[Hold Auth#22760 Web-E#54343] Refactor the security group Onyx key to use the sharedNVP pattern

[rayane-d]

Explanation of Change

The security group is a shared NVP, but we were sending its Onyx updates on a separate key (securityGroup_).
This PR changes the App to read it from the shared NVP: sharedNVP_domain_securityGroup_<securityGroupID>_<ownerAccountID>.

Changes:

• Added one helper, getUserSecurityGroup(), and a hook, useUserSecurityGroup(), that own the lookup. The same lookup logic that was repeated in usePreferredPolicy, useStrictPolicyRules, ContactMethodDetailsPage, and SubmitPlanWelcomeModalGuard - now they all call the helper.
• Reads the new shared-NVP key when the membership is the new object form ({securityGroupID, ownerAccountID}), and falls back to the old key when that key is not there yet or when the membership is still the old string form.
• Added the new SHARED_NVP_SECURITY_GROUP key and the DomainSecurityGroupMembership type, updated the type of MY_DOMAIN_SECURITY_GROUPS, and masked the new key in the Onyx state export.

Fixed Issues

Part of https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/587357
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Please perform regression tests for the domain control feature.

1. Log in to NewDot as a member of a domain whose security group has "Restrict expense workspace creation" enabled.
2. Go to Workspaces and verify the "New workspace" button is not shown.
3. Open the browser console and run Onyx.get('myDomainSecurityGroups'). Note the security group ID.
4. Run Onyx.get('securityGroup_<securityGroupID>') and verify it holds enableRestrictedPolicyCreation: true.
5. In the console, switch the membership to the object form and add the shared NVP key:

   Onyx.set('myDomainSecurityGroups', {'<yourDomainName>': {securityGroupID: '<securityGroupID>', ownerAccountID: <yourDomainAccountID>}});
   Onyx.set('sharedNVP_domain_securityGroup_<securityGroupID>_<yourDomainAccountID>', {enableRestrictedPolicyCreation: true});

6. Verify the "New workspace" button is still not shown. The group is now read from the shared NVP key.
7. Run Onyx.set('sharedNVP_domain_securityGroup_<securityGroupID>_<yourDomainAccountID>', null).
8. Verify the "New workspace" button is still not shown. The group falls back to the old key.
9. Run Onyx.set('securityGroup_<securityGroupID>', null).
10. Verify the "New workspace" button is now shown, because neither key holds the group.

Screen.Recording.mov

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

Same as tests. Also, Please perform regression tests for the domain control feature.

• [Domain control] [Release 1] Remove Admins "beta" - add Admins button #79765 (comment)

• [Release 2] Test and release the members page for customers #79901 (comment)

• [Test cases] Domain Control - Release 3 #84809 (comment)

• 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 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 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)
• 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)
• 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.
• 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]

@marcochavezf 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]

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: cda83b6824

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".

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/ONYXKEYS.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/hooks/usePreferredPolicy.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/hooks/useStrictPolicyRules.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/hooks/useUserSecurityGroup.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/ExportOnyxState/common.ts	80.35% <ø> (ø)
...s/Navigation/guards/SubmitPlanWelcomeModalGuard.ts	97.29% <100.00%> (-0.03%)	⬇️
src/libs/getUserSecurityGroup.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ofile/Contacts/DynamicContactMethodDetailsPage.tsx	58.33% <100.00%> (-0.73%)	⬇️
... and 67 files with indirect coverage changes

[github-actions]

This PR adds a new Onyx.connectWithoutView call, so I've requested a review from the Onyx performance reviewers (@tgolen, @mountiny, @luacmartins) — a review from any one of them is enough. Please add a link in your PR description to the Slack discussion where the @frontend-performance team approved using connectWithoutView here.

[situchan]

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 proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
  • 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 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)
• 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)
• If a new component is created I verified that:
  • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • All props are defined accurately
  • 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
  • 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(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.
• 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

[github-actions]

❌ CONSISTENCY-15 (docs)

These comments restate what the code does rather than explaining why. // Get the user's domain from their email sits above const userDomain = email ? Str.extractEmailDomain(email) : undefined; and // Get the security group details for the user's domain sits above the myDomainSecurityGroups?.[userDomain] lookup — in both cases the identifiers (userDomain, extractEmailDomain, groupMembership) and the code already make the "what" obvious, so the comments are dead weight (this is the same pattern as the rule's // loop through users example).

Drop the pure restatements and keep only comments that add "why" context. The rest of this file already does this well (e.g. the comment explaining why the object membership is read first because it carries the owner account ID). For example:

const userDomain = email ? Str.extractEmailDomain(email) : undefined;

const groupMembership = userDomain ? myDomainSecurityGroups?.[userDomain] : undefined;

---

Reviewed at: f84d923 | Please rate this suggestion with 👍 or 👎 to help us improve! Reactions are used to monitor reviewer efficiency.

[rayane-d]

This PR adds a new Onyx.connectWithoutView call, so I've requested a review from the Onyx performance reviewers (@tgolen, @mountiny, @luacmartins) — a review from any one of them is enough. Please add a link in your PR description to the Slack discussion where the @frontend-performance team approved using connectWithoutView here.

Onyx.connectWithoutView is already used for the ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.SECURITY_GROUP key, and this PR is a refactor of that key. There are no behavior changes.

Also, Vit is assigned to the issue and will review this PR, so I removed the review requests from the other Onyx performance reviewers.

[tgolen]

Yeah, I think this is OK. From the looks of it, I couldn't find this being triggered from any UI callers, only from the navigation lib that lives outside of React so useOnyx() can't be used. Please add a comment to explain that (same with the other connectWithoutView() references).