fix: Clicking on report link does not add external_link_clicked to si… #29969
+185
−1
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes. |
Builds ready [b22bea6]
Page Load Metrics (1619 ± 44 ms)
Bundle size diffs
|
Builds ready [a3f8f6d]
Page Load Metrics (1705 ± 74 ms)
Bundle size diffs
|
jpuri
reviewed
Feb 3, 2025
| @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ function ReportLink({ | |||
| <Text marginTop={1} display={Display.Flex}> | |||
| {t('somethingDoesntLookRight', [ | |||
| <ButtonLink | |||
| data-testid="alert-provider-report-link" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We avoid adding data-testid in extension, in case its possible to query using button text it may be better.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like this suggestion. I do like using findByText to also test text expectations simultaneously
pedronfigueiredo
approved these changes
Feb 3, 2025
digiwand
requested changes
Feb 3, 2025
| ...unapprovedTypedMessage, | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| console.log(state); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| console.log(state); |
Comment on lines
+94
to
+95
| export const getMetamaskStateWithMaliciousPermit = (accountAddress: string) => { | ||
| const pendingPermitId = '48a75190-45ca-11ef-9001-f3886ec2397c'; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[minor nit] we can move this out to avoid reinstantiating for each getMetamaskStateWithMaliciousPermit call
Suggested change
| export const getMetamaskStateWithMaliciousPermit = (accountAddress: string) => { | |
| const pendingPermitId = '48a75190-45ca-11ef-9001-f3886ec2397c'; | |
| const pendingPermitId = '48a75190-45ca-11ef-9001-f3886ec2397c'; | |
| export const getMetamaskStateWithMaliciousPermit = (accountAddress: string) => { |
OGPoyraz
reviewed
Feb 3, 2025
Comment on lines
+311
to
+326
| await waitFor(() => { | ||
| updateSignatureEventFragment = | ||
| mockedBackgroundConnection.submitRequestToBackground.mock.calls?.find( | ||
| (call) => | ||
| call[0] === 'updateEventFragment' && | ||
| JSON.stringify(call[1]).includes( | ||
| JSON.stringify({ | ||
| properties: { | ||
| external_link_clicked: 'security_alert_support_link', | ||
| }, | ||
| }), | ||
| ), | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| expect(updateSignatureEventFragment).toBeDefined(); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it make sense to use Jest's matchers rather than relying on string comparisons?
Suggested change
| await waitFor(() => { | |
| updateSignatureEventFragment = | |
| mockedBackgroundConnection.submitRequestToBackground.mock.calls?.find( | |
| (call) => | |
| call[0] === 'updateEventFragment' && | |
| JSON.stringify(call[1]).includes( | |
| JSON.stringify({ | |
| properties: { | |
| external_link_clicked: 'security_alert_support_link', | |
| }, | |
| }), | |
| ), | |
| ); | |
| expect(updateSignatureEventFragment).toBeDefined(); | |
| }); | |
| expect( | |
| mockedBackgroundConnection.submitRequestToBackground, | |
| ).toHaveBeenCalledWith( | |
| 'updateEventFragment', | |
| expect.arrayContaining([ | |
| expect.objectContaining({ | |
| properties: expect.objectContaining({ | |
| external_link_clicked: 'security_alert_support_link', | |
| }), | |
| }), | |
| ]), | |
| ); |
| ...unapprovedTypedMessage, | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| console.log(state); |
Comment on lines
+39
to
+48
| const onClickSupportLink = () => { | ||
| const properties = { | ||
| properties: { | ||
| external_link_clicked: 'security_alert_support_link', | ||
| }, | ||
| }; | ||
| updateSignatureEventFragment(properties); | ||
| updateTransactionEventFragment(properties, ownerId); | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we create this callback with useCallback if it has ownerId dependency?
Suggested change
| const onClickSupportLink = () => { | |
| const properties = { | |
| properties: { | |
| external_link_clicked: 'security_alert_support_link', | |
| }, | |
| }; | |
| updateSignatureEventFragment(properties); | |
| updateTransactionEventFragment(properties, ownerId); | |
| }; | |
| const onClickSupportLink = useCallback(() => { | |
| const properties = { | |
| properties: { | |
| external_link_clicked: 'security_alert_support_link', | |
| }, | |
| }; | |
| updateSignatureEventFragment(properties); | |
| updateTransactionEventFragment(properties, ownerId); | |
| }, [ownerId]); |
Welbert5753
approved these changes
Feb 3, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
…gnature events
Description
Fixes the bug that the external_link_clicked property is not added to the Signature approved, signature rejected , transaction approved and transaction rejected events
Adds integration tests to verify the property is added to the metrics
Related issues
Fixes: #23995
Manual testing steps
Screenshots/Recordings
Before
After
Pre-merge author checklist
Pre-merge reviewer checklist