fix: render the view "Back" lands on after the popup is reopened (closes #268)

goBack() only unhid its target. A reopened popup renders the wallet list
and the one view restoreView() lands on, so every other view is still the
blank static template from index.html: pressing Back from Settings onto an
address showed an empty address line and no balances, and the same held for
address-token, receive, confirm-tx and transaction.

The per-view dispatch and its data guards move out of restoreView() into
src/popup/viewRouter.js, and goBack() now routes a popped view through the
same code by way of a renderer index.js registers with setBackRenderer().
A view whose backing state is gone falls back to Home the way the restore
does, rather than showing an empty template.

The Back path renders only a view this page load has not rendered yet.
viewRouter.js keeps a page-load-scoped set of rendered views, written by
showView() — the last thing every render path runs, forward navigation and
the restore alike, so a view added later registers itself rather than
needing to be remembered. Back onto a view already in that set unhides it
and nothing more, exactly as it does for a view outside RESTORABLE_VIEWS:
rendering a second time would re-fetch and overwrite what the view holds,
such as an edit typed into Settings and not yet saved. Home stays the
exception and is re-rendered on every Back, as it was when goBack() called
the renderWalletList() registered through setRenderMain(), so the wallet
list reflects what changed while the user was away from it.

tests/backNavigation.test.js drives the real goBack() over the reproduction
and over each of address-token, receive, confirm-tx, transaction, success-tx
and error-tx, with and without their backing state, and pins that a view
this page load already rendered — a live-session view, or Settings revisited
— is only unhidden, while Home still re-renders. tests/e2e/run.js adds three
cases against the real popup in a real browser, because make check cannot
see a blank view: a real close and reopen then Back onto the address screen
and onto Receive, and an in-session Back onto Settings that must keep
unsaved input. All three were demonstrated failing first.

TODO.md

@@ -45,32 +45,6 @@ undefined identifiers, which is how
 
 # Completed Steps
 
-- 2026-08-14: Approving a site connection is no longer a race against the popup
-  closing. The decision now rides the approval port the popup already holds,
-  which is the same channel the close disconnects, so it is delivered ahead of
-  that disconnect however fast the teardown is; `windows.onRemoved` no longer
-  decides a site approval whose port is connected, since that event is ordered
-  against nothing either. Rejecting and closing without deciding both still
-  report a rejection, and the popup delays its own close by nothing. The e2e
-  harness's deferred-`window.close()` accommodation is gone with it, so the two
-  site-prompt tests now drive the shipped decide-then-close in a real Chromium;
-  against the unfixed code the approval came back to the page as
-  `{"settled":"rejected","code":4001}`
-  ([#275](https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/275)).
-- 2026-08-12: EIP-1193 error codes now reach the page. `src/content/inpage.js`
-  rebuilt every failure as `new Error(error.message)`, so the code the
-  background produced and the content script relayed intact was dropped in the
-  last hop and a dApp checking `err.code === 4001` saw `undefined` — a wallet
-  the user deliberately declined was indistinguishable from one that broke. The
-  provider now rejects with a `ProviderRpcError` carrying `code` and, where the
-  boundary sent one, `data`, passed through verbatim rather than matched against
-  a list, so 4001, 4100 and 4902 all arrive and a future code needs no edit
-  here. An error the background sent with no code stays a plain `Error` with no
-  `code` property, and `message` is unchanged in every case. All four request
-  entry points (`request`, `enable`, `send`, `sendAsync`) are covered by
-  `tests/inpageErrors.test.js`, and the e2e probe that printed the missing code
-  now requires it on the page's Error as well as on the wire, for all four
-  rejected flows ([#274](https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/274)).
 - 2026-08-12: "Back" now renders the screen it lands on instead of only unhiding
   it. A reopened popup renders the wallet list and the one screen it restores
   onto, so every screen further down the stack was still the blank template from
@@ -88,20 +62,6 @@ undefined identifiers, which is how
   and by three end-to-end cases against the real popup, each demonstrated
   failing on the unfixed build
   ([#268](https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/268)).
-- 2026-08-12: `KNOWN_SYMBOLS` now maps a symbol to the set of contract addresses
-  that bear it, not to one of them. A ticker is not unique: seven of the 512
-  bundled tokens — `FRAX`, `REUSD`, `TON`, `EURE`, `MSUSD`, `MUSD` and `JPYC` —
-  share a symbol with another bundled entry at a different real contract, and
-  the table, built from the list first-wins, kept only the earlier one. The
-  other seven were judged spoofs of their own symbol at their own address and
-  hidden from the balance list, the history and the send selector, so a holder
-  could not spend them. Both contracts of each pair come from the same CoinGecko
-  fetch of 2026-02-27, so neither was stale and neither was dropped.
-  `isSpoofedSymbol()` asks set membership instead of equality, which does not
-  loosen the rule — a contract outside the set is still a spoof — and a test now
-  walks `TOKENS` asserting no bundled token is filtered at its own address,
-  which is the walk the suite lacked
-  ([#276](https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/AutistMask/issues/276)).
 - 2026-08-12: The dApp approval round trips are driven end to end in the
   browser. A test page served by the harness speaks EIP-1193 to the real inpage
   provider through the real content script, background worker and approval popup

