Skip to content

Remove code that explicitly pushed to MFA outcome screens - #94103

Merged
neil-marcellini merged 6 commits into
mainfrom
chuckdries/mobile-3ds-mfa-prompt-nav-jank
Jun 26, 2026
Merged

Remove code that explicitly pushed to MFA outcome screens#94103
neil-marcellini merged 6 commits into
mainfrom
chuckdries/mobile-3ds-mfa-prompt-nav-jank

Conversation

@chuckdries

@chuckdries chuckdries commented Jun 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

When dismissing the MFA navigator, using goBack when the outcome screen was pushed on top of the prompt screen reveals the prompt screen underneath it. We should be using replace here.

Fixed Issues

$ #94101
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  1. Trigger a 3DS challenge
  2. Approve and authorize it
  3. Press Got it
  4. Verify that it looks right as it navigates away

Also confirm other MFA flows look right

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

N/A - QA cannot test 3DS for now

  • 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 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 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)
  • 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.
  • 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

Android: Native
android.3ds.challenge.mfa.prompt.fixed.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android.chrome.3ds.challenge.mfa.fixed.mp4
iOS: Native
mobile.3ds.challenge.mfa.prompt.fixed.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios.safari.3ds.challenge.mfa.fixed.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web.3ds.challenge.mfa.prompt.still.works.mp4

@chuckdries
chuckdries requested a review from dariusz-biela June 19, 2026 23:43
@chuckdries chuckdries self-assigned this Jun 19, 2026
@chuckdries
chuckdries requested review from a team as code owners June 19, 2026 23:43
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from cretadn22 and joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team June 19, 2026 23:43
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@cretadn22 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]

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot removed the request for review from a team June 19, 2026 23:43
@chuckdries
chuckdries requested review from DylanDylann and removed request for cretadn22 June 19, 2026 23:43
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jun 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
...ponents/MultifactorAuthentication/mfaNavigation.ts 16.66% <ø> (+1.51%) ⬆️
... and 9 files with indirect coverage changes

@dariusz-biela dariusz-biela left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Your solution works, but before we merge it, I want to analyze the problem in depth, because the proposed solution:

  • stops using animations in react-navigation, which could cause the animations to become desynchronized in the future
  • and adds quite a bit of complexity

Why has the code been working so far, and why did you encounter an error with this issue #94101?
A PR #92837 was merged into main that replaces replace with push for navigation:

   // In HybridApp the MFA overlay renders in an independent BaseNavigationContainer presented inside a native
    // modal, where StackActions.replace silently fails to commit (the computed state is never applied), stranding
    // the user on the spinner-bearing Prompt screen. For the terminal outcome screens we push instead, which
    // commits reliably; outcome screens end the flow (the stack is reset when the overlay closes) so the extra
    // stack entry has no downside. Standalone keeps replace, where it works as expected.
    if (CONFIG.IS_HYBRID_APP && OUTCOME_SCREENS.has(screen)) {
        mfaNavigationRef.dispatch(StackActions.push(screen, params));
        return;
    }

As a result, the animation to the initial screen stopped working because it had previously been implemented using:

        if (mfaNavigationRef.isReady() && mfaNavigationRef.canGoBack()) {
            mfaNavigationRef.goBack();
        }

A minimal fix that restores the previous behavior is to always force a return to the initial screen using popToTop (This still needs to be tested):

        if (mfaNavigationRef.isReady() && mfaNavigationRef.canGoBack()) {
            mfaNavigationRef.dispatch(StackActions.popToTop());
        }

However, I’m still wondering why the PR #92837 stated that a “replace” action cannot be performed in a hybrid app, and I plan to investigate this, as it could cause potential problems in the future.

@joekaufmanexpensify joekaufmanexpensify left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good for product 👍

@chuckdries

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hey @heekinho, can you provide more context on this change to mfaNavigation.ts? Specifically, I'm trying to reproduce the behavior described in the comment: that the user becomes stranded on the spinner and never sees the outcome screen, but I can't seem to repro it.

comment.out.mfa.push.od-.nd.transition.mp4

The issue is that pushing rather than replaceing to the outcome causes the prompt page to incorrectly appear below the outcome screen as it transitions out after the user dismisses it. After looking closer, I agree with @dariusz-biela's assessment that I'd rather restore the replace behavior rather than animating the whole navigation stack.

@heekinho

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hmmm. @chuckdries, with replace it was closing the App and returning to OD instead of returning to card details.
That doesn't happen to you? The video show the verification failed. On verification success it correctly returns to card details with that code commented out as well?

