-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 112
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
LG-13692 Use PendingProfileConcern
to check for pending profiles during IdV
#10867
Conversation
6dcd40e
to
08a5542
Compare
…ring IdV The `PendingProfileConcern` uses the `PendingProfilePolicy` to check if a user has a pending profile and needs to be redirected to finish proofing. We have code in the `IdvStepConcern` that does the same, but does not factor all of the things that go into that function, such as whether the SP requested a biometric comparison and the pending profile had a biometric comparison. This commit uses the `PendingProfileConcern` in the `IdvStepConcern` to ensure the pending profile logic is consistent. [skip changelog]
08a5542
to
561fb82
Compare
return idv_please_call_url if current_user.fraud_review_pending? | ||
idv_not_verified_url if current_user.fraud_rejection? | ||
end | ||
|
||
def user_has_pending_profile? | ||
pending_profile_policy.user_has_pending_profile? | ||
pending_profile_policy.user_has_pending_profile? && !user_failed_ipp_with_fraud_review_pending? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this !user_failed_ipp_with_fraud_review_pending
be part of PendingProfilePolicy
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I had some back and forth on this. It is a little tough to track exactly what it does. It appears that if a user failed IPP with fraud review pending then their pending_profile
does not count. That implementation is, perhaps, questionable but I think that is a bigger change than this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It feels like if we know they failed IPP we should cancel the profile
LGTM, pending adding back the feature spec showing what this fixes |
expect(current_path).to eq(idv_verify_by_mail_enter_code_path) | ||
|
||
# Cancelling redirects to IdV flow start | ||
click_on t('idv.gpo.address_accordion.cta_link') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is wholly irrelevant to your PR, but just looking at this translation string I would never guess it read "Clear your information and start over". I would expect a CTA to be enticing the user to start some action, not cancel and start over.
…ring IdV (#10867) The `PendingProfileConcern` uses the `PendingProfilePolicy` to check if a user has a pending profile and needs to be redirected to finish proofing. We have code in the `IdvStepConcern` that does the same, but does not factor all of the things that go into that function, such as whether the SP requested a biometric comparison and the pending profile had a biometric comparison. This commit uses the `PendingProfileConcern` in the `IdvStepConcern` to ensure the pending profile logic is consistent. [skip changelog]
…ring IdV (#10867) The `PendingProfileConcern` uses the `PendingProfilePolicy` to check if a user has a pending profile and needs to be redirected to finish proofing. We have code in the `IdvStepConcern` that does the same, but does not factor all of the things that go into that function, such as whether the SP requested a biometric comparison and the pending profile had a biometric comparison. This commit uses the `PendingProfileConcern` in the `IdvStepConcern` to ensure the pending profile logic is consistent. [skip changelog]
@@ -14,9 +15,7 @@ module IdvStepConcern | |||
before_action :confirm_personal_key_acknowledged_if_needed | |||
before_action :confirm_idv_needed | |||
before_action :confirm_letter_recently_enqueued | |||
before_action :confirm_no_pending_gpo_profile | |||
before_action :confirm_no_pending_in_person_enrollment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey @jmhooper, for future PRs that affect in_person_enrollments, could you please tag @identity-joy-engineers for a review? It would help us track potential changes to our flow.
If you’re concerned about turnaround time, you can also post the PR in the #login-team-joy-eng channel and tag the @login-joy-engineers group. Thanks!
The
PendingProfileConcern
uses thePendingProfilePolicy
to check if a user has a pending profile and needs to be redirected to finish proofing. We have code in theIdvStepConcern
that does the same, but does not factor all of the things that go into that function, such as whether the SP requested a biometric comparison and the pending profile had a biometric comparison.This commit uses the
PendingProfileConcern
in theIdvStepConcern
to ensure the pending profile logic is consistent.