src/background/index.js

@@ -279,50 +279,13 @@ function requestSignApproval(origin, hostname, signParams, approvedFrom) {
     });
 }
 
-// Anything only the extension's own pages may say. A content script speaks
+// Detect when an approval popup (browser-action) closes without a response.
-// with the page's URL, so this is what separates the popup from the site the
+// TX and sign approvals now use windows.create() and are handled by the
-// popup is being asked about.
+// windowsApi.onRemoved listener below, but we still handle site-connection
-function isExtensionSender(sender) {
+// approval disconnects here.
-    const extUrl = runtime.getURL("");
-    return !!(sender && sender.url && sender.url.startsWith(extUrl));
-}
-
-// The approval popup's port: it carries the user's decision on a
-// site-connection approval, and its disconnect is how that approval learns the
-// popup closed without one.
-//
-// The decision travels this port rather than a one-off runtime.sendMessage()
-// for exactly one reason: the port is also what the popup's window.close()
-// disconnects. A message posted on a port is delivered before that port's
-// disconnect, so approve-then-close settles as an approval no matter how fast
-// the teardown is. Sent as a one-off message the two crossed on independent
-// channels with nothing ordering them, and the teardown won every time when
-// the prompt was driven in a tab: the user approved and the dApp was told they
-// had refused.
-//
-// TX and sign approvals do not decide here. They stay pending across a
-// disconnect — the user can reopen the toolbar popup — and are rejected by the
-// windowsApi.onRemoved listener below.
 runtime.onConnect.addListener((port) => {
     if (port.name.startsWith("approval:")) {
         const id = port.name.split(":")[1];
-        if (pendingApprovals[id]) {
-            // This approval has a popup that can speak for it, so its
-            // disconnect is a trustworthy "closed"; see onRemoved below.
-            pendingApprovals[id].portConnected = true;
-        }
-        port.onMessage.addListener((msg) => {
-            if (!msg || msg.type !== "AUTISTMASK_APPROVAL_DECISION") return;
-            if (!isExtensionSender(port.sender)) return;
-            const approval = pendingApprovals[id];
-            if (!approval || approval.type === "tx" || approval.type === "sign")
-                return;
-            settleApproval(id, {
-                approved: !!msg.approved,
-                remember: !!msg.remember,
-            });
-            resetPopupUrl();
-        });
         port.onDisconnect.addListener(() => {
             const approval = pendingApprovals[id];
             if (approval) {
@@ -869,32 +832,20 @@ startBackgroundJobs();
 // window is an ordinary event with an attempt already in flight behind it.
 // settleApproval() refuses those, which leaves the attempt to report its real
 // outcome to the page.
-//
-// A site-connection approval whose popup connected its port is not decided
-// here. That popup approves and closes in the same breath, and this event
-// races the decision on a channel of its own — the same race the port exists
-// to end. Its port disconnect says the same thing this event does, in an order
-// that is defined, so the disconnect is left to say it. The window closing
-// before any port connected is the one case with nothing else to speak for it,
-// and is rejected here so the dApp is not left waiting on a window that is
-// gone.
 if (windowsApi && windowsApi.onRemoved) {
     windowsApi.onRemoved.addListener((windowId) => {
         for (const [id, approval] of Object.entries(pendingApprovals)) {
             if (approval.windowId !== windowId) continue;
-            const isSite = approval.type !== "tx" && approval.type !== "sign";
+            const rejection =
-            if (isSite && approval.portConnected) continue;
+                approval.type === "tx" || approval.type === "sign"
-            settleApproval(
+                    ? {
-                id,
-                isSite
-                    ? { approved: false, remember: false }
-                    : {
                           error: {
                               code: 4001,
                               message: "User rejected the request.",
                           },
-                      },
+                      }
-            );
+                    : { approved: false, remember: false };
+            settleApproval(id, rejection);
         }
     });
 }
@@ -921,17 +872,19 @@ runtime.onMessage.addListener((msg, sender, sendResponse) => {
     }
 
     // Validate that popup-only messages originate from the extension itself.
-    // The site-connection decision is not here: it is a port message, and it
-    // is checked the same way where the port is served.
     const POPUP_ONLY_TYPES = [
         "AUTISTMASK_GET_APPROVAL",
+        "AUTISTMASK_APPROVAL_RESPONSE",
         "AUTISTMASK_TX_RESPONSE",
         "AUTISTMASK_SIGN_RESPONSE",
     ];
-    if (POPUP_ONLY_TYPES.includes(msg.type) && !isExtensionSender(sender)) {
+    if (POPUP_ONLY_TYPES.includes(msg.type)) {
+        const extUrl = runtime.getURL("");
+        if (!sender.url || !sender.url.startsWith(extUrl)) {
             sendResponse({ error: "Unauthorized sender" });
             return false;
         }
+    }
 
     if (msg.type === "AUTISTMASK_GET_APPROVAL") {
         const approval = pendingApprovals[msg.id];
@@ -962,6 +915,15 @@ runtime.onMessage.addListener((msg, sender, sendResponse) => {
         return false;
     }
 
+    if (msg.type === "AUTISTMASK_APPROVAL_RESPONSE") {
+        settleApproval(msg.id, {
+            approved: msg.approved,
+            remember: msg.remember,
+        });
+        resetPopupUrl();
+        return false;
+    }
+
     if (msg.type === "AUTISTMASK_TX_RESPONSE") {
         const approval = pendingApprovals[msg.id];
         if (!approval) return false;

src/content/inpage.js

@@ -11,39 +11,6 @@
     let nextId = 1;
     const pending = {};
 
-    // EIP-1193 ProviderRpcError: `code`, `message`, optional `data`. A class
-    // rather than properties bolted onto an Error because this object crosses
-    // no boundary after construction — it is built in the page's own realm and
-    // handed straight to the caller's catch — so the prototype survives and
-    // `error.name` is a stable thing for a dApp to see.
-    class ProviderRpcError extends Error {
-        constructor(code, message, data) {
-            super(message);
-            this.name = "ProviderRpcError";
-            this.code = code;
-            if (data !== undefined) this.data = data;
-        }
-    }
-
-    // Rebuild a boundary error as the error the page catches, carrying the
-    // code (and data) the extension reported. Without this a dApp cannot tell
-    // a user's refusal (4001) from a wallet that broke, and retries or shows
-    // an error instead of accepting the refusal.
-    //
-    // Whatever code arrived is passed through verbatim rather than being
-    // matched against a list: the extension emits 4001, 4100 and 4902 today,
-    // and a code this file has never heard of is still the truth about what
-    // happened. An error reported with no code at all stays a plain Error —
-    // a ProviderRpcError whose `code` is undefined would advertise a
-    // conformance it does not have. `message` is untouched in every case.
-    function toPageError(error) {
-        const message = (error && error.message) || "Request failed";
-        if (error && error.code !== undefined && error.code !== null) {
-            return new ProviderRpcError(error.code, message, error.data);
-        }
-        return new Error(message);
-    }
-
     // Listen for responses from the content script
     window.addEventListener("message", function onUuid(event) {
         if (event.source !== window) return;
@@ -53,7 +20,7 @@
         if (!p) return;
         delete pending[id];
         if (error) {
-            p.reject(toPageError(error));
+            p.reject(new Error(error.message || "Request failed"));
         } else {
             p.resolve(result);
         }

