fix: store an absent explorer decimals as unknown instead of fabricating 18 (closes #349)

fetchTokenBalances() did parseInt(item.token.decimals || "18", 10) before writing to state.wallets[].addresses[].tokenBalances[].decimals, so a token whose decimals() reverts -- one the block explorer reports no scale for -- was stored with a fabricated 18 that no reader could tell from a real one.

That is upstream of a rule already merged. #306 made the ERC-20 approval amount line resolve the real scale or refuse to format, and #340 extended it to the swap lines; both read this stored value as an authoritative source, so the guess walked straight past refusals that were intact and simply never fired. A 1,000-unit approval of such a token rendered 0.000000001 on the one screen whose job is to state what is being authorized.

The stored value is now the explorer's own answer or null, never a default. Both approval paths reach unknownDecimalsAmount() on a null, using the refusal that was already there. The history list's token transfers carried the same || "18" and now state exact base units with the scale unknown rather than a quantity at a guessed one.

A holding whose scale nothing knows has no quantity either, so its balance is stored as null -- unknown, never zero -- and the balance list, the address USD total, the Send screen and the confirmation screen each say so rather than printing 0.0000 for money that is really there. The zero-balance filter moved onto the base-unit integer, where it needs no scale at all. The bundled token list and the user's tracked tokens already outrank the explorer, so a token either of them knows still displays its real quantity when the explorer's entry omits decimals; only what none of the three knows is unknown.

Which makes the stored field the explorer's answer alone, and NOT the scale a screen renders at. Those are two questions, and every screen that needs the second one asks resolveTokenDecimals(). The Send screen did not: it read tokenBalances[].decimals raw and carried it onto the pending transaction, so a bundled or tracked token whose explorer row omits decimals reached displayedDecimals(null) inside estimateGas(). That throws, is caught as an unavailable fee, and disables Send behind "The network fee could not be estimated ... Please go back and try again" -- untrue, unactionable, and for a token such as WETH whose scale was never in doubt. The balance and the amount on the same screen were correct throughout, and validateTransfer() had nothing to object to, so nothing named the real reason. Before this change the fabricated 18 happened to be that token's real scale and the send completed, so this is a capability regression and not an inherited one. Send now resolves the scale exactly as the balance list resolved it, with no fallback: null still goes forward when resolution genuinely answers null, and the confirmation screen's "this token's balance is unknown" is then the message the user gets.

The uint8 check is one shared toDecimals() rather than three copies of it, and it answers 0 for a real scale of zero: || "18" collapsed that to eighteen, the falsy-collapse trap of #246.

The reader half is asserted, not just the writer half. Each of the six sites that now distinguishes an unknown quantity from a zero one -- balanceLine(), balanceLinesForAddress(), addressHoldsFunds(), getAddressValue()'s partial flag, the Send balance line and the confirmation screen's balance and insufficient-balance wording -- is tested on the PAIR, because an assertion about null alone still passes on a build that renders both as zero. The Send and confirmation cases run the real explorer response through the real fetcher, the real review handler and the real confirmation screen, so they show which of the two scale questions each screen is asking.

Existing installs hold 18s that cannot be told apart retroactively -- that is the defect, and no migration can undo it. They display exactly as they do today until the next balance refresh, which rewrites tokenBalances wholesale and needs no user action. The schema version is not bumped: version 1 records stay valid and are read exactly as before.

The only 18s left in src/ are native ETH's real scale in uniswap.js and the fixed-point comparison scale in txValidation.js.

README.md

@@ -914,6 +914,15 @@ anywhere, and a holding of it carries no quantity either: its balance is `null`
 printing `0.0000` for money that is really there. `0` is a real scale and is
 never treated as absent.
 
+`tokenBalances[].decimals` is therefore the explorer's own answer and nothing
+else, which is not the same question as the scale a screen should render at.
+Anything that needs the second one calls `resolveTokenDecimals()` — the balance
+list, the approval and swap lines, and the Send screen, which carries the
+resolved scale onto the pending transaction for `transferAmount.js` to encode
+and compare against. Reading the stored field directly instead answers `null`
+for a bundled or tracked token the explorer merely omitted, which is not a
+refusal the wallet has any reason to make.
+
 #### Partial USD totals
 
 Prices are fetched for the top 25 tokens only, so an address can hold assets the

TODO.md

@@ -132,7 +132,12 @@ but the review is broader than any of them.
   they do today until the next balance refresh, which rewrites `tokenBalances`
   wholesale and needs no user action. The only `18`s left in `src/` are native
   ETH's real scale in `src/shared/uniswap.js` and the fixed-point comparison
-  scale in `src/shared/txValidation.js`.
+  scale in `src/shared/txValidation.js`. `tokenBalances[].decimals` is the
+  explorer's answer alone and not the scale a screen renders at, so the Send
+  screen resolves through `resolveTokenDecimals()` like every other consumer:
+  reading the stored field raw carried a `null` into `estimateGas()` for a
+  bundled token such as WETH, which reported an unestimable network fee and left
+  Send disabled behind a message no retry could clear.
 
 - 2026-08-23: The background no longer reads or writes the shared `state`
   singleton ([#324](https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/324)), which

src/popup/views/send.js

@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ const {
 const { state, currentAddress } = require("../../shared/state");
 let ctx;
 const { getProvider } = require("../../shared/balances");
+const { resolveTokenDecimals } = require("../../shared/approvalAmount");
 const { resolveSymbol } = require("../../shared/tokenList");
 const { isLowHolderCount } = require("../../shared/holders");
 const { isSpoofedSymbol } = require("../../shared/symbolSpoof");
@@ -244,8 +245,22 @@ function init(_ctx) {
             // screen states an unknown balance as unknown, and
             // validateTransfer() treats it as no balance to spend from, which
             // is the fail-closed side of an amount nobody can check.
-            tokenBalance = tb ? (tb.balance != null ? tb.balance : null) : "0";
-            tokenDecimals = tb ? tb.decimals : null;
+            tokenBalance = tb ? (tb.balance ?? null) : "0";
+            // Resolved the same way balances.js resolved the scale it
+            // DISPLAYED this token's balance at: bundled list, then the user's
+            // tracked tokens, then the explorer. The stored
+            // tokenBalances[].decimals is the explorer's own answer alone, so
+            // reading it raw carries a null forward for a token the wallet
+            // does know the scale of — and displayedDecimals() then throws
+            // inside estimateGas(), which the confirmation screen reports as
+            // an unestimable fee. Unsendable, over a scale that was never in
+            // doubt (https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/349).
+            // Still null when nothing knows: no fallback, and the unknown
+            // path below is then the real one.
+            tokenDecimals = resolveTokenDecimals(token, {
+                trackedTokens: state.trackedTokens,
+                wallets: state.wallets,
+            });
         }
 
