can't switch freely between the old and new implementations.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing, provided we stop supporting the old biometrics after this PR is merged.

Otherwise, we'll have to do something about it.

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/NativeBiometricsHSM/helpers.ts

dariusz-biela

I've completed 2/3 of the review; I still have some tests left to go over.

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/NativeBiometricsHSM/helpers.ts

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/NativeBiometricsEC256/helpers.ts

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/NativeBiometricsHSM/helpers.ts

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/NativeBiometricsEC256/helpers.ts

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/NativeBiometricsHSM/helpers.ts

src/libs/MultifactorAuthentication/shared/types.ts

DylanDylann · 2026-03-30T17:18:07Z

src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/biometrics/useNativeBiometricsHSM.ts

+
+    const doesDeviceSupportAuthenticationMethod = useCallback(() => {
+        const sensorResult = getSensorResult();
+        return sensorResult.isDeviceSecure ?? sensorResult.available;


isDeviceSecure can be false, but it’s rare.

Suggested change

return sensorResult.isDeviceSecure ?? sensorResult.available;

return sensorResult.isDeviceSecure || sensorResult.available;

I believe we can actually use just the .isDeviceSecure, as it tells us whether the device has a secure lock screen set up (e.g. PIN/passcode and not just swipe).

As far as I know, it's not possible to have biometrics set up without a PIN or other device credentials, so .isDeviceSecure covers everything (while .available only tells us whether the device has biometrics enrolled).

Currently the type signature of .isDeviceSecure is misleading (boolean | undefined - however it's always a boolean, this is fixed in the next release of the library that we're waiting for anyways), so I added ?? .available for now, for the type compliance

src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/biometrics/useNativeBiometricsHSM.ts

… fixed one naming problem; removed unnecessary mapping function

mrejdak · 2026-03-30T19:16:53Z

I had to leave for today, will get back to resolving the remaining comments/checks in the morning

rafecolton

It looks like this change breaks web. React-native-biometrics is native-only and we rely on importing AuthType for web. We need to either stop relying on AuthType and hardcode the constants or, probably better, add basic support upstream for those constants in web.

More discussion here

dariusz-biela

Very good job with this PR. The code looks great. My simulator tests also showed no issues.

@chuckdries I'll leave this PR to you now.

github-actions · 2026-04-03T16:15:19Z

🚧 @chuckdries has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

chuckdries · 2026-04-03T16:58:30Z

src/components/MultifactorAuthentication/biometrics/useNativeBiometricsHSM.ts

+                keyAlias,
+                data: dataToSignB64,
+                inputEncoding: InputEncoding.Base64,
+                promptTitle: translate('multifactorAuthentication.letsVerifyItsYou'),


I'm not going to block this PR on it, but as a follow-up we should pass the promptSubtitle parameter here. Currently, react-native-biometrics shows the android system prompt with the subtitle "Please verify your identity to generate signature", which I feel like the user doesn't need to know or care about

Rafe is OOO, I am taking over to get this over the line

chuckdries · 2026-04-03T18:34:25Z

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 that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: HybridApp
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: HybridApp
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
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 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.ts 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.
For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
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: HybridApp

native.biometrics.android.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

passkeys.still.work.android.chrome.mp4

iOS: HybridApp

native.biometrics.ios.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

passkeys.still.work.ios.safari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

passkeys.still.work.mac.chrome.mp4

github-actions · 2026-04-03T18:51:28Z

🚧 @chuckdries has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

OSBotify · 2026-04-03T18:55:37Z

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

github-actions · 2026-04-03T19:14:55Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #86310.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-8b20dd3-4cded0d-12c298a42bad573811d18d5c0556739a357e23d1/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-8b20dd3-4cded0d-9a146bf2cc4bf8138e23ba96028fa52a52db57d2/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://86310.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

…e-new-biometry-lib-PoC Integrate new native biometrics library (cherry picked from commit 8b20dd3) (cherry-picked to staging by jasperhuangg)

OSBotify · 2026-04-03T19:53:55Z

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 9.3.52-6 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	cancelled 🔪

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android
iOS

MelvinBot · 2026-04-03T19:56:36Z

No help site changes are required for this PR.

This PR swaps the underlying native biometrics library (to @sbaiahmed1/react-native-biometrics with HSM support) without changing any user-facing behavior. The biometric authentication flow — registration, testing, and usage for card PIN reveal/transaction authorization — remains identical from the user's perspective.

I reviewed the relevant help site articles:

docs/articles/new-expensify/settings/Two-Factor-Authentication.md — covers authenticator app 2FA, not biometrics
docs/articles/new-expensify/expensify-card/Expensify-Card-3D-Secure-Verification.md — covers SMS OTP for card transactions
docs/articles/expensify-classic/expensify-card/Expensify-Card-3D-Secure-Verification.md — same for Classic

None of these articles reference biometric authentication, and there is no existing help article specifically about the biometrics feature. Since this PR only changes the internal implementation (library swap, HSM key management, error handling) with no impact on UI labels, settings names, or user-facing flows, no documentation updates are needed.