src/popup/views/approval.js

@@ -441,7 +441,7 @@ function showSignApproval(details) {
 
 function show(id) {
     approvalId = id;
-    approvalPort = runtime.connect({ name: "approval:" + id });
+    runtime.connect({ name: "approval:" + id });
     runtime.sendMessage({ type: "AUTISTMASK_GET_APPROVAL", id }, (details) => {
         if (!details) {
             window.close();
@@ -470,14 +470,6 @@ function show(id) {
 }
 
 let approvalId = null;
-// The port this approval was opened on. Closing this window disconnects it,
-// and the background treats that disconnect as "closed without deciding" for a
-// site connection — so the decision goes out on this same port and not as a
-// one-off message. One channel is ordered: a message posted on it is delivered
-// before its own disconnect, however immediately the close follows. Two
-// channels were not, and the close won, reporting a user who approved as
-// having refused.
-let approvalPort = null;
 let pendingTxDetails = null;
 // The exact objects shown to the user, kept so the popup signs what it
 // displayed rather than re-fetching or re-populating anything at approval
@@ -545,20 +537,6 @@ function clearSignPassword() {
     hideError("approve-sign-error");
 }
 
-// Answer a site-connection approval and close. The decision goes out on the
-// approval port — see approvalPort above for why — and carries no approval id,
-// because the port name already names the approval the background will settle.
-function decideSite(approved) {
-    if (approvalPort) {
-        approvalPort.postMessage({
-            type: "AUTISTMASK_APPROVAL_DECISION",
-            approved,
-            remember: $("approve-remember").checked,
-        });
-    }
-    window.close();
-}
-
 function init(ctx) {
     onViewLeave("approve-tx", clearTxPassword);
     onViewLeave("approve-sign", clearSignPassword);
@@ -569,11 +547,25 @@ function init(ctx) {
     });
 
     $("btn-approve").addEventListener("click", () => {
-        decideSite(true);
+        const remember = $("approve-remember").checked;
+        runtime.sendMessage({
+            type: "AUTISTMASK_APPROVAL_RESPONSE",
+            id: approvalId,
+            approved: true,
+            remember,
+        });
+        window.close();
     });
 
     $("btn-reject").addEventListener("click", () => {
-        decideSite(false);
+        const remember = $("approve-remember").checked;
+        runtime.sendMessage({
+            type: "AUTISTMASK_APPROVAL_RESPONSE",
+            id: approvalId,
+            approved: false,
+            remember,
+        });
+        window.close();
     });
 
