[$1000] Web - Inconsistency in the email's content when verifying the new contact method.

[izarutskaya]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Action Performed:

1. Login to any account.
2. Go to Settings >> Profile >> Contact method >> choose New contact method.
3. Provide the new Contact method and click Add >> check the email's content.
4. Click on the "Didn't receive a magic code?" option to get a new verification code >> check the email's content.
5. Observation: The email content in step 3 and step 4 is not consistent.

Expected Result:

The email content sent in step #4 should be similar to the email sent in step #3, in order to avoid confusion with the magic code used for login.

Actual Result:

There is inconsistency in the email content between step #3 and step #4. The email’s content at step #4 is confusing because it appears the same as the email used for login.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

• Android / native
• Android / Chrome
• iOS / native
• iOS / Safari
• MacOS / Chrome / Safari
• MacOS / Desktop

Version Number: v1.3.57-0

Reproducible in staging?: Y

Reproducible in production?: Y

If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:

Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):

Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856

Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

20230824_180036.mp4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:

Issue reported by: @tranvantoan-qn

Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1692036965973929

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01624b023e6db373cc
• Upwork Job ID: 1696962559910027264
• Last Price Increase: 2023-08-30

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @maddylewis (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[melvin-bot]

@maddylewis Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[melvin-bot]

@maddylewis Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[maddylewis]

sorry for the delay on this one. there were some other things that i needed to prioritize over this, but let me try to repro now!

[maddylewis]

Okay, so when i add a Secondary Login, I receive an email titled Verify secondary email for Expensify:

And, if i click Didn't receive magic code?, I receive a new email titled Your magic sign-in link for Expensify:

---

The link in the Didn't receive magic code? email doesn't work for validating a Secondary Login so it sends the customer in a loop and they might end up needing to delete / re-add their secondary login to resolve this.

[tranvantoan-qn]

Please note about the attached link too.
The link in the 2nd email can not be used for secondary email validation either (as It is a link for login).
So the text + the email's structure is confusing and doesn't make sense in the context

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01624b023e6db373cc

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @maddylewis is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @mananjadhav (External)

[b4s36t4]

Is this supposed to be external? I don't think email templates/email related triggers are related App. @maddylewis maybe this has to be internal.

[mananjadhav]

@maddylewis This would have to be internal because email content is sent from the backend.

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @mananjadhav is eligible for the Internal assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[maddylewis]

updated the label - thanks!

[melvin-bot]

@mananjadhav, @maddylewis Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @mountiny (Engineering), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4319 for more details.

[maddylewis]

@mountiny - my friend, Vit! i think i am meant to add the Engineering label to internal issues. But, lmk if I'm mistaken and i will go about triaging this differently!

[mountiny]

All good

@NikkiWines Do you know if this is a regression or maybe this loophole was missed? Would you be interested in taking this one over as you go experience with these? No problem if not 😄

[melvin-bot]

@mananjadhav, @mountiny, @maddylewis Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[mountiny]

asked in DM

[NikkiWines]

👋 sorry for the delay

@NikkiWines Do you know if this is a regression or maybe this loophole was missed? Would you be interested in taking this one over as you go experience with these? No problem if not 😄

I wasn't involved in this flow, but I'd guess that it was either overlooked or just not considered important when we added the Didn't receive a magic code link to the Add Contact Methods page. The code that the user receives still works, but I agree the copy is a little weird given the flow they're in.

This occurs because we call two different commands (AddNewContactMethod and RequestContactMethodValidateCode) which use two distinct templates (SecondaryLoginAdd vs. SendValidateCode) to send the code in the backend.

The latter command ultimately calls this function which does support using different templates depending on a number of factors. We could adjust it to use the SecondaryLoginAdd template (or a new template like SendValidateCode but specific to secondary logins).

Ultimately though I think it's fine to leave as is. Kind of a "nice to have" fix. FWIW, expensify.com has the same behavior

[mountiny]

Ok, really appreciate this, I think I agree that this is super low priority and we can focus on this kind of polish after reunification