[Refactor] Use new API Command: UpdateBeneficialOwnersForBankAccount

[NikkiWines]

Details

Associated web PR: https://github.com/Expensify/Web-Expensify/pull/34853

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/226855

Tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Review Checklist

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 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 included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • iOS / native
  • Android / native
  • iOS / Safari
  • Android / Chrome
  • MacOS / Chrome
  • 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by tagging the marketing team 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
• 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 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(themeColors.componentBG)
• 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.
• I have checked off every checkbox in the PR author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

PR Reviewer Checklist

The reviewer will copy/paste it into a new comment and complete it after the author checklist is completed

• 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 verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • iOS / native
  • Android / native
  • iOS / Safari
  • Android / Chrome
  • MacOS / Chrome
  • 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by tagging the marketing team 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 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(themeColors.componentBG)
• 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.
• I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

QA Steps

1. In NewExpensify log into an account with a workspace / Create an account and then create a workspace
2. Navigate to Settings > Workspace > Connect Bank Account
3. Follow the steps from this StackOverflow post to add a verifying bank account
4. Confirm that after submitting the beneficial owners step that you are routed to the Validate Bank Account - Let's finish in chat page

Screenshots

Web

Pending:

pending.mov

Verifying:

verifying.mov

Open

Screen.Recording.2022-10-05.at.14.54.06.mov

Desktop

desktop-pending.mov

mWeb

mweb-pending.mp4

iOS

ios-pending.mp4

Android

android-pending.webm

[NikkiWines]

Oops, sorry @sketchydroide - please hold off reviewing for now, this isn't quite ready

[nkuoch]

#11162 has been merged on main - please merge main on your branch

[MariaHCD]

LGTM! We'll just need the test steps and QA steps added for this one

[sketchydroide]

LGTM

[sketchydroide]

Do we need to add C+?

[NikkiWines]

@sketchydroide I don't think it has to be a C+ to do the PR reviewer checklist, any reviewer should be able to check things so that the test passes?

[JmillsExpensify]

We've been talking about this topic in this #whatsnext post. As a quick summary, this is what's being proposed as the new standard:

• PRs that change code that runs in any of our platforms must have screenshots/videos (proof of testing) for all platforms (same as today for contributors, but a new standard for us)
• Both checklists (author & reviewer) must be filled out on all PRs (same as today for contributors, but a new standard for us)
• C+ is assigned to all PRs (same as today for contributors, but a new standard for us)

[MariaHCD]

1. Testing on the iOS simulator

@NikkiWines Have you tested checking the boxes for I own more than 25%.. and/or Somebody else owns more than 25%...? I checked those boxes for an OPEN bank account and landed on an empty ValidationStep page:

Screen.Recording.2022-10-11.at.4.44.34.PM.mov

I also tried the flow without checking those two boxes and still ended up on an empty ValidationStep page 😕

I also get this error pop up during the setup process (but I don't think it's related to this PR) 🤔

[MariaHCD]

2. Testing on MacOS / Chrome

Hmm, getting an error after selecting a Plaid bank account. Also doesn't seem related to this PR 🤔

[NikkiWines]

@NikkiWines Have you tested checking the boxes for I own more than 25%.. and/or Somebody else owns more than 25%...? I checked those boxes for an OPEN bank account and landed on an empty ValidationStep page:

Also able to reproduce this on Web - digging into it now.

I also tried the flow without checking those two boxes and still ended up on an empty ValidationStep page 😕

Weird, I'm getting this now too but it was definitely working before 🤔

Hmm, getting an error after selecting a Plaid bank account. Also doesn't seem related to this PR 🤔

I'm also getting these now - maybe some new code merged to main?

[NikkiWines]

It looks like for the Uncaught TypeError: Cannot set properties of undefined (setting 'bankName') error is because onInputChange is getting called twice in a row and the second time doesn't have any value associated with it. Potentially tied to this PR which was merged a couple days ago

[NikkiWines]

For the blank validationStep flows it looks like using the Wells Fargo creds and following the SO post is returning the bank account in state SETUP? No idea what would've caused that regression but will continue digging.

[NikkiWines]

@MariaHCD it seems to be an issue with useOnfido being true even when we're using the Wells Fargo credentials and skipping the onFido step. Because it's being passed as true we end up filtering out requestorIdentityKBA from the additionalData being passed to SetupWithdrawalAccount.cpp.

