[$250] User validation –User logging out when validate account in NewDot that was created in OldDot

[lanitochka17]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 1.4.68-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/4524500
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team

Action Performed:

1. Log out of both NewDot and OldDot
2. Navigate to OldDot https://staging.expensify.com/
3. In the login screen enter a new gmail account
4. Verify you're navigated to staging NewDot
5. Navigate to account Settings > Contact methods
6. Click on the email
7. Verify you're prompted for the magic code to validate the account
8. Verify the account receives a magic code to their email inbox
9. Enter the magic code in the field
10. Click on Verify

Expected Result:

The account is validated

Actual Result:

User logging out when try to validate account in NewDot that was created in OldDot. On step 6 User receive a magic code only after resend it

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6466569_1714482054776.validate_account_in_NewDot.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0126755b0189ef4aa2
• Upwork Job ID: 1785612522728562689
• Last Price Increase: 2024-05-29
• Automatic offers:
• c3024 | Reviewer | 102590991

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @sonialiap (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[lanitochka17]

@sonialiap FYI I haven't added the External label as I wasn't 100% sure about this issue. Please take a look and add the label if you agree it's a bug and can be handled by external contributors

[humanitiesclinic]

I tried this, and did not receive any verification code at all with [email protected], despite clicking on resend multiple times.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @humanitiesclinic! 📣
Hey, it seems we don’t have your contributor details yet! You'll only have to do this once, and this is how we'll hire you on Upwork.
Please follow these steps:

1. Make sure you've read and understood the contributing guidelines.
2. Get the email address used to login to your Expensify account. If you don't already have an Expensify account, create one here. If you have multiple accounts (e.g. one for testing), please use your main account email.
3. Get the link to your Upwork profile. It's necessary because we only pay via Upwork. You can access it by logging in, and then clicking on your name. It'll look like this. If you don't already have an account, sign up for one here.
4. Copy the format below and paste it in a comment on this issue. Replace the placeholder text with your actual details.
   
   Format:

Contributor details
Your Expensify account email: <REPLACE EMAIL HERE>
Upwork Profile Link: <REPLACE LINK HERE>

[humanitiesclinic]

Contributor details
Your Expensify account email: [email protected]
Upwork Profile Link: https://www.upwork.com/freelancers/~01dd0a657e935bad4f?viewMode=1

[melvin-bot]

✅ Contributor details stored successfully. Thank you for contributing to Expensify!

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0126755b0189ef4aa2

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @c3024 (External)

[melvin-bot]

@sonialiap, @c3024 Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[sonialiap]

Looking for proposals

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[melvin-bot]

@sonialiap, @c3024 Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[melvin-bot]

@sonialiap @c3024 this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to approving a proposal? If not, what's blocking us from getting this issue assigned? Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks!

[sonialiap]

looking for proposals, will retest later this week

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[c3024]

Waiting for proposals.

[sonialiap]

@johncschuster back from OOO, releasing you from buddy role :D

[sonialiap]

@c3024 we have clarification from Tom for the expected behavior. Is the next step to implement and push a PR?

[teneeto]

@sonialiap, O yes, I already did a push for that change, but I am working a way around this comment: #47772 (comment)

We should push a final fix today.

[c3024]

There have been some changes in these flows since our last discussion.

Now, if we want to add a secondary contact, we need to re-validate our primary login before adding the secondary contact. As it stands, this validation page is identical to the usual first-time code verification page.

The flow for case 2 will be now as follows:

1. Click New Contact Method.
2. Enter a new login.
3. Click Add.
4. The verification page for the primary login appears, as this is the current flow.
5. Once the primary login is validated, we proceed to the code validation page for the secondary login.
6. Currently, both pages (4 and 5) look the same, with the only difference being the email address. This could be confusing for users. It might be clearer to add specific information to the primary contact verification page in Step 4, such as "Verify your primary contact first to add a secondary contact."

Should we also update the text on the primary contact validation page?

[trjExpensify]

Ah, nice catch on changes in this flow to verify access to the primary login. I guess that might changes things a bit.

The flow for #41330 (comment) will be now as follows:

1. Click New Contact Method.
2. Enter a new login.
3. Click Add.
4. The verification page for the primary login appears, as this is the current [HOLD for payment 2024-09-18] Update the Magic code form to be easier to reuse in other flows and add it to Reveal card details flow #48541 (comment).
5. Once the primary login is validated, we proceed to the code validation page for the secondary login.
6. Currently, both pages (4 and 5) look the same, with the only difference being the email address. This could be confusing for users. It might be clearer to add specific information to the primary contact verification page in Step 4, such as "Verify your primary contact first to add a secondary contact."

Should we also update the text on the primary contact validation page?

For the benefit of the discussion and design input, can you add a video of this flow so we can see the problem it presents please? Thanks!

[teneeto]

@c3024 @trjExpensify how do we plan to proceed with this? I'm waiting for your lead 😌.

[trjExpensify]

Hoping @c3024 can provide us a video of the current behaviour, so we can discuss those next steps.

For the benefit of the discussion and design input, can you add a video of this flow so we can see the problem it presents please? Thanks!

[c3024]

Now, with the changes in the PR #47772, the secondary contact verification page appears only for a brief period and redirects to ContactMethodsPage.

secondaryContactChrome.mp4

I think this needs to be fixed first. @teneeto

[teneeto]

on it.

[teneeto]

I'm sorry for not getting back to you sooner. This should be the current state for the secondary contact method.

Screen.Recording.2024-09-13.at.10.22.54.mov

[c3024]

The earlier PR was reverted because of this flow after addition of secondary contact

1. Backend sends a validate code immediately for the secondary contact
2. But since we redirect to the ContactMethodsPage, we still have to click again on the secondary contact method and another code is requested from front-end.

This flow still remains with this PR. Here is the video.

magicCodeSentWhenAddingSecondaryContact.mp4

We need to redirect the user not to ContactMethodsPage but to the validate code page to use the code immediately received in Step 1.

[teneeto]

More straightforward to follow now, 100% get you. I will add a fix and push back. Thanks @c3024

[teneeto]

@c3024 can you confirm this is the expected flow?

Screen.Recording.2024-09-17.at.10.38.58.mov

[teneeto]

This issue PR seems to have been approved by @c3024 with a few UI comments, but I'm still not clear on how we intend to proceed with it. Do you have any comments on this?

[melvin-bot]

This issue has not been updated in over 15 days. @sonialiap, @teneeto, @narefyev91, @c3024 eroding to Monthly issue.

P.S. Is everyone reading this sure this is really a near-term priority? Be brave: if you disagree, go ahead and close it out. If someone disagrees, they'll reopen it, and if they don't: one less thing to do!

[sonialiap]

@teneeto @c3024 I see we're still working on the fix for the revert #47772, is there anything I can help with to push this along?

[waterim]

Hello, Im Artem from Callstack
As @teneeto is OOO I will take this ticket to finish on time!

[sonialiap]

Thanks Artem!
Adding you to the issue 🥳

[sonialiap]

moving back to Weekly

[sonialiap]

This has been open for a solid six months, asking QA for a retest to confirm if still an issue

[sonialiap]

Not reproducible - https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C9YU7BX5M/p1734120354616929?thread_ts=1734095446.002559&cid=C9YU7BX5M