[JakubKorytko]

Explanation of Change

Part 3/7 of the RiskControl transaction review FE.

Adds the fraud review screen (multifactor-authentication/review-transaction/:transactionID) in the MFA RHP stack, the REVIEW-FRAUD-TRANSACTION MFA scenario for "Yes, I do" with the "Try again" outcome, and wires the fraud queue into useNavigateToForcedTransactionReview:

• 3DS keeps priority, and the hook shows the first review this device can complete, so an unsupported 3DS review doesn't block a fraud review
• fraud reviews have no auth method gate ("No" doesn't need MFA)
• a fraud review answered on this device is skipped for 3 days, then shown again if the server still lists it
• local answers are dropped once the server stops listing their review, after the queues are read from storage
• leaving the screen asks to freeze the card (fire-and-forget report), and "No" reports fraud (its outcome screens come in part 4)
• the "Yes" and "No" buttons get their own Sentry labels, separate from the 3DS ones

Notes:

• The 3-day window is measured from when the hook mounts, so the selection stays stable between renders. A tab left open for days shows such a review again only after it remounts (reload, app restart). This only matters when an answer never reached the server
• illustration_card_pos_refresh.svg added as card-pos-refresh.svg (compressed)

Fixed Issues

$ #104109
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

Precondition: sign in with an account that has an Expensify Card with a transaction pending fraud review.

1. Open the app.
2. Verify the "Review transaction" screen opens on its own with "Do you recognize this transaction?", the merchant, the amount and "Ending in" with the last 4 digits of the card.
3. Tap the back arrow.
4. Verify the "Freeze card" drawer appears with "If you close this screen, we'll have to freeze your card. You'll need to unfreeze it to use it again."
5. Tap "Cancel".
6. Verify the drawer closes and the "Review transaction" screen is still open.
7. Tap "Yes, I do" and complete the magic code, biometrics or passkey prompts.
8. Verify the "Try again" screen shows "Give it another try".
9. Tap "Got it".
10. Verify the "Review transaction" screen does not open again.

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as tests. The precondition needs the backend part of the design doc on staging, plus a test RiskControl rule that applies a REVIEW tag (same as the "Deploy & verify" section of the doc).

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 verified any copy / text that was added to the app 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)
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• 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)
• 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 the PR adds or modifies the UI:
  • I asked an AI agent to review the changes for accessibility issues and addressed its findings.
  • I tested with a screen reader (VoiceOver on macOS) and verified all new/changed elements are reachable with a logical focus order.
  • I verified all new/changed elements have meaningful accessible names and roles.
  • I verified state changes are announced (e.g. checked/unchecked, expanded/collapsed, selected).
• 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

Android: Native

Not recorded, same React Native code as iOS: Native.

Android: mWeb Chrome

Not recorded, same web code as MacOS: Chrome.

iOS: Native

Recorded on the iOS simulator (HybridApp, top of the stack) with GetTransactionsPendingFraudReview and RecordFraudFeedback faked inside the app for the recording, since the backend does not have these commands yet. MFA, Face ID registration and the card pages use the real backend.

pr3-ios.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Not recorded, same web code as MacOS: Chrome.

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Recorded on staging with GetTransactionsPendingFraudReview and RecordFraudFeedback answered by a local mock, since the backend does not have these commands yet. Everything else (sign in, MFA, passkey, card pages) is the real staging backend.

pr3-web.mp4

[melvin-bot]

Hey, I noticed you changed src/languages/en.ts in a PR from a fork. For security reasons, translations are not generated automatically for PRs from forks.

If you want to automatically generate translations for other locales, an Expensify employee will have to:

1. Look at the code and make sure there are no malicious changes.
2. Run the Generate static translations GitHub workflow. If you have write access and the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Alternatively, if you are an external contributor, you can run the translation script locally with your own OpenAI API key. To learn more, try running:

npx bun ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --help

Typically, you'd want to translate only what you changed by running npx bun ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --compare-ref main

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/CONST/SENTRY_LABEL.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/CONST/index.ts	96.15% <ø> (+0.06%)	⬆️
src/ROUTES.ts	34.48% <100.00%> (+0.04%)	⬆️
src/SCREENS.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/components/Icon/chunks/illustrations.chunk.ts	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...tifactorAuthentication/components/Modals/index.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...tication/config/scenarios/AuthorizeTransaction.tsx	94.11% <ø> (ø)
...cation/config/scenarios/ReviewFraudTransaction.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ultifactorAuthentication/config/scenarios/index.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...ultifactorAuthentication/config/scenarios/names.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
... and 7 more
... and 32 files with indirect coverage changes