When checking the logs I can see we're successfully passing it originally but then there's an error saying it's missing from externalAPIResponses and the bank account state reverts to SETUP.

rJ6WYG /api.php [email protected] !ecash1.2.12-3! ?api? [info] Bedrock\Client - Starting a request ~~ command: 'SetupWithdrawalAccount' clusterName: 'auth' headers: '[authToken: '<REDACTED>' additionalData: '[routingNumber: '011401533' accountNumber: '<REDACTED>' addressName: 'Alberta Bobbeth Charleson' isSavings: '1' bankAccountID: '1179234' created: '2022-10-11 14:01:09' state: 'SETUP' acceptTerms: '1' addressCity: 'San Francisco' addressState: 'CA' addressStreet: 'Test Street' addressZipCode: '94103' bankName: '' beneficialOwners: '[]' companyName: 'Alberta Bobbeth Charleson' companyPhone: '1234567890' companyTaxID: '123456789' country: 'US' currency: 'USD' currentStep: 'ACHContractStep' dateSigned: '2022-10-11 20:57:01' dob: '1998-01-01' enableCardAfterVerified: '1' fieldsType: 'local' firstName: 'Alberta' hasFullSSN: '1' hasNoConnectionToCannabis: '1' incorporationDate: '2001-01-01' incorporationState: 'AK' incorporationType: 'LLC' industryCode: '541930' isControllingOfficer: '1' lastName: 'Charleson' lastUpdate: '2022-10-11 20:38:18' ownsMoreThan25Percent: '' plaidAccountID: 'E1MqdJWGnEF4wpEjmwWJTl7PJekGakFvpW8NX' previousState: '2' requestorAddressCity: 'San Francisco' requestorAddressState: 'CA' requestorAddressStreet: 'Test Street' requestorAddressZipCode: '94103' setupType: 'plaid' ssnLast4: '2034' useOnfido: '1' verifications: '[externalApiResponses: '[bankAccount: '[apiResult: '[reason: 'Plaid test withdrawal account']' status: 'pass' timestamp: '2022-10-11 18:34:11']' companyTaxID: '[apiResult: '[reason: 'Plaid test withdrawal account']' status: 'pass' timestamp: '2022-10-11 18:34:11']' lexisNexisInstantIDResult: '[apiResult: '[reason: 'Plaid test withdrawal account']' status: 'pass' timestamp: '2022-10-11 18:34:11']' realSearchResult: '[apiResult: '[reason: 'Plaid test withdrawal account']' status: 'pass' timestamp: '2022-10-11 18:34:11']' requestorIdentityID: '[apiResult: '[reason: 'Plaid test withdrawal account']' status: 'pass' timestamp: '2022-10-11 18:34:24']' requestorIdentityOnfido: '[apiResult: '[reason: 'Plaid test withdrawal account']' status: 'pass' timestamp: '2022-10-11 18:34:24']' requestorIdentityKBA: '[status: 'pass' apiResult: '[reason: 'Tested via Onfido instead']' timestamp: '2022-10-11 20:57:01']']']' website: 'https://www.meep.com']' isFromVerifyBankTool: '' bankAccountID: '1179234' logParam: '[email protected]' commitCount: '4148' requestID: 'rJ6WYG' lastIP: '62.195.76.50' writeConsistency: 'ASYNC' priority: '500' timeout: '290000']'
...
rJ6WYG [email protected] (BankAccount.cpp:1882) getFilteredAdditionalDataJSON [socket9] [info] Calling SetupWithdrawalAccount for step ACHContractStep using onfido
...
rJ6WYG [email protected] (BankAccount.cpp:2388) isSetupComplete [socket9] [info] Setup is not complete because externalAPIResponses['requestorIdentityKBA'] is missing
....
rJ6WYG [email protected] (BankAccount.cpp:2007) setupWithdrawalAccount [socket9] [info] [audit] Setting up withdrawal account for accountID 4 (bankAccountID 1179234, state 4)

Using an ssn of 3333 seems to bypass the issue, allowing us to set up the VBBA successfully in the OPEN state when using Wells Fargo creds. Not sure why useOnFido is being set to true, but looking into it more now.