         ctx.showConfirmTx({

tests/unknownScaleDisplay.test.js

@@ -0,0 +1,185 @@
+// What the screens that READ a stored token balance do with a holding whose
+// scale nothing knows.
+//
+// https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/349 stopped `fetchTokenBalances()`
+// fabricating a scale of 18, so a row it cannot state a quantity for is now
+// stored with `balance: null`. Every reader of that field therefore has two
+// distinct inputs where it used to have one, and the property that has to hold
+// at each of them is the same one this codebase keeps losing:
+//
+//     null (unknown) and 0 (genuinely zero) must produce DIFFERENT output.
+//
+// Losing it is what https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/246,
+// https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/306,
+// https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/322,
+// https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/359 and
+// https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/364 each were. So every case
+// below asserts the pair, not just that the null branch does something
+// reasonable: an assertion on the null alone still passes on a build that
+// renders both as zero, which is precisely the build being guarded against.
+//
+// The writer half — that the fetcher stores null rather than 18 — is in
+// tests/fabricatedDecimals.test.js, and the Send and confirmation screens are
+// in tests/unknownScaleSend.test.js.
+
+"use strict";
+
+// helpers.js reaches for both at module scope through the modules it pulls in.
+globalThis.chrome = {
+    storage: {
+        local: {
+            get: () => Promise.resolve({}),
+            set: () => Promise.resolve(),
+        },
+    },
+    runtime: { sendMessage: () => {} },
+};
+globalThis.document = {
+    getElementById: () => null,
+    createElement: () => ({ style: {}, classList: { toggle() {} } }),
+    body: { prepend: () => {} },
+    addEventListener: () => {},
+};
+
+const {
+    balanceLine,
+    balanceLinesForAddress,
+    addressHoldsFunds,
+} = require("../src/popup/views/helpers");
+const {
+    prices,
+    clearPrices,
+    getAddressValue,
+} = require("../src/shared/prices");
+const { state } = require("../src/shared/state");
+
+const NOVEL = "0x1111111111111111111111111111111111111111";
+
+// One stored tokenBalances row. `balance: null` is what balances.js writes for
+// a holding whose scale nothing knows; "0.0" is a quantity that was actually
+// established and is zero.
+function holding(balance) {
+    return {
+        address: NOVEL,
+        symbol: "NOVEL",
+        decimals: balance === null ? null : 18,
+        balance,
+        holders: 50000,
+    };
+}
+
+function address(balance) {
+    return {
+        address: "0x" + "a".repeat(40),
+        balance: "0",
+        tokenBalances: [holding(balance)],
+    };
+}
+
+// The quantity cell of a rendered row, which is the second of the two spans
+// inside the fixed-width span.
+function quantities(html) {
+    return [...html.matchAll(/<span>([^<]*)<\/span>/g)].map((m) => m[1]);
+}
+
+beforeEach(() => {
+    clearPrices();
+    state.wallets = [];
+    state.trackedTokens = [];
+    state.activeAddress = null;
+});
+
+afterEach(() => {
+    clearPrices();
+});
+
+describe("balanceLine", () => {
+    test("an unknown quantity and a zero one render differently", () => {
+        const unknown = balanceLine("NOVEL", null, null, NOVEL);
+        const zero = balanceLine("NOVEL", 0, null, NOVEL);
+        expect(unknown).not.toBe(zero);
+        expect(quantities(unknown)).toEqual(["NOVEL", "quantity unknown"]);
+        expect(quantities(zero)).toEqual(["NOVEL", "0.0000"]);
+    });
+
+    test("an unknown quantity produces no fiat figure, a zero one does", () => {
+        prices.NOVEL = 3;
+        const unknown = balanceLine("NOVEL", null, 3, NOVEL);
+        const zero = balanceLine("NOVEL", 0, 3, NOVEL);
+        // A price times an unknown quantity is not $0.00: that is the same
+        // claim of "nothing here" the quantity cell just refused to make.
+        expect(unknown).toContain(
+            '<span class="text-right text-muted flex-1">&nbsp;</span>',
+        );
+        expect(zero).toContain(
+            '<span class="text-right text-muted flex-1">$0.00</span>',
+        );
+    });
+});
+
+describe("balanceLinesForAddress", () => {
+    // The show-zero setting is a statement about zeroes. An unknown quantity
+    // is not one, so hiding the row would assert the zero nobody established
+    // and the holding would vanish from the list entirely.
+    test("hiding zero balances hides the zero row and keeps the unknown one", () => {
+        const unknown = balanceLinesForAddress(address(null), [], false);
+        const zero = balanceLinesForAddress(address("0.0"), [], false);
+        expect(unknown).not.toBe(zero);
+        expect(unknown).toContain("quantity unknown");
+        expect(unknown).toContain("NOVEL");
+        expect(zero).not.toContain("NOVEL");
+    });
+
+    test("showing zero balances still tells the two apart", () => {
+        const unknown = balanceLinesForAddress(address(null), [], true);
+        const zero = balanceLinesForAddress(address("0.0"), [], true);
+        expect(unknown).not.toBe(zero);
+        expect(quantities(unknown)).toEqual([
+            "ETH",
+            "0.0000",
+            "NOVEL",
+            "quantity unknown",
+        ]);
+        expect(quantities(zero)).toEqual(["ETH", "0.0000", "NOVEL", "0.0000"]);
+    });
+});
+
+describe("addressHoldsFunds", () => {
+    // Read by deleteAddress.js to decide whether removing the address is
+    // warned about. balances.js drops a row of zero base units before any
+    // scale is consulted, so a row that survived with no quantity is holding
+    // something, and the warning must err towards warning.
+    test("an unknown balance holds funds, a zero balance does not", () => {
+        expect(addressHoldsFunds(address(null))).toBe(true);
+        expect(addressHoldsFunds(address("0.0"))).toBe(false);
+    });
+});
+
+describe("getAddressValue", () => {
+    // `usd` is the value of what could be priced and `partial` says it is a
+    // floor rather than the total. An unpriceable holding is exactly what
+    // `partial` exists for; a holding of zero can neither add to the total nor
+    // make it incomplete.
+    test("an unknown balance makes the total partial, a zero balance does not", () => {
+        prices.ETH = 2000;
+        prices.NOVEL = 3;
+        const unknown = getAddressValue(address(null));
+        const zero = getAddressValue(address("0.0"));
+        expect(unknown).not.toEqual(zero);
+        expect(unknown).toEqual({ usd: 0, partial: true });
+        expect(zero).toEqual({ usd: 0, partial: false });
+    });
+
+    test("an unknown balance is not priced as zero of the token", () => {
+        prices.ETH = 2000;
+        prices.NOVEL = 3;
+        // The same row with a real quantity of 10 is worth $30. Neither that
+        // figure nor a confident $0.00 may be stated for the unknown one.
+        expect(getAddressValue(address("10.0"))).toEqual({
+            usd: 30,
+            partial: false,
+        });
+        expect(getAddressValue(address(null)).usd).toBe(0);
+        expect(getAddressValue(address(null)).partial).toBe(true);
+    });
+});

