fix: restore Ledger keyring after restoring the vault

[dawnseeker8]

Description

This PR will fix #5721 issue and #8713, the fix contain following change.

1. in Vault.js, get the old ledger keyring first before KeyringController.createNewVaultAndRestore.
2. Modify existing restoreLedgerKeyring method in Vault.js to regenerate the ledger keyring with existing account.
3. Unit tests fix for above changes.

Related issues

Fixes: #5721
#8713

Manual testing steps

For #5721

1. Pair a ledger account with metamask,
2. Go to Settings
3. Tap on Security & Privacy
4. Scroll down to Password and tap on Change Password
5. Enter your current password and tap on Confirm
6. Enter a new password and tap on Reset password
7. After new password update successfully, move to home page and you can see ledger account is still there.

For #8713

1. install the fresh metamask mobile in android. (must be fresh MMM app)
2. restore a account using SRP.
3. when account appear. click the account, and bring up the account drop down list.
4. select Add account and hardware wallet -> Add hardware wallet
5. Select ledger and then allow all permission required.
6. and then add a ledger account in MMM.
7. Make sure ledger account is in the account list.
8. Now you can close MMM and relaunch metamask. (or wait for screen lock and reactive phone which will force user relogin to metamask
9. After user login again. you should still see the ledger account in the account list.

Screenshots/Recordings

Before

Screen_Recording_20240227_184709_MetaMask.mp4

Pre-merge author checklist

• I’ve followed MetaMask Coding Standards.
• I've clearly explained what problem this PR is solving and how it is solved.
• I've linked related issues
• I've included manual testing steps
• I've included screenshots/recordings if applicable
• I’ve included tests if applicable
• I’ve documented my code using JSDoc format if applicable
• I’ve applied the right labels on the PR (see labeling guidelines). Not required for external contributors.
• I’ve properly set the pull request status:
  • In case it's not yet "ready for review", I've set it to "draft".
  • In case it's "ready for review", I've changed it from "draft" to "non-draft".

Pre-merge reviewer checklist

• I've manually tested the PR (e.g. pull and build branch, run the app, test code being changed).
• I confirm that this PR addresses all acceptance criteria described in the ticket it closes and includes the necessary testing evidence such as recordings and or screenshots.

[github-actions]

CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 60.00000% with 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 43.27%. Comparing base (1f213b0) to head (d94160a).

Files	Patch %	Lines
app/core/Vault.js	60.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8740   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   43.27%   43.27%           
=======================================
  Files        1271     1271           
  Lines       30916    30918    +2     
  Branches     3092     3092           
=======================================
+ Hits        13378    13379    +1     
- Misses      16765    16766    +1     
  Partials      773      773           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[github-actions]

E2E test started on Bitrise: https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/58b40dc4-ecd6-4af4-87b6-0b74f15f6544
You can also kick off another Bitrise E2E smoke test by removing and re-applying the (Run Smoke E2E) label

[github-actions]

Bitrise

✅✅✅ pr_smoke_e2e_pipeline passed on Bitrise! ✅✅✅

Commit hash: 4c0ab2d
Build link: https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/444d8dbb-7c6a-4140-abbd-c3f8b7569f52

Note

• You can kick off another pr_smoke_e2e_pipeline on Bitrise by removing and re-applying the Run Smoke E2E label on the pull request

[dawnseeker8]

Bitrise

✅✅✅ pr_smoke_e2e_pipeline passed on Bitrise! ✅✅✅

Commit hash: 4c0ab2d Build link: https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/444d8dbb-7c6a-4140-abbd-c3f8b7569f52

Note

• You can kick off another pr_smoke_e2e_pipeline on Bitrise by removing and re-applying the Run Smoke E2E label on the pull request

Britrise e2e tests pass even Check Bitrise E2E status github action failed, MM team will fix github action issue in main

[github-actions]

Bitrise

✅✅✅ pr_smoke_e2e_pipeline passed on Bitrise! ✅✅✅

Commit hash: 7a2e7a6
Build link: https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/1cfc64ba-9131-4ecb-9e40-2ac194857e01

Note

• You can kick off another pr_smoke_e2e_pipeline on Bitrise by removing and re-applying the Run Smoke E2E label on the pull request

[tommasini]

It seems to follow the same pattern as the restoreQRKeyring, but I don't feel 100% comfortable with my knowledge on what's happening on the vault, It would be cool if this have the attention of the accounts team

[dawnseeker8]

It seems to follow the same pattern as the restoreQRKeyring, but I don't feel 100% comfortable with my knowledge on what's happening on the vault, It would be cool if this have the attention of the accounts team

Just attached team-accounts to ticket so that they can provide the review.

[gantunesr]

Just a minor comment

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
60.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[dawnseeker8]

E2e tests pass even Check Bitrise E2E status failed
Here is the result, ready to be merged.
https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/1cfc64ba-9131-4ecb-9e40-2ac194857e01