Skip to content

Fix: Enable strict HTML tag validation on tax name forms#84872

Merged
MonilBhavsar merged 3 commits intomainfrom
claude-fixAngleBracketTaxValidation
Mar 16, 2026
Merged

Fix: Enable strict HTML tag validation on tax name forms#84872
MonilBhavsar merged 3 commits intomainfrom
claude-fixAngleBracketTaxValidation

Conversation

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Contributor

@MelvinBot MelvinBot commented Mar 11, 2026

Explanation of Change

Tax names containing certain angle bracket patterns (e.g., GST<10%>) bypass the default HTML tag validation regex (VALIDATE_FOR_HTML_TAG_REGEX) because the pattern <10%> doesn't match valid HTML-like tag syntax. However, the backend WAF strips any angle-bracketed content, creating a mismatch: the frontend optimistically saves GST<10%> while the backend creates GST, resulting in duplicate tax rates and broken selection.

The codebase already has STRICT_VALIDATE_FOR_HTML_TAG_REGEX and a shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation prop on FormProvider that catches any content in angle brackets. This PR enables that strict validation on both the tax rate creation and tax rate rename forms, consistently rejecting names like GST<10%> before submission.

Additionally, the same fix is applied to the Report Fields creation page, where the field name input also uses TextPicker and is susceptible to the same WAF stripping issue.

Fixed Issues

$ #83183
PROPOSAL: #83183 (comment)

Tests

Tax rates:

  1. Go to a workspace and enable taxes
  2. Go to Workspace > Taxes and click Add rate
  3. Enter a tax name containing angle brackets, e.g. GST<10%>
  4. Verify the "Invalid character" error is shown immediately
  5. Enter a valid tax name without angle brackets (e.g. GST 10%), set a value, and save
  6. Verify the tax rate is created successfully
  7. Click on the newly created tax rate, then tap the name to edit it
  8. Try renaming it to something with angle brackets, e.g. Tax<Rate>
  9. Verify the "Invalid character" error is shown
  10. Rename it to a valid name and save successfully

Report fields:

  1. Go to a workspace and navigate to More features
  2. Enable Report fields
  3. Go to Workspace > Report fields and tap Add field
  4. Tap the Name field and enter a name containing angle brackets, e.g. Field<test>
  5. Verify the "Invalid character" error is shown
  6. Enter a valid name (e.g. Field test), select a type, and save
  7. Verify the report field is created successfully
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

The validation is purely client-side and runs before any API call, so offline behavior is unchanged. The form still works offline with enabledWhenOffline — it just now also rejects angle bracket patterns.

QA Steps

Tax rates:

  1. Go to a workspace and enable taxes
  2. Go to Workspace > Taxes and click Add rate
  3. Enter a tax name like GST<10%> and try to save
  4. Verify an "Invalid character" error appears and the form does not submit
  5. Enter a valid tax name (e.g. GST 10%), set a value, and save successfully
  6. Tap the created tax rate, then tap the name to edit
  7. Try renaming to Tax<5%> — verify "Invalid character" error appears
  8. Rename to a valid name and verify it saves

Report fields:

  1. Go to a workspace and navigate to More features
  2. Enable Report fields
  3. Go to Workspace > Report fields and tap Add field
  4. Tap the Name field and enter a name with angle brackets, e.g. Field<test>
  5. Verify an "Invalid character" error appears and the form does not submit
  6. Enter a valid name (e.g. Field test), select a type, and save successfully
  7. Verify the report field is created successfully
  • 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 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

N/A - No UI changes, only enabling an existing validation prop

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A - No UI changes, only enabling an existing validation prop

iOS: Native

N/A - No UI changes, only enabling an existing validation prop

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A - No UI changes, only enabling an existing validation prop

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A - No UI changes, only enabling an existing validation prop

Angle brackets in tax names (e.g., GST<10%>) bypass the default HTML tag
regex but get stripped by the backend WAF, creating duplicate tax rates
and causing selection reversion. Enable shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation
on both the tax creation and tax rename FormProviders to consistently
reject any angle-bracketed content before submission.

Co-authored-by: Sobit Neupane <sobitneupane@users.noreply.github.com>
@sobitneupane
Copy link
Contributor

@MelvinBot

  • Should we add shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation with "false" as the default value in TextSelectorModal and pass it to FormProvider?
  • Then Pass shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation to TextPicker InputWrapper for the tax name.

This should ensure that the name page while creating a new tax also check for strict html tag validation.

…ectorModal

Pass shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation prop through TextPicker and
TextSelectorModal so the strict HTML tag validation runs inside the
modal's own FormProvider, providing immediate validation feedback
while the user is typing.

Co-authored-by: Sobit Neupane <sobitneupane@users.noreply.github.com>
@MelvinBot
Copy link
Contributor Author

Good catch! You're right — the current approach only sets shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation on the outer FormProvider in WorkspaceCreateTaxPage. Since the tax name input goes through TextPickerTextSelectorModal, which has its own internal FormProvider, the strict validation wouldn't run inside the modal while the user is typing. The user would only see the error after closing the modal, when the value reaches the outer form — not the best UX.