OSBotify · 2026-04-07T01:10:52Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.3.52-9 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-04-07T01:24:28Z

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 9.3.53-0 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	failure ❌
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android

MelvinBot · 2026-04-07T01:26:50Z

No help site changes are required for this PR.

The changes in this PR are purely internal/technical — switching the native biometrics implementation from the existing keystore-based approach to a new HSM-based EC256 key approach using @sbaiahmed1/react-native-biometrics. The user-facing behavior (biometric authentication prompts for card PIN reveal, card PIN change, transaction authorization, etc.) remains the same.

I searched all files under docs/articles/ for any references to biometrics, device credentials, multi-factor authentication methods, or card PIN flows. No existing help site articles document the internal biometrics implementation or reference any of the components/constants changed in this PR.

OSBotify · 2026-04-07T01:35:26Z

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 9.3.53-0 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	failure ❌
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android

OSBotify · 2026-04-07T23:53:05Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.3.53-7 🚀

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

melvin-bot bot assigned mrejdak Mar 25, 2026

mrejdak added 5 commits March 25, 2026 12:41

PoC @sbaiahmed1/react-native-biometrics

a4e8758

updated version

fdff7cc

fix available auth methods

91efcd7

add missing authType values

f392f7d

switch flag

85c2a02

mrejdak force-pushed the mrejdak/integrate-new-biometry-lib-PoC branch from b49e604 to 85c2a02 Compare March 25, 2026 11:46

fix comments

5b02e71

mrejdak force-pushed the mrejdak/integrate-new-biometry-lib-PoC branch from 8acc1b2 to 5b02e71 Compare March 25, 2026 12:06

mrejdak added 6 commits March 25, 2026 14:47

separate helper methods and types into new files

ce03e81

cspell updated

e1ca00b

mocked turbomodule functions

2b4f19a

create separate auth-to-marqueta values

3076097

added tests similarly to previous native biometrics

ded5e47

Merge branch 'main' into mrejdak/integrate-new-biometry-lib-PoC

9465ca3

rafecolton requested review from DylanDylann and dariusz-biela March 28, 2026 16:56

rafecolton reviewed Mar 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

mrejdak added 3 commits March 30, 2026 15:02

Merge branch 'main' into mrejdak/integrate-new-biometry-lib-PoC

0770aca

documented tests

a42ba8d

removed EC256 flag

81fda0c

dariusz-biela reviewed Mar 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

renamed ec256 to hsm and documented the used arguments

34dedf5

dariusz-biela reviewed Mar 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

DylanDylann reviewed Mar 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

moved base64ToBase64url and its tests; modified authType in register;…

df6edec

… fixed one naming problem; removed unnecessary mapping function

rafecolton previously requested changes Mar 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

mrejdak added 4 commits April 3, 2026 16:32

update error handling

dd50120

geterrormessage util

7ab8ec0

fix eslint

777df95

fix tests

7f32516

dariusz-biela approved these changes Apr 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

chuckdries reviewed Apr 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

chuckdries approved these changes Apr 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

chuckdries merged commit 8b20dd3 into Expensify:main Apr 3, 2026
48 of 51 checks passed

chuckdries changed the title ~~Integrate new native biometrics library~~ [CP Staging] Integrate new native biometrics library Apr 3, 2026

OSBotify added the CP Staging marks PRs that have been CP'd to staging label Apr 3, 2026

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-04-02 #86989

Closed

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Apr 7, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-04-14] [Due for payment 2026-04-14] Replace mobile native private key storage with Secure Enclave / StrongBox #81912

Open

This was referenced Apr 7, 2026

Update @sbaiahmed1/react-native-biometrics to v0.15.0 #87240

Merged

Remove promptSubtitle on Android #87260

Merged

mrejdak mentioned this pull request Apr 8, 2026

Remove old native biometry #86440

Merged

52 tasks

	return sensorResult.isDeviceSecure ?? sensorResult.available;
	return sensorResult.isDeviceSecure \|\| sensorResult.available;

Conversation

mrejdak commented Mar 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

In case of need to revert to previous implementation:

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Uh oh!

rafecolton commented Mar 28, 2026

Uh oh!

rafecolton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dariusz-biela left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dariusz-biela Mar 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dariusz-biela left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

DylanDylann Mar 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mrejdak Apr 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mrejdak commented Mar 30, 2026

Uh oh!

rafecolton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dariusz-biela left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Apr 3, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

chuckdries Apr 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chuckdries commented Apr 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

mrejdak commented Mar 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading

chuckdries Apr 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

chuckdries commented Apr 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading