Block browser back from leaving onboarding after React Navigation bump

[sumo-slonik]

Explanation of Change

Since #103346, browser back on onboarding dispatches GO_BACK instead of RESET, so OnboardingGuard no longer blocked it. The guard now blocks GO_BACK too.

Fixed Issues

$ #103839
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

1. Sign up with a new account on web so onboarding opens.
2. Press the browser back button.
3. Verify onboarding stays open with the "Please finish the setup questions" error.
4. Go to the next onboarding step, press browser back, and verify it returns to the previous step.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests.

QA Steps

Same as tests.

• 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 any copy / text that was added to the app 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 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 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 the PR adds or modifies the UI:
  • I asked an AI agent to review the changes for accessibility issues and addressed its findings.
  • I tested with a screen reader (VoiceOver on macOS) and verified all new/changed elements are reachable with a logical focus order.
  • I verified all new/changed elements have meaningful accessible names and roles.
  • I verified state changes are announced (e.g. checked/unchecked, expanded/collapsed, selected).
• 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

[sumo-slonik]

@TMisiukiewicz @ZhenjaHorbach I'd like your opinion on this one.

Context

Since #103346 / #103699, browser back dispatches goBack() instead of resetRoot(record.state) (upstream react-navigation#13077). Our guards only ever saw browser back as a RESET, so OnboardingGuard stopped blocking it and the onboarding modal now closes (#103839).

This PR is the minimal fix: OnboardingGuard blocks GO_BACK the same way it blocks RESET. It fixes the reported case.

Open question

A few cases still differ from prod. Examples are onboarding that opens with more than one step, and MigratedUserWelcomeModal and SubmitPlanWelcomeModal, which now close on browser back. Fully matching prod would need a small patch to our native+001 patch: keep goBack() for nested pops and use resetRoot for root-level pops.

I'd prefer not to patch a library we just bumped on purpose, so I kept the guard fix. What do you think: patch it, or keep this fix and handle the rest separately?

[melvin-bot]

@getusha 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 Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-13T09:27:20.766335Z	8b2c14e	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 8b2c14e480

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".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Don't pass payload-less back actions to findFocusedRoute

When browser back produces the payload-less action used by the new test ({type: 'GO_BACK'}), this condition now falls through to findFocusedRoute(action?.payload as NavigationState) below. The cast does not create a runtime state, and React Navigation's helper dereferences state.routes, so the guard throws before returning BLOCK or restoring browser history; the added test would fail for the same reason. Handle GO_BACK without attempting to derive a target route from its missing payload.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[sumo-slonik]

findFocusedRoute handles an undefined state. It uses optional chaining throughout (current?.routes[...]), so it returns undefined and the guard returns BLOCK. Verified with CommonActions.goBack() ({type: 'GO_BACK'}) on a nested onboarding state, and the new test fails without the fix (ALLOW).

[ZhenjaHorbach]

@TMisiukiewicz @ZhenjaHorbach I'd like your opinion on this one.

Context

Since #103346 / #103699, browser back dispatches goBack() instead of resetRoot(record.state) (upstream react-navigation#13077). Our guards only ever saw browser back as a RESET, so OnboardingGuard stopped blocking it and the onboarding modal now closes (#103839).

This PR is the minimal fix: OnboardingGuard blocks GO_BACK the same way it blocks RESET. It fixes the reported case.

Open question

A few cases still differ from prod. Examples are onboarding that opens with more than one step, and MigratedUserWelcomeModal and SubmitPlanWelcomeModal, which now close on browser back. Fully matching prod would need a small patch to our native+001 patch: keep goBack() for nested pops and use resetRoot for root-level pops.

I'd prefer not to patch a library we just bumped on purpose, so I kept the guard fix. What do you think: patch it, or keep this fix and handle the rest separately?

Yeah
I think it's better to focus on the current bug
And a small inconsistency is better to fix separately

[ZhenjaHorbach]

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 any copy / text that was added to the app 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 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 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 the PR adds or modifies the UI:
  • I asked an AI agent to review the changes for accessibility issues and addressed its findings.
  • I tested with a screen reader (VoiceOver on macOS) and verified all new/changed elements are reachable with a logical focus order.
  • I verified all new/changed elements have meaningful accessible names and roles.
  • I verified state changes are announced (e.g. checked/unchecked, expanded/collapsed, selected).
• 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

NA

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-10-13.at.11.58.49.mov

iOS: HybridApp

NA

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-10-13.at.11.58.49.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-10-13.at.11.53.35.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-10-13.at.11.54.18.mov

[ZhenjaHorbach]

TS issue is not related to this PR

[mountiny]

Thank you

[github-actions]

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

[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.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #103837.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-10d77ab-ffd7862-6f45a463c6075553bcccd7049ae2991ca96fbad5/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-10d77ab-ffd7862-bfd47084b5b2f83931712d9e6d60da3534428f5a/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://103837.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.5.9-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

No help site update is needed. This PR fixes a regression so that the browser back button can't skip onboarding again, and no help article describes that behavior.

---

view run

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.5.9-4 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS