[Payment due @huult] [Internal QA] Trigger SAML sign-in when trying to re-auth a SAML required account by s77rt · Pull Request #87368 · Expensify/App

s77rt · 2026-04-08T12:09:02Z

Explanation of Change

For SAML required accounts, when a request fails due to auth token being expired, we cannot reauthenticate using the stored login (only SAML login is allowed) thus instead of doing that, we should redirect the user to their IdP. If their IdP is still active they will get redirected back to ND just fine, otherwise they have to login in IdP first.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/609978
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Have an account that have SAML enabled & required

Login in ND
Wait 2h (for token to expire)
Try navigate to any page
Verify you get redirected to IdP and then signed in back again

Screen.Recording.2026-04-08.at.1.01.50.PM.mov

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

n/a

QA Steps

Same as Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

codecov · 2026-04-08T12:18:46Z

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/Reauthentication.ts	`68.57% <20.00%> (-3.74%)`	⬇️
src/libs/actions/SignInRedirect.ts	`73.07% <55.55%> (-5.19%)`	⬇️
... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2026-04-14T18:08:41Z

@ahmedGaber93 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]

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: dfd4f8baf3

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-04-14T18:20:29Z

+        keysToPreserve.push(ONYXKEYS.CREDENTIALS);
+        keysToPreserve.push(ONYXKEYS.ACCOUNT);
+        Onyx.merge(ONYXKEYS.CREDENTIALS, {login: currentSessionEmail, autoGeneratedLogin: null, autoGeneratedPassword: null});
+        Onyx.merge(ONYXKEYS.ACCOUNT, {isLoading: true});


Avoid leaving account loading for SAML reauth

Setting account.isLoading to true here breaks the native SAML callback path: src/pages/signin/SAMLSignInPage/index.native.tsx only completes sign-in when !account?.isLoading (line 57). During token-expiry reauthentication for SAML-required users, this flag is never reset before the callback runs, so even a valid shortLivedAuthToken takes the failure branch (clearSignInData + error), preventing successful re-login on iOS/Android.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@s77rt what do you think?

Still working on it. I think we probably clear the isLoading somewhere but need to check to be sure

OK, let me know when this PR is ready.

I was not really able to reproduce. I think we should move forward and test this in staging/production. The isLoading must be true as that's required in order to redirect the user to the SAMLSignInPage in the first place. Since this is already working on native so that must be the case.

@s77rt When do we need isLoading? SAMLSignInPage already uses SAMLLoadingIndicator to wait for the portal login redirect.

ahh this one:

App/src/pages/signin/SignInPage.tsx

Line 103 in b538fb3

const shouldInitiateSAMLLogin = hasAccount && hasLogin && isSAMLRequired && !hasInitiatedSAMLLogin && !!account.isLoading;

In SignInPage, shouldInitiateSAMLLogin depends on the isLoading to be true in order to redirect to SAML

mountiny · 2026-04-15T05:33:18Z

@ahmedGaber93 Are you able to test it?

@s77rt please check out the bot comments

s77rt · 2026-04-15T16:47:26Z

On it... I'm working on fixing native build locally then I will test on native

s77rt · 2026-04-15T20:49:18Z

Hmm the SAML login appears to be broken on main? or is it just me cc @ahmedGaber93

Screen.Recording.2026-04-15.at.9.43.29.PM.mov

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-04-16T07:27:02Z

@s77rt, sorry for the delay.

I don’t have a domain with SAML enabled. I’ll follow this thread today to set one up and share updates with you.

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-04-16T07:33:29Z

I’m trying to use the email address mentioned in your video about production, but I’m encountering an error.: Unknown error during the SAML authentication • process. SAML login is not available on your domain 'expensifail.com'

@s77rt Does this domain have SAML enabled?

s77rt · 2026-04-16T15:23:41Z

@ahmedGaber93 I think you will need a personal domain

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-04-16T15:47:14Z

I already have a private domain, but not with SAML sign-in enable.

@s77rt, is the credentials with email external-contributor@expensifail.com available for C+? CC @mountiny.

s77rt · 2026-04-16T15:56:25Z

I already have a private domain, but not with SAML sign-in enable.

Can you setup SAML on that and try again? From linked Slack thread Fedy used Auth0 so maybe it's worth trying

is the credentials with email external-contributor@expensifail.com available for C+?

