Implement escape key suppression for focus trap in icationPromptPage

[DylanDylann]

Explanation of Change

Root cause

Two libraries handle ESC at different event phases:

Component	Event
focus-trap library	keydown
ReanimatedModal	keyup

A single ESC press generates both events. When the user presses ESC on PromptPage:

1. keydown → focus-trap calls interceptFocusTrapEscape → requestCancel() dispatches SET_CANCEL_CONFIRM_VISIBLE: true.
2. React commits the state change → ConfirmModal mounts → its useEffect attaches the keyup listener on document.body.
3. keyup (same key press, ~milliseconds later) → the brand-new listener fires → calls closeTop() → invokes the modal's onCancel (hideCancelConfirm) → modal closes instantly.

The modal essentially intercepts the tail end of the same keystroke that opened it.

Solution

Before triggering requestCancel(), we register a one-shot capture-phase keyup listener on document. When the matching ESC keyup arrives, stopImmediatePropagation() prevents ReanimatedModal's listener from ever seeing it, so the modal stays open. The listener self-removes on the next keyup of any kind, so it never affects subsequent keystrokes.

Fixed Issues

$ #93304
PROPOSAL:

Tests

1. Begin the passkey registration flow (e.g. via the troubleshoot/test page or virtual card reveal).
2. On the prompt page, press the Escape key.
3. The cancel confirmation modal opens and stays open, mirroring the click-outside behavior.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

1. Begin the passkey registration flow (e.g. via the troubleshoot/test page or virtual card reveal).
2. On the prompt page, press the Escape key.
3. The cancel confirmation modal opens and stays open, mirroring the click-outside behavior.

• 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
• 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 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 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.ts 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 new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
  • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
  • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
• 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.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Screen.Recording.2026-06-15.at.16.54.59.mov

[melvin-bot]

@huult 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]

[huult]

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 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)
• 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)
• 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.
• 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

Screen.Recording.2026-06-16.at.09.50.35.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-06-16.at.09.46.19.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-06-16.at.09.34.17.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-06-16.at.09.36.17.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-06-16.at.09.52.06.mov

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...factorAuthentication/useMFACancelOnEscape/index.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/pages/MultifactorAuthentication/PromptPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...ges/MultifactorAuthentication/ValidateCodePage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 266 files with indirect coverage changes

[DylanDylann]

@huult Have you started yet?

[huult]

is it ready?

[DylanDylann]

yes

[huult]

Reviewing...

[joekaufmanexpensify]

Good for product 👍

[huult]

LGTM.

[melvin-bot]

We did not find an internal engineer to review this PR, trying to assign a random engineer to #93304 as well as to this PR... Please reach out for help on Slack if no one gets assigned!

[DylanDylann]

Sorry @mountiny, but I believe @rafecolton will take over this PR

[rafecolton]

Tested on dev, works well!

[DylanDylann]

@mountiny added unit tests

[mountiny]

Thanks! All yours @rafecolton

[rafecolton]

@huult CI is failing, complaining that the number of items in the reviewer checklist doesn't match latest. Can you please take a look?

[huult]

LGTM, re-approved

[huult]

@rafecolton all yours

[rafecolton]

thanks!

[github-actions]

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

[OSBotify]

✋ 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]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #93570.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-7cb5e55206e-8aaf48f-a9e1ac56776393b7d8401a01f1dd95b83401d793/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-7cb5e55-8aaf48f-af2c2319299e8cc7152d42f0d40058f101545ecf/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://93570.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/rafecolton in version: 9.4.15-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

🤖 No help site changes required.

This PR is a purely internal bug fix for keyboard-event handling — it does not change any documented, user-facing behavior.

What it does: When a user presses Esc on the MFA prompt/validate-code pages, a single key press fires both a keydown (handled by focus-trap) and a keyup (handled by ReanimatedModal). The same keystroke that opened the cancel-confirmation modal was also closing it instantly. The fix registers a one-shot capture-phase keyup listener that swallows just that one ESC keyup, so the modal stays open — matching the existing click-outside behavior.

Why no docs are needed:

• The change is invisible at the help-site level. Articles like Two-Factor-Authentication.md document how to enable/use 2FA, not the low-level keyboard interaction of the cancel-confirmation modal.
• No feature names, tab names, settings labels, buttons, or user-facing flows were added or renamed.
• The PR adds a reusable hook (useMFACancelOnEscape) plus unit tests; both are implementation details.

I reviewed App/docs/articles for anything describing the ESC/cancel behavior on the passkey/MFA prompt and found nothing that this change would make inaccurate. No draft docs PR was created.

@DylanDylann, let me know if you'd like a docs PR anyway, or if there's a user-facing behavior change here I may have missed.

[IuliiaHerets]

Hi @DylanDylann. Is it an internal PR?

cc @rafecolton @joekaufmanexpensify @mountiny

[rafecolton]

No, QA can test this using the biometrics test row in the troubleshoot menu

[DylanDylann]

@IuliiaHerets I updated the PR description to include the QA steps, similar to the test section.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.4.15-3 🚀

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