Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update Onfido SDK to fix package dependencies #34509

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 22, 2024
Merged

Update Onfido SDK to fix package dependencies #34509

merged 5 commits into from
Jan 22, 2024

Conversation

pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor

@pecanoro pecanoro commented Jan 15, 2024

There are some vulnerabilities in the dependencies for Onfido, so this should fix it. I didn't upgrade to the latest one because there are no changelogs and I wasn't sure of something big could have changed.

Details

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/286999
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Same as QA

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

  1. Create a new workspace on a new account with no bank accounts linked yet
  2. Go to the workspace settings > Reimbursements > Connect Bank Account.
  3. Follow the flow until you get the Onfido verification.
  4. Complete the Onfido verification. It should not throw any weird errors.
  • 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
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • 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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • 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
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
    • 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • 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.js 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 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 form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label 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.
  • 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: mWeb Chrome

image

iOS: Native

image

iOS: mWeb Safari

image

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

image

MacOS: Desktop

image

@pecanoro pecanoro requested a review from a team as a code owner January 15, 2024 15:50
@pecanoro pecanoro self-assigned this Jan 15, 2024
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from cubuspl42 and removed request for a team January 15, 2024 15:50
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 15, 2024

@cubuspl42 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]

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cubuspl42 We need to check that I didn't break the Onfido flow for adding a bank account after bumping the version.

@cubuspl42
Copy link
Contributor

I don't think I ever managed to complete the real Onfido flow. I'll try my best.

It's my end of the day, though, so I can pick this up tomorrow.

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cubuspl42 yeah, no rush, I also didn't have time to test it today, that's why I added the HOLD, I will test it tomorrow.

@cubuspl42
Copy link
Contributor

I don't know how to pass the "Additional details" step (which is before the Onfido flow). I tried fake SSN generators, but nothing seemed to work. When I hack it around so the flow starts with Onfido step, it also gives me an error.

I'm not sure how to properly test this as non-American.

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cubuspl42 I think you can just add a video up to that step, the fact that it's showing is a good sign that I didn't break it completely 😄

@pecanoro pecanoro changed the title [HOLD tests] Update Onfido SDK to fix package dependencies Update Onfido SDK to fix package dependencies Jan 16, 2024
@cubuspl42
Copy link
Contributor

I wasn't able to get to what you showed on your screenshots without errors. Did you use your real US data in steps 1 and 2?

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cubuspl42 I used my real first/last name and a US address. For the last 4 SSN I used 3333. That took me to the next screen.

@cubuspl42
Copy link
Contributor

I'm always stuck here:

image

I tried full-blown fake identity from a generator, to ensure info is consistent:

image

It's not the first one I tried. I don't know what causes the verification to fail; I had the same issues in the past.

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cubuspl42 Which flow are you using? I am going to the workspace settings > Reimbursements > Connect Bank Account. The screen I see it's different:

image

@cubuspl42
Copy link
Contributor

I went through the Wallet path! I'll try your way.

@cubuspl42
Copy link
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 tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • 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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • 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.js 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 form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label 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.
  • 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: Native
onfido-sdk-upgrade-android-compressed.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
onfido-sdk-upgrade-android-web-compressed.mp4
iOS: Native
onfido-sdk-upgrade-ios-compressed.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
onfido-sdk-upgrade-ios-web-compressed.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
onfido-sdk-upgrade-web-converted.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
onfido-sdk-upgrade-desktop-converted.mp4

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 18, 2024

@MonilBhavsar 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]

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 18, 2024

🎯 @cubuspl42, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

An E/App issue has been created to issue payment here: #34737.

Copy link
Contributor

@MonilBhavsar MonilBhavsar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for fixing it!
Could you please fill the author checklist, tests and QA steps

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have ni clue why Snyk is failing, I will try to figure it out on Monday

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

@MonilBhavsar
Copy link
Contributor

Github actions test is failing
Could you please check

Error: Diff found when Github Actions were rebuilt. Did you forget to run npm run gh-actions-build after a clean install (rm -rf node_modules && npm i)? Do you need to merge main? Did you try running git config --global core.autocrlf false then npm run gh-actions-build again?

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

What on earth? I have no clue why this would be failing, I am going to check in Slack

@cubuspl42
Copy link
Contributor

I don't understand this either... Doesn't buildActions.sh process the scripts in the .github/actions directory? What does it have to do with running npm i?

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

I tried to run npm run gh-actions-build, it gave me a big diff...

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

pecanoro commented Jan 22, 2024

I think it was probably related to some sub-dependency I got updated after bumping the version? The actions seem to working just fine regardless after running gh-actions-build. I also retested on web:

image

@cubuspl42
Copy link
Contributor

Diff stats are +244 −41,893. Very red. Interesting, not necessarily a problem.

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor Author

It seems to be working, it just removed a lot in those compiled files. @MonilBhavsar All yours!

@MonilBhavsar
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for looking! Makes sense and works fine

@MonilBhavsar MonilBhavsar merged commit f37782e into main Jan 22, 2024
18 checks passed
@MonilBhavsar MonilBhavsar deleted the rocio-socket branch January 22, 2024 12:53
@OSBotify
Copy link
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
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/MonilBhavsar in version: 1.4.30-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.30-1 🚀

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

1 similar comment
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.30-1 🚀

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

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.

4 participants