Not totally sure, I think the credentials are not an issue but external-contributor@expensifail.com user must be invited in ND first so I think someone internal must do that

mountiny · 2026-04-17T03:20:19Z

Seems like that is not available to C+

@ahmedGaber93 would be great if you could try to setup a private domain with SAML to test this 🙏 Or ask if any other C+ already has that setup and could take over. Thanks

ahmedGaber93 · 2026-04-17T03:36:21Z

@mountiny Asked on slack for taking over. CC @fedirjh @parasharrajat

huult · 2026-04-17T04:21:25Z

I reviewed this PR and tried to set up SAML using the email contact@huutech.com, but when I log in, it always redirects to production due to backend configuration. So I think we can't test this in local dev unless we hard-code it or update the backend.

s77rt · 2026-04-19T19:12:11Z

Ah riight I forgot about that. Can you confirm that SAML login works for you in production (in native)

huult · 2026-04-20T00:34:18Z

ScreenRecording_04-20-2026.07-30-08_1.mov

I tested this in production and it works.

huult · 2026-04-20T00:44:57Z

I will review the code quality (like I did for other PRs), and once this PR is released to production, I will verify it. @s77rt @mountiny I can take over this PR, so could you assign it to me?

huult · 2026-04-23T04:11:02Z

+        if (account?.isSAMLRequired) {
+            Log.info(`[Reauthenticate] Redirecting to Sign In because SAML is required`);
+            setIsAuthenticating(false);
+            redirectToSignIn(undefined, true);


Suggested change

redirectToSignIn(undefined, true);

redirectToSAMLSignIn().then(() => false);

I think we should introduce a dedicated function for redirecting to the SAML Sign-In page. This would prevent the extra redirect from sign-in → SAML indicator and simplify the sign-in page logic.

We likely only need to redirect to SAML Sign-In when re-auth is triggered by user action, rather than coupling it with the general sign-in flow. Example change here: link. What do you think?

Not necessary. I think the central sign in flow makes sense as well so let's not change it unless we have to

huult · 2026-04-24T05:25:13Z

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 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

huult

LGTM!

melvin-bot · 2026-04-24T05:27:09Z

🎯 @huult, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

A payment issue will be created for your review once this PR is deployed to production.
E/E issue linked to the PR - https://www.github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/609978.

If payment is not needed (e.g., regression PR review fix etc), react with 👎 to this comment to prevent the payment issue from being created.

trigger SAML sign-in when trying to re-auth a SAML required account

2d311bc

melvin-bot Bot assigned s77rt Apr 8, 2026

s77rt changed the title ~~Trigger SAML sign-in when trying to re-auth a SAML required account~~ [Hold Auth#20920] Trigger SAML sign-in when trying to re-auth a SAML required account Apr 8, 2026

Merge branch 'main' into handle-saml-required-reauth

dfd4f8b

s77rt changed the title ~~[Hold Auth#20920] Trigger SAML sign-in when trying to re-auth a SAML required account~~ Trigger SAML sign-in when trying to re-auth a SAML required account Apr 14, 2026

s77rt marked this pull request as ready for review April 14, 2026 18:08

s77rt requested review from a team as code owners April 14, 2026 18:08

melvin-bot Bot requested review from JmillsExpensify and ahmedGaber93 and removed request for a team and JmillsExpensify April 14, 2026 18:08

melvin-bot Bot removed the request for review from a team April 14, 2026 18:08

s77rt changed the title ~~Trigger SAML sign-in when trying to re-auth a SAML required account~~ [Internal QA] Trigger SAML sign-in when trying to re-auth a SAML required account Apr 14, 2026

s77rt added the InternalQA This pull request required internal QA label Apr 14, 2026

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Apr 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

mountiny requested review from huult and mountiny and removed request for ahmedGaber93 April 20, 2026 13:26

Merge branch 'main' into handle-saml-required-reauth

348f22c

huult reviewed Apr 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

huult approved these changes Apr 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot changed the title ~~[Internal QA] Trigger SAML sign-in when trying to re-auth a SAML required account~~ [Payment due @huult] [Internal QA] Trigger SAML sign-in when trying to re-auth a SAML required account Apr 24, 2026

	redirectToSignIn(undefined, true);
	redirectToSAMLSignIn().then(() => false);

Conversation

s77rt commented Apr 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Apr 8, 2026 • edited by github-actions Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Apr 14, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

s77rt commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

s77rt commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

s77rt commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Apr 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

s77rt commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Apr 17, 2026

Uh oh!

ahmedGaber93 commented Apr 17, 2026

Uh oh!

huult commented Apr 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

s77rt commented Apr 19, 2026

Uh oh!

huult commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

huult commented Apr 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

huult commented Apr 24, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

s77rt commented Apr 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Apr 8, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

ahmedGaber93 commented Apr 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading

huult commented Apr 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

huult commented Apr 24, 2026 •

edited

Loading