[CP Staging] Fix fraud alert widget not rendering due to wrong data path

[mountiny]

Explanation of Change

The card fraud data (possibleFraud) is stored under card.nameValuePairs in Onyx, not under card.message as the code previously assumed. This mismatch caused the fraud alert widget in the Time Sensitive section to never render because card.message?.possibleFraud was always undefined, which meant:

1. The ReviewCardFraud component was never shown
2. Users could never navigate to the fraud alert report from the home page widget

This PR:

• Moves the PossibleFraudData type from the removed CardMessage wrapper into Card.nameValuePairs
• Updates TimeSensitiveSection to read card.nameValuePairs?.possibleFraud instead of card.message?.possibleFraud
• Removes the now-unused CardMessage type
• Updates test helpers and test cases to set possibleFraud via nameValuePairs

Fixed Issues

$ #82242

Tests

Testing on the adhoc

1. Supportal into user account that has had the card fraud alert triggered in past 2 days
2. Verify that you can see the task on the home page
3. Verify that clicking on the link takes you the workspace chat with the message

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A - This is a data path fix. The fraud data comes from Onyx which persists offline.

QA Steps

Same as test - InternalQA

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• 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 is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and 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)
  • 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.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• 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(theme.componentBG))
• 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 a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[melvin-bot]

@Pujan92 Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[github-actions]

🚧 @mountiny has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/CardUtils.ts	75.22% <100.00%> (ø)
src/pages/home/TimeSensitiveSection/index.tsx	33.33% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 23 files with indirect coverage changes

[mountiny]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: f51eeb921e

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[nkuoch]

Summary

This PR fixes a data path mismatch where fraud alert data (possibleFraud) was being read from card.message?.possibleFraud but is actually stored in Onyx under card.nameValuePairs?.possibleFraud. This caused the fraud alert widget in the Time Sensitive section to never render.

---

✅ What's Good

1. Clear problem identification: The PR description clearly explains the root cause - a mismatch between where the code reads data vs. where it's actually stored in Onyx.

2. Minimal, focused changes: The PR only touches 6 files with +87/-22 lines, making it easy to review:

   • CardUtils.ts - Extends fraud detection logic
   • TimeSensitiveSection/index.tsx - Fixes the data path
   • Card.ts - Moves type and removes unused wrapper
   • Test files - Updates to match new data structure

3. Type cleanup: Removes the unused CardMessage type wrapper and moves PossibleFraudData directly into nameValuePairs. This is cleaner.

4. Comprehensive test updates: All test files are updated to:

   • Use the new possibleFraud option in test helpers
   • Add assertions for the nameValuePairs?.possibleFraud path
   • Add a new test case for when fraud === NONE but possibleFraud data exists

5. Defensive logic enhancement: The isCardWithPotentialFraud function now also checks for !!card.nameValuePairs?.possibleFraud:

function isCardWithPotentialFraud(card: Card): boolean {
-    return card.fraud === CONST.EXPENSIFY_CARD.FRAUD_TYPES.DOMAIN || card.fraud === CONST.EXPENSIFY_CARD.FRAUD_TYPES.INDIVIDUAL;
+    return card.fraud === CONST.EXPENSIFY_CARD.FRAUD_TYPES.DOMAIN || card.fraud === CONST.EXPENSIFY_CARD.FRAUD_TYPES.INDIVIDUAL || !!card.nameValuePairs?.possibleFraud;
}

This handles the edge case where card.fraud might be reset to 'none' while a fraud alert is still pending review.

---

⚠️ Potential Concerns / Suggestions

1. Test helper type assertion: In tests/utils/collections/card.ts, the helper uses a type assertion:

...(options?.possibleFraud ? {nameValuePairs: {possibleFraud: options.possibleFraud} as Card['nameValuePairs']} : {}),

This could potentially overwrite other nameValuePairs fields. Consider merging instead if nameValuePairs already exists in the generated card. However, since this is a test helper and the base card doesn't set nameValuePairs, this is acceptable.

2. Duplicate nameValuePairs in virtual card test: In CardTest.ts, the virtual card with fraud test creates a card then immediately overwrites nameValuePairs:

const virtualCardWithFraud: Card = {
    ...createRandomExpensifyCard(2, {
        state: CONST.EXPENSIFY_CARD.STATE.OPEN,
        fraud: CONST.EXPENSIFY_CARD.FRAUD_TYPES.INDIVIDUAL,
        possibleFraud: {triggerAmount: 2000, triggerMerchant: 'Store B', currency: 'USD', fraudAlertReportID: 222},
    }),
    nameValuePairs: {
        isVirtual: true,
        possibleFraud: {triggerAmount: 2000, triggerMerchant: 'Store B', currency: 'USD', fraudAlertReportID: 222},
    } as Card['nameValuePairs'],
};

The possibleFraud from the helper gets overwritten when manually setting nameValuePairs. This is intentional to also set isVirtual: true, but the duplication of possibleFraud data is a bit redundant. Consider merging:

const baseCard = createRandomExpensifyCard(2, {
    state: CONST.EXPENSIFY_CARD.STATE.OPEN,
    fraud: CONST.EXPENSIFY_CARD.FRAUD_TYPES.INDIVIDUAL,
    possibleFraud: {triggerAmount: 2000, triggerMerchant: 'Store B', currency: 'USD', fraudAlertReportID: 222},
});
const virtualCardWithFraud: Card = {
    ...baseCard,
    nameValuePairs: {
        ...baseCard.nameValuePairs,
        isVirtual: true,
    },
};

This is a minor nit - the current approach works correctly.

3. Missing screenshots: The PR checklist mentions all platforms were tested, but the screenshot sections are empty. For a user-facing bug fix like this, screenshots showing the fraud widget rendering correctly would strengthen the PR.

---

✅ Code Style & Conventions

• Follows existing patterns and naming conventions
• No linter issues visible
• TypeScript types are correctly updated
• Exports are properly updated (adds PossibleFraudData, removes CardMessage)

---

🔍 Risk Assessment

Low Risk - This is a straightforward data path fix:

• Only changes where the code reads existing data
• No new features or architectural changes
• Well-covered by tests
• The type change from message to nameValuePairs aligns with how Onyx actually stores the data

---

Verdict: ✅ Approve

This is a clean, well-scoped bug fix that correctly addresses the data path mismatch. The changes are minimal, the tests are comprehensive, and the defensive check in isCardWithPotentialFraud handles edge cases appropriately.

Recommendation: Approve, but consider adding screenshots of the fraud widget working correctly on at least one platform before merging.

[nkuoch]

Reviewer Checklist

• 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 included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
• I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • Android: HybridApp
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: HybridApp
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
• I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• 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 is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and 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)
  • 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.ts 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 */
  • 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 any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• 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(theme.componentBG)
• 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 a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this 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.
• I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[mountiny]

I think the comments are not blocking in the tests, I will move this ahead

[github-actions]

🚧 @mountiny has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #82247.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-fce1364-d240a1dca758491d5f0866e26e89d9a4c6e0ec54/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-fce1364-d72fd61ce622256d8b4a7d47d80f04a039d914a6/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://82247.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.3.17-9 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.3.17-9 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌

[OSBotify]

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.3.18-0 🚀

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