tests/unknownScaleSend.test.js

@@ -0,0 +1,343 @@
+// The Send and confirmation screens for a token whose explorer row carries no
+// decimals.
+//
+// https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/349 made `fetchTokenBalances()`
+// store the explorer's own answer — `null` when it reported none — while the
+// scale a balance is DISPLAYED at is resolved separately: bundled list, then
+// the user's tracked tokens, then the explorer. The two are different
+// questions, and `tokenBalances[].decimals` only answers the second one.
+//
+// A reader that takes the stored field for the display scale therefore gets
+// `null` for a token the wallet does know the scale of. On the Send path that
+// null reaches `displayedDecimals()` inside `estimateGas()`, which throws, is
+// caught as an unavailable fee, and disables Send behind "The network fee could
+// not be estimated" — untrue, unactionable, and for a bundled token like WETH
+// or DAI whose scale was never in doubt. So the Send screen resolves the scale
+// the same way the balance list did, and only carries a null forward when that
+// resolution genuinely answers null.
+//
+// Driven through the real `fetchTokenBalances()`, the real Send review handler
+// and the real confirmation screen: a test that hand-wrote `decimals: null`
+// onto state would not show which of the two questions each screen is asking.
+//
+// The reader sites that are pure display are in tests/unknownScaleDisplay.test.js,
+// and what the fetcher stores is in tests/fabricatedDecimals.test.js.
+
+"use strict";
+
+jest.mock("../src/shared/log", () => ({
+    log: {
+        debugf: () => {},
+        infof: () => {},
+        warnf: () => {},
+        errorf: () => {},
+    },
+    debugFetch: jest.fn(),
+    setRuntimeDebug: () => {},
+    isDebug: () => false,
+}));
+
+// Everything the confirmation screen would reach the network for. The gas
+// estimate is the point: with a usable scale it must succeed, so that a failure
+// in these tests is a failure of the scale and not of the stub.
+const mockProvider = {
+    getFeeData: async () => ({
+        maxFeePerGas: 2000000000n,
+        gasPrice: 1000000000n,
+    }),
+    estimateGas: async () => 21000n,
+    getCode: async () => "0x",
+    getTransactionCount: async () => 1,
+    getBalance: async () => 0n,
+};
+
+jest.mock("../src/shared/balances", () => {
+    const actual = jest.requireActual("../src/shared/balances");
+    return { ...actual, getProvider: () => mockProvider };
+});
+
+// The confirmation screen's best-effort Etherscan label lookup is the one
+// thing here that reaches for fetch(). It is stubbed to fail, which is the
+// path it already takes offline; the assertion at the bottom of this file
+// pins that it is the ONLY fetch these screens make.
+global.fetch = jest.fn(() => {
+    throw new Error("tests must not perform network requests");
+});
+
+const { makeStorageStub } = require("./support/storageStub");
+global.chrome = { storage: makeStorageStub(), runtime: { sendMessage() {} } };
+
+// A stub DOM. Every id in index.html that these two views touch resolves to a
+// fresh recording element; nothing here depends on layout, only on what the
+// views write into the elements and which handlers they register.
+const elements = new Map();
+
+function makeEl(id) {
+    const handlers = new Map();
+    return {
+        id,
+        textContent: "",
+        innerHTML: "",
+        value: "",
+        disabled: false,
+        onclick: null,
+        style: {},
+        dataset: {},
+        classList: {
+            add() {},
+            remove() {},
+            toggle() {},
+            contains: () => false,
+        },
+        handlers,
+        addEventListener(name, fn) {
+            handlers.set(name, fn);
+        },
+        appendChild(child) {
+            return child;
+        },
+        querySelectorAll: () => [],
+        querySelector: () => null,
+        remove() {},
+        focus() {},
+    };
+}
+
+global.document = {
+    getElementById(id) {
+        if (!elements.has(id)) elements.set(id, makeEl(id));
+        return elements.get(id);
+    },
+    createElement: (tag) => makeEl(tag),
+    body: { prepend() {}, appendChild() {} },
+    addEventListener() {},
+};
+global.navigator = { clipboard: { writeText() {} } };
+