[MariaHCD]

@NikkiWines Thanks for investigating that! It's probably due to this fix for VerifyIdentityForBankAccount: https://github.com/Expensify/Web-Expensify/pull/35108

We started sending useOnfido as true for every step in the flow here. And we actually don't need requestorIdentityKBA anymore. It used to be a fallback to Onfido but we removed this fallback for NewDot (more details here)

So it sounds like we just need to understand when Onfido can be skipped and when it cannot.

cc: @nkuoch

[JmillsExpensify]

Question question: with 34853 merged and now on production can we remove the [HOLD] on this PR?

[MariaHCD]

We still need to work through a small issue with the flow: #10994 (comment)

I'm looking into it!

[MariaHCD]

Looks like we get the error (BankAccount.cpp:2385) isSetupComplete [socket298] [info] Setup is not complete because externalAPIResponses['requestorIdentityKBA'] is missing because useOnfido is false here (the bank account's additionalData does not have the onfidoData)

I'm not 100% sure of why/when we skip Onfido during the VBBA flow, I can dig into it more tomorrow

[MariaHCD]

Made sure to pull the latest changes from Auth and the tests work better today 🎊

1. iOS / native

Screen.Recording.2022-10-13.at.4.29.45.PM.mov

2. Android / native

Screen.Recording.2022-10-13.at.6.30.20.PM.mov

3. iOS / Safari

Screen.Recording.2022-10-13.at.4.42.08.PM.mov

4. Android / Chrome

XRecorder_13102022_184043.mp4

5. MacOS / Chrome

2.New.Expensify.webm

6. MacOS / Desktop

Screen.Recording.2022-10-13.at.5.06.52.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2022-10-13.at.5.08.54.PM.mov

[MariaHCD]

But unfortunately, I'm still running into that blank Validation page when adding an OPEN bank account:

Testing this PR and the web deploy took up a lot of my time today so will have to take a look at this tomorrow.

[NikkiWines]

Thanks for all the testing @MariaHCD!! Went through it again myself and got the same results as you.

It looks like things may have just changed with https://github.com/Expensify/Auth/pull/7091 just getting merged but to recap this is why the OPEN VBBA flow is routing to the SETUP state instead of OPEN.

TLDR; we need to make sure useOnfido is defined by the same check in getFilteredAdditionalDataJSON() here and in isSetupComplete() here. Right now that bool true in getFilteredAdditionalDataJSON() but false in isSetupComplete() - which results in our error and bad setup state.

Long explanation

We pass along both useOnfido: '1' and requestorIdentityKBA: '[status: 'pass' apiResult: '[reason: 'Tested via Onfido instead']' in the additional data when calling the SetupWithdrawalAccount command (when setting up with the Wells Fargo Plaid creds)

In getFilteredAdditionalDataJSON() we define const bool useOnfido based only on if useOnfido is true or not when it's passed to the command. In that function we call getRequiredVerificationSetupAttributes() which takes in useOnfido. Because useOnfido is true at this point, our step name to use is ACHContractStepWithOnfido which returns nothing for our required setup attributes.

This results in us leaving out requestorIdentityKBA from the externalApiResponses that we add to the additionalDataJSON.

Then, later in isSetupComplete(), const bool useOnfido is based off of both useOnfido being true, and onfidoData being passed (as @MariaHCD mentioned here. Because we're not passing onfidoData, useOnfido is now false and our step name to use is ACHContractStep returns an requestorIdentityKBA as a key for our required setup attributes. Since that's now required - we end up failing and returning here leaving our bank account in state setup.

[JmillsExpensify]

Quick question: Are we holding on this PR until the Auth PR for consistently handling Onfido is merged?

[MariaHCD]

Thinking about @JmillsExpensify's comment, I think we can merge this PR. The bug with the flow is on the backend. I've created a separate issue to investigate and fix that: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/234337

[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.

[JmillsExpensify]

Nice, agree with that. Thanks all!

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by @MariaHCD in version: 1.2.17-0 🚀

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

[roryabraham]

Hi everyone 👋🏼

It seems like this PR is the most likely culprit for this deploy blocker. Would be great if anyone with context on the changes in this PR could look into that 🙇🏼

[MariaHCD]

It seems like this PR is the most likely culprit for this deploy blocker. Would be great if anyone with context on the changes in this PR could look into that 🙇🏼

This is likely a backend error and not a frontend error. We're investigating here: https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/234337

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by @sketchydroide in version: 1.2.17-4 🚀

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