Components: Add ScanReport

[dkmyta]

Description

• Adds a ScanReport component
• Adds ShieldIcon components in js-packages (introduced in Protect: Add ShieldIcon Component #40402) to be shared by components and Protect (in favour of ProtectCheck, Shield, and Alert components in Protect)

Other information:

• Have you written new tests for your changes, if applicable?
• Have you checked the E2E test CI results, and verified that your changes do not break them?
• Have you tested your changes on WordPress.com, if applicable (if so, you'll see a generated comment below with a script to run)?

Jetpack product discussion

• https://github.com/Automattic/jetpack-scan-team/issues/1583

Does this pull request change what data or activity we track or use?

• No

Testing instructions:

• Review the Storybook for the ScanReport component

Screenshots

[github-actions]

Are you an Automattician? Please test your changes on all WordPress.com environments to help mitigate accidental explosions.

• To test on WoA, go to the Plugins menu on a WordPress.com Simple site. Click on the "Upload" button and follow the upgrade flow to be able to upload, install, and activate the Jetpack Beta plugin. Once the plugin is active, go to Jetpack > Jetpack Beta, select your plugin, and enable the components/add-scan-report branch.

  • For jetpack-mu-wpcom changes, also add define( 'JETPACK_MU_WPCOM_LOAD_VIA_BETA_PLUGIN', true ); to your wp-config.php file.

• To test on Simple, run the following command on your sandbox:

  bin/jetpack-downloader test jetpack components/add-scan-report
  

  bin/jetpack-downloader test jetpack-mu-wpcom-plugin components/add-scan-report
  

Interested in more tips and information?

• In your local development environment, use the jetpack rsync command to sync your changes to a WoA dev blog.
• Read more about our development workflow here: PCYsg-eg0-p2
• Figure out when your changes will be shipped to customers here: PCYsg-eg5-p2

[github-actions]

Thank you for your PR!

When contributing to Jetpack, we have a few suggestions that can help us test and review your patch:

• ✅ Include a description of your PR changes.
  
• ✅ Add a "[Status]" label (In Progress, Needs Team Review, ...).
  
• 🔴 Add a "[Type]" label (Bug, Enhancement, Janitorial, Task).
  
• ✅ Add testing instructions.
  
• ✅ Specify whether this PR includes any changes to data or privacy.
  
• ✅ Add changelog entries to affected projects
  

This comment will be updated as you work on your PR and make changes. If you think that some of those checks are not needed for your PR, please explain why you think so. Thanks for cooperation 🤖

---

The e2e test report can be found here. Please note that it can take a few minutes after the e2e tests checks are complete for the report to be available.

---

Follow this PR Review Process:

1. Ensure all required checks appearing at the bottom of this PR are passing.
2. Choose a review path based on your changes:
   • A. Team Review: add the "[Status] Needs Team Review" label
     • For most changes, including minor cross-team impacts.
     • Example: Updating a team-specific component or a small change to a shared library.
   • B. Crew Review: add the "[Status] Needs Review" label
     • For significant changes to core functionality.
     • Example: Major updates to a shared library or complex features.
   • C. Both: Start with Team, then request Crew
     • For complex changes or when you need extra confidence.
     • Example: Refactor affecting multiple systems.
3. Get at least one approval before merging.

Still unsure? Reach out in #jetpack-developers for guidance!

[nateweller]

Suggested change

	const getItemId = useCallback( ( item: Threat ) => item.id.toString(), [] );
	const getItemId = useCallback( ( item: Extension ) => item.slug, [] );

[dkmyta]

How I've got this to work in Protect is by spreading the core, plugins, themes, and a modified files variable from the useProtectData hook as data and passing it to this component. The core and files variables will no include a slug so instead I've just combined the set and indexed them like so:

	const {
		results: { core, plugins, themes, files },
	} = useProtectData();

	const data = [
		...core,
		...plugins,
		...themes,
		{ checked: true, threats: files, type: 'files' },
	].map( ( item, index ) => {
		return { id: index + 1, ...item };
	} );

Obviously the Threat doesn't apply here, but Extension won't either. Any thought on how we could approach this differently?

[nateweller]

The useProtectData hook is being removed in add/protect/core, we will be referencing data from protect-status here which should return the full Extension.

[nateweller]

(We could add a custom type if Extension is not applicable, i.e. ScanReportExtension)

[nateweller]

If you do go with generating an ID, I would recommend using the slug or any other unique identifiers whenever possible as opposed to index.

[dkmyta]

The useProtectData hook is being removed in add/protect/core, we will be referencing data from protect-status here which should return the full Extension.

Ah good to know, I missed that entirely. How will core and file threats be formatted? Will all follow the same structure? Or will they remain unchanged.

[nateweller]

They should remain the same, with core being an Extension with threats, and files being an array of file threats.

[dkmyta]

Added/applied a custom ScanReportExtension type. I've kept with generating an ID for now, because for core the slug will always be null, and for the variable we'll have to generate from files and pass to the component, it seems a little awkward to predefine the slug in someway. Perhaps we can add a followup to investigate an improved way to use unique identifier, unless you have a different recommendation for now?