I've implemented your suggestion in b8b4757:

  1. Added shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation prop (default false) to both TextSelectorModalProps and TextPickerProps in types.ts
  2. TextSelectorModal now destructures the prop and passes it to its internal FormProvider
  3. TextPicker destructures and forwards it to TextSelectorModal
  4. WorkspaceCreateTaxPage passes shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation to the TextPicker InputWrapper

I also kept shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation on the outer FormProvider as an additional safety net. Now the validation fires inside the modal immediately, giving users proper feedback before they submit.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 16, 2026

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/components/TextPicker/index.tsx 0.00% <ø> (ø)
...pages/workspace/reports/CreateReportFieldsPage.tsx 0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/pages/workspace/taxes/NamePage.tsx 0.00% <ø> (ø)
...c/pages/workspace/taxes/WorkspaceCreateTaxPage.tsx 0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/components/TextPicker/TextSelectorModal.tsx 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 601 files with indirect coverage changes

@sobitneupane
Copy link
Contributor

@MelvinBot I could reproduce the issue in WorkspaceCreateReportFieldsPage as well. Could you please pass shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation in InputWrapper TextPicker for ReportField Name in WorkspaceCreateReportFieldsPage as well?

Add shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation to the FormProvider and the
Name TextPicker InputWrapper in CreateReportFieldsPage so that
angle bracket patterns are rejected in report field names too.

Co-authored-by: Sobit Neupane <sobitneupane@users.noreply.github.com>
@MelvinBot
Copy link
Contributor Author

Done! In b5baee7 I added shouldUseStrictHtmlTagValidation to both the outer FormProvider and the Name TextPicker InputWrapper in CreateReportFieldsPage.tsx. This ensures the strict HTML tag validation runs inside the modal when creating a report field name, matching the pattern we set up for the tax pages.

Copy link
Contributor

@sobitneupane sobitneupane left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2026-03-16.at.14.53.45.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2026-03-16.at.14.55.50.mov
iOS: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2026-03-16.at.14.44.40.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-03-16.at.14.46.53.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-03-16.at.14.43.28.mov

Copy link
Contributor

@sobitneupane sobitneupane left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

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.

@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 16, 2026

We did not find an internal engineer to review this PR, trying to assign a random engineer to #83183 as well as to this PR... Please reach out for help on Slack if no one gets assigned!

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from MonilBhavsar March 16, 2026 09:12
@sobitneupane
Copy link
Contributor

@MelvinBot Please mark this PR as ready for review

@MelvinBot MelvinBot marked this pull request as ready for review March 16, 2026 09:14
@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner March 16, 2026 09:14
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from JmillsExpensify and sobitneupane and removed request for a team March 16, 2026 09:14
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 16, 2026

@sobitneupane 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]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team March 16, 2026 09:14
@MelvinBot
Copy link
Contributor Author

Done — this PR has been marked as ready for review. 🚀

Copy link
Contributor

@JmillsExpensify JmillsExpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Product behavior outline in testing steps LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@MelvinBot Why changes in CreateReportField page? Is this related to tax?

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Contributor Author

The CreateReportFieldsPage change is not directly related to tax — it addresses the same underlying vulnerability in a different feature area. CreateReportFieldsPage also uses TextPicker for the report field name input (line 190), which means report field names like Field<test> would hit the same backend WAF stripping issue: the frontend allows it, but the WAF strips the angle-bracketed content, causing a mismatch.

The change was added in commit b5baee7 (co-authored by sobitneupane) to proactively apply the same strict validation fix to report field name creation, since it shares the same TextPickerTextSelectorModal input pattern that the tax forms use.

If you'd prefer to keep this PR scoped strictly to the tax issue (#83183), the CreateReportFieldsPage change could be split into a separate PR. Let me know how you'd like to proceed.

@MonilBhavsar
Copy link
Contributor

@MelvinBot I'm fine with it. Could you then please update "QA" section in PR description to also test for Report fields change?

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated the PR description. Both the Tests and QA Steps sections now include a Report fields subsection with steps to:

  1. Enable Report fields in a workspace
  2. Navigate to Workspace > Report fields and tap Add field
  3. Enter a name with angle brackets (e.g. Field<test>) and verify the "Invalid character" error
  4. Enter a valid name, select a type, and verify the field is created successfully

I also added a note in the Explanation of Change section mentioning the Report Fields fix.

Copy link
Contributor

@MonilBhavsar MonilBhavsar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

@MonilBhavsar MonilBhavsar merged commit 85ec2f5 into main Mar 16, 2026
45 checks passed
@MonilBhavsar MonilBhavsar deleted the claude-fixAngleBracketTaxValidation branch March 16, 2026 11:07
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

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

@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.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/MonilBhavsar in version: 9.3.39-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.3.39-3 🚀

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

5 participants