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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Return data from Reauthentication middleware when shouldRetry: false #9961

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 18, 2022
Merged

Return data from Reauthentication middleware when shouldRetry: false #9961

merged 2 commits into from
Jul 18, 2022

Conversation

marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor

@marcaaron marcaaron commented Jul 18, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Details

cc @yuwenmemon @luacmartins

When we switched from using makeRequestWithSideEffects() instead of the "main queue" (a.k.a. deprecatedAPI) for authenticating Pusher we changed the way those responses are handled when the authToken expires. Previously, a request.resolve function was provided to the request object so the original response could be processed by the original caller when shouldRetry: false is true. Since we do not pass this promise the response data is never returned and Pusher's custom authorizer can't handle the response or reauthentication attempts.

Fixed Issues

$ #9958

Tests

There isn't a clear natural reproduction for the linked issue other than waiting a long time for the authToken to expire and I am mostly following the trail of logs, but manually killing the authToken seems to work and we can do it via the "Preferences" on dev or staging.

See QA Steps

PR Review Checklist

Contributor (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 */
    • Any functional components have the displayName property
    • 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 Contributor+ 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
  • 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 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 */
    • Any functional components have the displayName property
    • 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. Invalidate the authToken manually and do not navigate anywhere.
    2022-07-18_08-47-25
  2. Quickly close the Desktop app before any network requests have a chance to run and refresh the authToken.
  3. Reopen the desktop app
  4. Verify you are subscribed to the private user channel by typing getPusherInstance() in the JS console and verifying that the private user channel is subscribed: true

2022-07-18_08-49-42

If this test is repeated without the line of code changing to return the data we will no longer be subscribed.

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Screenshots

Web

Mobile Web

Desktop

iOS

Android

@marcaaron marcaaron requested a review from a team as a code owner July 18, 2022 18:50
@marcaaron marcaaron self-assigned this Jul 18, 2022
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from AndrewGable and removed request for a team July 18, 2022 18:50
@marcaaron marcaaron mentioned this pull request Jul 18, 2022
Merged
87 tasks
@marcaaron marcaaron mentioned this pull request Jul 18, 2022
Closed
95 tasks
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

⚠️ ⚠️ Heads up! This pull request has the CP Staging label. ⚠️ ⚠️
Merging it will cause it to be immediately deployed to staging, even if the open StagingDeployCash deploy checklist is locked.

luacmartins
luacmartins approved these changes Jul 18, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@luacmartins luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! Thanks for fixing this!

chiragsalian
chiragsalian reviewed Jul 18, 2022
View reviewed changes
src/libs/actions/Session/index.js
@@ -343,6 +343,11 @@ function invalidateCredentials() {
Onyx.merge(ONYXKEYS.CREDENTIALS, {autoGeneratedLogin: '', autoGeneratedPassword: ''});
}

function invalidateAuthToken() {
NetworkStore.setAuthToken('pizza');
Onyx.merge(ONYXKEYS.SESSION, {authToken: 'pizza'});
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

pizza? lol, did you mean to clear it here instead or actually leave it as pizza?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lol seems like we were already doing that in TestToolsMenu haha. I like it :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🍕 if we set it as null the user would be logged out or other weird things. So "bad authToken" vs. "no authToken" is what we want.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

cool, can that be added as a comment so that its not easily forgotten for the next person updating this block.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Anyway, im not going to block since adding a comment is a NAB. Going to approve and merge this since its the only thing blocking deploy.

chiragsalian
chiragsalian approved these changes Jul 18, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@chiragsalian chiragsalian left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Merging before andrew can review to get this out the door sooner.

@chiragsalian chiragsalian merged commit dd9c8f5 into main Jul 18, 2022
@chiragsalian chiragsalian deleted the marcaaron-fixPusherReauthenticationIssue branch July 18, 2022 21:15
OSBotify pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 18, 2022
@chiragsalian @OSBotify
Merge pull request #9961 from Expensify/marcaaron-fixPusherReauthenti…
53b02fe 
…cationIssue

Return `data` from `Reauthentication` middleware when `shouldRetry: false`

(cherry picked from commit dd9c8f5)
@OSBotify OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jul 18, 2022
Merged
OSBotify added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 18, 2022
@OSBotify
Merge pull request #9965 from Expensify/OSBotify-cherry-pick-staging-…
1b08e6d 
…9961

🍒 Cherry pick PR #9961 to staging 🍒
@OSBotify OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jul 19, 2022
Closed
79 tasks
@yuwenmemon
Copy link
Contributor

Nice, thanks for this!

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by @chiragsalian in version: 1.1.84-13 🚀

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

@OSBotify OSBotify mentioned this pull request Aug 16, 2022
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@luacmartins luacmartins luacmartins approved these changes

@chiragsalian chiragsalian chiragsalian approved these changes

@AndrewGable AndrewGable Awaiting requested review from AndrewGable

Assignees

@marcaaron marcaaron

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@marcaaron @yuwenmemon @OSBotify @chiragsalian @luacmartins