@chuckdries

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@heekinho yes, when the biometrics succeeds, it works as expected (though in this case reveal details doesn't go to an OUTCOME_SCREEN, so that if statement wouldn't hit anyway). For reveal details, the only time the user sees an outcome screen is if it fails. Do you recall the specific flow where you spotted that behavior? Might've been a red herring

@heekinho

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Given the commit "Adjust MFA cancel or not matched flow for hybrid app" it was indeed for the failure. Have you try it for iOS? Maybe that was platform specific? Lemme configure it here and try to help you figuring it out.

@chuckdries

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Success and failure cases work fine in my testing on iOS

ios.od-.nd.mfa.nav.mp4

I went ahead and reverted "animating the whole MFA stack", and committed removing the .push for outcome screens, so that this PR accurately reflects what we're talking about doing

@chuckdries chuckdries changed the title Animate entire MFA panel out on finishClose Remove code that explicitly pushed to MFA outcome screens Jun 23, 2026
@heekinho

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Ok, after testing it just figured it out what happened:

testing-push-issue.mov

The video shows the process of me trying to fix that issue. In the first moment when MFA is canceled it just goes straight to OD. That change you commented fixed that first bit. After that, the second issue was that hitting "Got it" was taking it to OD. The second change in that PR fixed that second problem. But the first one seems indeed unnecessary and even has a bad flash. Removing it fixes everything and doesn't have that bad flash. But trying to figure it out those navigation issues was not so clean as this recorded video atm 🫠 .

I did two changes in that commit, the second seems to be the important one. So this one you removed is indeed unnecessary and I can see the bad flash with it. So yep, @chuckdries, you probably cannot reproduce it because the second change is the actual fix.

I apologize for that. Indeed it is a code that I'm not super familiar and got going trying to fix all edge cases I had while testing.

@heekinho

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@chuckdries I think you need to remove the unused variables now
@dariusz-biela I think the video above answers the wrong diagnostics about push/replace. You can also see the initial state where it was going back straight to OD when canceling MFA.

@dariusz-biela

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@chuckdries @heekinho

It's great that you were able to find this solution.

I'm wondering if it might still be worth implementing the change below, since it makes logical sense and could potentially protect us from future bugs. On the other hand, it might also mask an underlying issue.

I'll leave that up to you to consider.

As a result, the animation to the initial screen stopped working because it had previously been implemented using:

        if (mfaNavigationRef.isReady() && mfaNavigationRef.canGoBack()) {
            mfaNavigationRef.goBack();
        }

A minimal fix that restores the previous behavior is to always force a return to the initial screen using popToTop (This still needs to be tested):

        if (mfaNavigationRef.isReady() && mfaNavigationRef.canGoBack()) {
            mfaNavigationRef.dispatch(StackActions.popToTop());
        }

@chuckdries

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I'm wondering if it might still be worth implementing the change below, since it makes logical sense and could potentially protect us from future bugs. On the other hand, it might also mask an underlying issue.

It is semantically correct and makes the code less brittle. I went ahead and committed that change.

@heekinho
heekinho self-requested a review June 24, 2026 18:26

@heekinho heekinho left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Tested the last changes with popToTop(). All good

testing-pop-to-top.mov

@chuckdries

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Sweet, thanks for confirming! @DylanDylann would you mind reviewing and checklisting? I'd like to get this visual polish merged sooner rather than later. (feel free to say no if you're too busy!)

@DylanDylann

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@chuckdries The code changes look good to me, but I'm unable to test the transaction approval flow on my end.

@DylanDylann

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: HybridApp
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

@DylanDylann DylanDylann left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm okay with merging this, since most of the changes simply revert the previous PR, and the author has also confirmed the fix. Note that I haven't re-tested this flow, as I don't have access to it.

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested a review from neil-marcellini June 25, 2026 18:11
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@neil-marcellini 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]

@neil-marcellini neil-marcellini left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Testing videos and code look good, and there was a great discussion on this PR which explains why the removed comment and code was invalid. Great work!

@neil-marcellini
neil-marcellini merged commit def6a78 into main Jun 26, 2026
37 of 38 checks passed
@neil-marcellini
neil-marcellini deleted the chuckdries/mobile-3ds-mfa-prompt-nav-jank branch June 26, 2026 18:58
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚧 neil-marcellini has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
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
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/neil-marcellini in version: 9.4.21-2 🚀

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

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.4.21-9 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

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.

7 participants