Skip to content

Bug fix: first biometric auth after log out/in sees unnecessary soft prompt#86291

Merged
chuckdries merged 5 commits into
mainfrom
fix-unnecessary-soft-prompt
Mar 25, 2026
Merged

Bug fix: first biometric auth after log out/in sees unnecessary soft prompt#86291
chuckdries merged 5 commits into
mainfrom
fix-unnecessary-soft-prompt

Conversation

@rafecolton

@rafecolton rafecolton commented Mar 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Explanation of Change

Fixes a bug where a user registers a passkey or mobile native biometrics, logs out, logs in, and sees a soft prompt before authenticating, as opposed to the authorization screen.

This fix also ensures that if the app is entirely deleted from a device and reinstalled, that we DO show the soft prompt again. That is still needed because iOS will show the system prompt in that case.

Fixed Issues

$ #86284
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

Web

  1. Navigate to the troulbeshoot page in a fresh incognito on web
  2. Tap Test and register a passkey. You should see the "soft prompt" first (it's a page that says "Enable quick, secure..." and has a green button).
  3. Log out and back in to the same account in the same browser session
  4. Navigate to troubleshoot and confirm you are still registered
  5. Tap test. You should see the Now, let's authenticate you... screen with the spinner right away, and you should not have to click any green button to get the browser passkey prompt.

iOS

  1. Make sure you start with a fresh install. This doesn't just mean an update. It means delete and reinstall the app.
  2. Log in with a fresh account.
  3. Navigate to Troubleshoot and register for biometrics.
    1. You should see the soft prompt first
    2. You may see the system prompt (system popup that asks you if you want to allow Face ID for the app). Make sure to allow it if you do see it.
    3. You should be prompted to authenticate with Face ID twice, and the screen will change in between
  4. Log out and back in.
  5. Go to Troubleshoot again, confirm you're still registered, and tap Test. You should go to authentication right away and not see the soft or the system prompt.
  6. Delete and reinstall the app, then log in with the same account as before.
  7. Log in, go to troubleshoot, confirm you're still registered, and tap Test
    1. You should see the soft prompt
    2. You may see the system prompt. Allow it if you do.
    3. You should be prompted for Face ID once.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A, online only

QA Steps

Same as tests

  • 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
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it 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 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

iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2026-03-24.at.5.16.49.PM.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-03-24.at.4.59.47.PM.mov

@rafecolton rafecolton self-assigned this Mar 24, 2026
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/ONYXKEYS.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
...ponents/MultifactorAuthentication/Context/Main.tsx 13.97% <100.00%> (+1.41%) ⬆️
src/libs/actions/App.ts 46.94% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/actions/Delegate.ts 31.63% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/actions/Session/index.ts 43.63% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/actions/SignInRedirect.ts 78.72% <100.00%> (+0.46%) ⬆️
src/pages/MultifactorAuthentication/PromptPage.tsx 0.00% <ø> (ø)
...tifactorAuthentication/Context/usePromptContent.ts 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...rc/libs/actions/MultifactorAuthentication/index.ts 16.19% <50.00%> (+1.62%) ⬆️
... and 11 files with indirect coverage changes

@rafecolton
rafecolton marked this pull request as ready for review March 25, 2026 00:23
@rafecolton
rafecolton requested review from a team as code owners March 25, 2026 00:23
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from thesahindia and trjExpensify and removed request for a team March 25, 2026 00:23
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@thesahindia 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 request for a team and trjExpensify March 25, 2026 00:23
@rafecolton
rafecolton requested review from DylanDylann, chuckdries and joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for thesahindia March 25, 2026 00:23
@rafecolton

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 676ccffb1d

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

const {accountID} = useCurrentUserPersonalDetails();
const [serverHasCredentials, setServerHasCredentials] = useState(false);
const [deviceBiometricsState] = useOnyx(ONYXKEYS.DEVICE_BIOMETRICS);
const [deviceBiometricsState] = useOnyx(getDeviceBiometricsOnyxKey(accountID));

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P2 Badge Migrate legacy soft-prompt state to account-scoped key

This read now only checks deviceBiometrics_${accountID}, but the previous value was stored under the legacy non-collection key, so existing users who already accepted the soft prompt will be treated as first-time until they re-approve. In practice, the first MFA authorization after this upgrade can show an unnecessary soft prompt even without reinstall/logout. Add a migration or fallback read from the legacy key during the transition.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It is known and acceptable - this is not a commonly used feature, as the main use for it is behind a beta, and the UX cost of re-registration is low. I don't think it's worth the complexity to add a migration.

Comment on lines +68 to +80
useEffect(() => {
// Non-reactive read of deviceBiometrics. Using Onyx.connectWithoutView (set up in a useEffect
// inside the provider) instead of useOnyx to avoid triggering process() too many times during
// the fresh registration flow.
const connection = Onyx.connectWithoutView({
key: getDeviceBiometricsOnyxKey(accountID),
callback: (data) => {
deviceBiometricsState = data;
},
});
return () => Onyx.disconnect(connection);
}, [accountID]);

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.

Using Onyx.connectWithoutView in components is a massive anti-pattern, and if it’s possible for this code to work with useOnyx, it would definitely be better to use that instead.

In useEffect, the deps array isn’t fully populated anyway, so omitting one additional dependency shouldn’t be a problem.

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 agree. I don’t think useOnyx would cause process() to trigger too frequently. Could you clarify in more detail why we shouldn’t use useOnyx?

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.

Experimentally, it did though 🙈. The process function relies on being called precisely when it should be and never more, and adding a subscription to this flag caused one extra call when we set the flag.

@chuckdries chuckdries Mar 25, 2026

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 agree it feels icky, but we've already talked about refactoring this file and agreed it's not a short term priority (connectWithoutView was the pattern already established in this file)

@chuckdries

chuckdries commented Mar 25, 2026

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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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 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 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.ts 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 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.
  • 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: Native
android.soft.prompt.works.correctly.mp4
iOS: Native
ios.soft.prompt.works.correctly.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
chrome.soft.prompt.works.correctly.mp4

@chuckdries

This comment was marked as outdated.

@chuckdries
chuckdries merged commit 166e112 into main Mar 25, 2026
35 of 42 checks passed
@chuckdries
chuckdries deleted the fix-unnecessary-soft-prompt branch March 25, 2026 16:18
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/chuckdries in version: 9.3.49-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

@nlemma

nlemma commented Mar 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@rafecolton Step 7 fails for Android, is this testable on Android?

cc @chuckdries @joekaufmanexpensify @DylanDylann

@chuckdries

chuckdries commented Mar 26, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@nlemma that behavior is only important on iOS, but it is still surprising to me that it failed. What did you observe?

@IuliiaHerets

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chuckdries On step 7, "Log in, go to troubleshoot, confirm you're still registered, and tap Test
You should see the soft prompt
You may see the system prompt. Allow it if you do.
You should be prompted for Face ID once."

We were no longer registered (it says "Another device registered"), and were prompted to scan our finger twice.

1774540018321.D3dd8d6d-07F8-4Ec0-96C2-5519C9decfbb-1.mp4

@chuckdries

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Interesting. Seems like android gives us different credential IDs when you reinstall the app. This is fine, as the flow the user sees is reasonable and not confusing or broken. @IuliiaHerets @nlemma please mark this as a pass. Thanks!

@rafecolton

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Very interesting, good to know. Agree with Chuck's assessment, thanks for flagging 👍

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.3.49-2 🚀

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

7 participants