+const { parseUnits } = require("ethers");
+const { fetchTokenBalances } = require("../src/shared/balances");
+const { debugFetch } = require("../src/shared/log");
+const { state } = require("../src/shared/state");
+const {
+    displayedDecimals,
+    transferAmountUnits,
+} = require("../src/shared/transferAmount");
+const send = require("../src/popup/views/send");
+const confirmTx = require("../src/popup/views/confirmTx");
+const { TOKEN_BY_ADDRESS } = require("../src/shared/tokenList");
+
+const HOLDER = "0x" + "a".repeat(40);
+const RECIPIENT = "0xC0FfEE0000000000000000000000000000c0fFEe";
+const BLOCKSCOUT = "https://blockscout.example/api/v2";
+// Bundled, 18 decimals. The wallet knows this token's scale without asking
+// anyone, which is what makes an unsendable WETH a regression rather than a
+// refusal.
+const WETH = "0xC02aaA39b223FE8D0A0e5C4F27eAD9083C756Cc2";
+// Neither bundled nor tracked, so the explorer is the only possible source and
+// an omission there really is an unknown scale.
+const NOVEL = "0xE2E0000000000000000000000000000000000E2e";
+
+const FIVE_WETH = 5000000000000000000n;
+
+function row(token = {}, value = FIVE_WETH) {
+    return {
+        value: String(value),
+        token: {
+            type: "ERC-20",
+            address_hash: WETH,
+            symbol: "WETH",
+            name: "Wrapped Ether",
+            holders_count: "50000",
+            ...token,
+        },
+    };
+}
+
+// Fetch the explorer's rows through the real fetcher and put them exactly where
+// refreshBalances() puts them.
+async function fetchOnto(items) {
+    debugFetch.mockImplementation(async () => ({
+        ok: true,
+        status: 200,
+        statusText: "OK",
+        json: async () => items,
+    }));
+    const balances = await fetchTokenBalances(HOLDER, BLOCKSCOUT, []);
+    state.wallets = [
+        {
+            name: "Wallet 1",
+            addresses: [
+                { address: HOLDER, balance: "1.0", tokenBalances: balances },
+            ],
+        },
+    ];
+    state.selectedWallet = 0;
+    state.selectedAddress = 0;
+    return balances;
+}
+
+function el(id) {
+    return global.document.getElementById(id);
+}
+
+// Press Review on the Send screen and return the txInfo it hands the
+// confirmation screen.
+async function reviewSend(tokenAddress, amount) {
+    let handed = null;
+    send.init({ showConfirmTx: (info) => (handed = info) });
+    state.selectedToken = tokenAddress;
+    el("send-token").value = tokenAddress;
+    el("send-to").value = RECIPIENT;
+    el("send-amount").value = amount;
+    await el("btn-send-review").handlers.get("click")();
+    return handed;
+}
+
+// show() kicks off the gas estimate without awaiting it; this lets it settle.
+async function settle() {
+    for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) await new Promise((r) => setTimeout(r, 0));
+}
+
+function text(id) {
+    return el(id).textContent;
+}
+
+function errors() {
+    return el("confirm-errors").innerHTML;
+}
+
+function sendDisabled() {
+    return el("btn-confirm-send").disabled;
+}
+
+beforeEach(() => {
+    elements.clear();
+    debugFetch.mockReset();
+    state.wallets = [];
+    state.trackedTokens = [];
+    state.selectedToken = null;
+    state.fraudContracts = [];
+    state.hideLowHolderTokens = false;
+    state.currentView = null;
+});
+
+describe("the Send screen resolves the scale rather than reading the stored one", () => {
+    test("the bundled list knows WETH, and the explorer row does not report a scale", async () => {
+        expect(TOKEN_BY_ADDRESS.get(WETH.toLowerCase()).decimals).toBe(18);
+        const balances = await fetchOnto([row()]);
+        // Stored: the explorer's own answer, which is nothing. Reading THIS is
+        // what carried a null into the fee estimate.
+        expect(balances[0].decimals).toBeNull();
+        // Displayed: the bundled scale, so the quantity on screen is real.
+        expect(balances[0].balance).toBe("5.0");
+    });
+
+    test("the review hands the confirmation screen the resolved scale, not the stored null", async () => {
+        const balances = await fetchOnto([row()]);
+        const txInfo = await reviewSend(WETH, "1.5");
+        expect(txInfo.tokenDecimals).toBe(18);
+        expect(txInfo.tokenDecimals).not.toBe(balances[0].decimals);
+        expect(txInfo.tokenBalance).toBe("5.0");
+    });
+
+    test("that scale estimates a fee and leaves Send enabled", async () => {
+        await fetchOnto([row()]);
+        const txInfo = await reviewSend(WETH, "1.5");
+        confirmTx.show(txInfo);
+        await settle();
+        // The regression: displayedDecimals(null) threw in estimateGas(), the
+        // catch reported the fee as unknown, and Send stayed disabled behind a
+        // message about the network fee that no retry could clear.
+        expect(text("confirm-fee-amount")).not.toBe("Unable to estimate");
+        expect(text("confirm-fee-amount")).toContain("ETH");
+        expect(errors()).toBe("");
+        expect(sendDisabled()).toBe(false);
+    });
+
+    test("and the transfer encodes at the scale that was displayed", async () => {
+        await fetchOnto([row()]);
+        const txInfo = await reviewSend(WETH, "1.5");
+        // The two calls confirmTx makes with this field: the gas estimate's
+        // scale, and the encode, which compares it against the contract's own
+        // decimals() before parsing.
+        expect(displayedDecimals(txInfo.tokenDecimals)).toBe(18);
+        expect(
+            transferAmountUnits(txInfo.amount, txInfo.tokenDecimals, 18n),
+        ).toBe(parseUnits("1.5", 18));
+    });
+
+    test("a token nothing knows the scale of is still refused, and says why", async () => {
+        await fetchOnto([
+            row({ address_hash: NOVEL, symbol: "NOVEL", name: "Novel Token" }),
+        ]);
+        const txInfo = await reviewSend(NOVEL, "1.5");
+        // No fallback was introduced: resolution answers null here, and the
+        // null is what goes forward.
+        expect(txInfo.tokenDecimals).toBeNull();
+        expect(txInfo.tokenBalance).toBeNull();
+        confirmTx.show(txInfo);
+        await settle();
+        expect(text("confirm-balance")).toBe("unknown (NOVEL)");
+        expect(errors()).toContain("This token&#39;s balance is unknown");
+        expect(sendDisabled()).toBe(true);
+    });
+});
+
+describe("the confirmation screen tells an unknown balance from a zero one", () => {
+    function txInfo(tokenBalance) {
+        return {
+            from: HOLDER,
+            to: RECIPIENT,
+            ensName: null,
+            amount: "1.5",
+            token: NOVEL,
+            balance: "1.0",
+            tokenSymbol: "NOVEL",
+            tokenBalance,
+            tokenDecimals: tokenBalance === null ? null : 18,
+        };
+    }
+
+    async function render(tokenBalance) {
+        state.wallets = [
+            {
+                name: "Wallet 1",
+                addresses: [
+                    { address: HOLDER, balance: "1.0", tokenBalances: [] },
+                ],
+            },
+        ];
+        state.selectedWallet = 0;
+        state.selectedAddress = 0;
+        confirmTx.show(txInfo(tokenBalance));
+        await settle();
+        return { balance: text("confirm-balance"), errors: errors() };
+    }
+
+    test("the balance line states unknown rather than a quantity of zero", async () => {
+        const unknown = await render(null);
+        const zero = await render("0.0");
+        expect(unknown.balance).not.toBe(zero.balance);
+        expect(unknown.balance).toBe("unknown (NOVEL)");
+        expect(zero.balance).toBe("0.0 NOVEL");
+    });
+
+    // Both hit INSUFFICIENT_TOKEN — an unknown balance is treated as nothing to
+    // spend from, which is the fail-closed side — but "you have 0.0" is a claim
+    // about the holding, and this one has no established quantity to claim.
+    test("the insufficient-balance message names the reason, not a figure", async () => {
+        const unknown = await render(null);
+        const zero = await render("0.0");
+        expect(unknown.errors).not.toBe(zero.errors);
+        expect(unknown.errors).toContain("This token&#39;s balance is unknown");
+        expect(unknown.errors).not.toContain("You have");
+        expect(zero.errors).toContain("You have 0.0 NOVEL");
+        expect(zero.errors).not.toContain("balance is unknown");
+    });
+});
+
+test("the only network these screens reached for is the Etherscan label lookup", () => {
+    for (const [url] of global.fetch.mock.calls) {
+        expect(String(url)).toMatch(/^https:\/\/etherscan\.io\/address\//);
+    }
+});