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.

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

Update electron (snyk security vulnerability fix) #9832

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 11, 2022

Conversation

aldo-expensify
Copy link
Contributor

@aldo-expensify aldo-expensify commented Jul 11, 2022

Details

Went from electron ^17.0.0 to ^17.4.5, this translated in the following changes in package-lock.json:

@electron/get 1.13.1 -> 1.14.1
boolean: 3.1.4 -> 3.2.0
electron: 17.0.0 -> 17.4.10

The rest of the changes in package-lock.json are the integrity hash changing

Changelog of electron v17: https://www.electronjs.org/releases/stable?version=17
It looks like it is mostly bug fixes and a few things added, but no breaking changes

Changelog of boolean: https://github.com/thenativeweb/boolean/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md
Same, bug fixes, new function added, no breaking changes

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/218341
$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/218340
$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/218339
$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/218338
$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/218337
$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/218336
$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/218335
$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/218334

Tests

I believe this affects only the Desktop version of the App

Open the desktop app and try to make sure some main flows are still working as expected:

  • Send new comment in existing chat

  • Open new chat

  • Register

  • Log in

  • Add VBA

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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

We should tell applause to be on the look out for bugs this may have caused in the desktop version

Screenshots

Web

Mobile Web

Desktop

Screen Shot 2022-07-11 at 11 49 54 AM

iOS

Android

@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jul 11, 2022

npm has a package.json file and a package-lock.json file. It seems you updated one without the other, which is usually a sign of a mistake. If you are updating a package make sure that you update the version in package.json then run npm install

@aldo-expensify aldo-expensify marked this pull request as ready for review July 11, 2022 18:54
@aldo-expensify aldo-expensify requested a review from a team as a code owner July 11, 2022 18:54
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from johnmlee101 and removed request for a team July 11, 2022 18:55
@aldo-expensify aldo-expensify self-assigned this Jul 11, 2022
@johnmlee101 johnmlee101 merged commit 8398e18 into main Jul 11, 2022
@johnmlee101 johnmlee101 deleted the aldo_update-electron branch July 11, 2022 19:34
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot added the Emergency label Jul 11, 2022
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jul 11, 2022

@johnmlee101 looks like this was merged without passing tests. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

@johnmlee101
Copy link
Contributor

huh?

@johnmlee101
Copy link
Contributor

Removing the label. I think the cherry pick check was skipped? But it was green check marked 🤔
image

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

@aldo-expensify
Copy link
Contributor Author

Removing the label. I think the cherry pick check was skipped? But it was green check marked 🤔

Yeah, I saw the green check too 🤷

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by @johnmlee101 in version: 1.1.83-1 🚀

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

@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 ✅

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants