Skip to content

LG-14653 | Log state_id_type on doc auth result event #11328

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.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
n1zyy merged 6 commits into from
Oct 17, 2024
Merged

LG-14653 | Log state_id_type on doc auth result event #11328

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
e8e71b9
LG-14653 | Log state_id_type on proofing result event
n1zyy Oct 9, 2024
1cb41c0
Merge branch 'main' into mattw/LG-14653_log_docauth_id_type
n1zyy Oct 9, 2024
6e6a0cc
Update spec/controllers/idv/verify_info_controller_spec.rb
n1zyy Oct 9, 2024
30be39e
Test fixes
n1zyy Oct 9, 2024
9384d43
Merge branch 'main' into mattw/LG-14653_log_docauth_id_type
n1zyy Oct 9, 2024
2cd4729
Merge branch 'main' into mattw/LG-14653_log_docauth_id_type
n1zyy Oct 17, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions app/controllers/concerns/idv/verify_info_concern.rb
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -185,6 +185,7 @@ def async_state_done(current_async_state)
state: pii[:state],
state_id_jurisdiction: pii[:state_id_jurisdiction],
state_id_number: pii[:state_id_number],
state_id_type: pii[:state_id_type],
# todo: add other edited fields?
extra: {
address_edited: !!idv_session.address_edited,
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -275,12 +276,14 @@ def idv_result_to_form_response(
state: nil,
state_id_jurisdiction: nil,
state_id_number: nil,
state_id_type: nil,
extra: {}
)
state_id = result.dig(:context, :stages, :state_id)
if state_id
state_id[:state] = state if state
state_id[:state_id_jurisdiction] = state_id_jurisdiction if state_id_jurisdiction
state_id[:state_id_type] = state_id_type if state_id_type
if state_id_number
state_id[:state_id_number] =
StringRedacter.redact_alphanumeric(state_id_number)
Expand Down
4 changes: 4 additions & 0 deletions spec/controllers/idv/verify_info_controller_spec.rb
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -349,6 +349,10 @@
},
),
)

event = @analytics.events["IdV: doc auth verify proofing results"].first
state_id = event[:proofing_results][:context][:stages][:state_id]
Comment thread
n1zyy marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
expect(state_id).to match(a_hash_including(state_id_type: 'drivers_license'))

@n1zyy n1zyy Oct 9, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I couldn't find prior art for handling this situation...

I basically wanted:

  expect(@analytics).to have_logged_event(
    'IdV: doc auth verify proofing results',
    hash_including(
      {
        proofing_results => context => stages => state_id => { state_id_type: 'drivers_license' }
      },
    ),
  )

except that's not valid code. I started nesting hash_including but it got really unwieldy fast.

hash_including doesn't look deep in the hash, e.g., just doing hash_including(state_id_type: 'drivers_license') expects a top-level key named state_id_type; it doesn't dig down recursively until it finds a match.

The test above feels inelegant, except compared to every other option I tried.

@zachmargolis zachmargolis Oct 9, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we have one double-nested hash-including here:

identity-idp/spec/features/idv/analytics_spec.rb

Line 311 in 0e9bba2

success: true, errors: hash_including(message: nil), destination: :link_sent, flow_path: 'hybrid', step: 'hybrid_handoff', analytics_id: 'Doc Auth', telephony_response: hash_including(errors: {}, message_id: 'fake-message-id', request_id: 'fake-message-request-id', success: true), selfie_check_required: boolean

@zachmargolis zachmargolis Oct 9, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

but I think that you're right, doing a point-check is clearer here

@lmgeorge lmgeorge Oct 10, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's almost like we need have_logged_event to support a pattern like:

expect(@analytics).to have_logged_event(
    event_name, 
    hash_deeply_including(
        [:proofing_results, :context, :stages, :state_id],
        {state_id_type: 'drivers_license'},
    ),
)

@n1zyy n1zyy Oct 10, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lmgeorge Something like this came up in the #rspec-league channel when I asked about this, even with some example code. I'm reluctant to add it, though. I feel like it would normalize having deeply-nested hashes for important things, but I feel like it's an antipattern.

I think I agree more with the comment in that thread that something being clunky to test is often a smell that the code (or here, data structure) is too convoluted. That's not an easy fix in this PR, though.

@lmgeorge lmgeorge Oct 10, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed. This is one of those do you fix "all the things" or just try to make your current need work. Either way, adding a custom matcher or dramatically restructuring the analytics event is beyond the scope of this PR.

end
end

Expand Down