     $("btn-approve-tx").addEventListener("click", async () => {

src/shared/symbolSpoof.js

@@ -8,19 +8,12 @@
 // either verdict alone, because the balance list is where the user forms
 // their belief about what they own (issue #235).
 //
-// KNOWN_SYMBOLS maps a symbol to the set of lowercased contract addresses
+// KNOWN_SYMBOLS maps a symbol to the lowercased contract address that may
-// that may bear it, or to null.  Null means the symbol belongs to the native
+// bear it, or to null.  Null means the symbol belongs to the native asset,
-// asset, which has no contract at all, so no contract may bear it and every
+// which has no contract at all, so no contract may bear it and every one
-// one that does is a spoof.  "ETH" is the only such entry today; the rule is
+// that does is a spoof.  "ETH" is the only such entry today; the rule is
 // written so that a second one needs no change here or at any call site.
 //
-// The value is a set because a ticker is not unique: seven symbols in the
-// bundled list belong to two real contracts each, and answering with one of
-// them hid the other one's holders' money (issue #276).  Membership, not
-// equality, is therefore the question — but it is the same question, asked of
-// a table that can now state the truth.  Every address in a set is one the
-// wallet ships as a real token; a contract outside the set is still a spoof.
-//
 // The symbol is attacker-controlled — it is whatever the ERC-20 contract
 // returns — so the lookup is done on a normalized form (issue #260): the
 // question is whether the symbol reaches the user's eye as a known one,
@@ -100,7 +93,7 @@ function isSpoofedSymbol(symbol, contractAddress) {
     if (!KNOWN_SYMBOLS.has(sym)) return false;
     const legit = KNOWN_SYMBOLS.get(sym);
     if (legit === null) return true;
-    return !legit.has(contract);
+    return contract !== normalizeAddress(legit);
 }
 
 module.exports = {

src/shared/tokenList.js

@@ -3607,33 +3607,14 @@ for (const t of TOKENS) {
     TOKEN_BY_ADDRESS.set(t.address.toLowerCase(), t);
 }
 
-// Build a map of symbol (uppercased) -> the set of contract addresses
+// Build a map of symbol (uppercased) -> legitimate contract address (lowercased).
-// (lowercased) that legitimately bear it.  Used for spoofed-symbol detection.
+// Used for spoofed-symbol detection. "ETH" maps to null (native token).
-// "ETH" maps to null: the native asset has no contract, so no contract may
-// bear its symbol.
-//
-// The value is a set and not a single address because tickers are not unique
-// and the list above proves it: seven of these 512 tokens share a symbol with
-// another entry — FRAX, REUSD, TON, EURE, MSUSD, MUSD and JPYC — at two
-// different real contracts each, all of them from the same source fetch.  A
-// one-address-per-symbol table can only answer that by picking a winner, and
-// the loser is then a token in our own bundled list that the spoof filter
-// hides from the balance list, the history and the send selector at its own
-// address, so the user cannot spend it (issue #276).  Naming every address
-// that bears the symbol is the only shape that says what is true; it does not
-// loosen the rule, because a contract outside the set is still a spoof.
 const KNOWN_SYMBOLS = new Map();
 KNOWN_SYMBOLS.set("ETH", null);
 for (const t of TOKENS) {
     const upper = t.symbol.toUpperCase();
     if (!KNOWN_SYMBOLS.has(upper)) {
-        KNOWN_SYMBOLS.set(upper, new Set());
+        KNOWN_SYMBOLS.set(upper, t.address.toLowerCase());
-    }
-    const addresses = KNOWN_SYMBOLS.get(upper);
-    // A null entry is the native asset and stays null: an ERC-20 that reports
-    // the native symbol does not thereby become entitled to it.
-    if (addresses !== null) {
-        addresses.add(t.address.toLowerCase());
     }
 }
 

tests/backgroundApproval.test.js

@@ -32,21 +32,6 @@ const ORIGIN = "https://dapp.example";
 const HOSTNAME = "dapp.example";
 const EXT_URL = "chrome-extension://autistmask/";
 
-// An origin the persisted state has never allowed, so asking to connect from
-// it raises a prompt rather than being answered from allowedSites.
-const FRESH_ORIGIN = "https://fresh.example";
-
-// The approval id in the most recent popup URL of a list, or null when none
-// of them carries one. Takes both shapes: the absolute URL windows.create()
-// is given and the extension-relative one action.setPopup() is given.
-function approvalIdIn(urls) {
-    for (let i = urls.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
-        if (!urls[i] || !urls[i].includes("?approval=")) continue;
-        return new URL(urls[i], EXT_URL).searchParams.get("approval");
-    }
-    return null;
-}
-
 // What the dApp asks for: no nonce, no gas, no fees. This is the shape that
 // makes a duplicate broadcast possible at all.
 const TX_PARAMS = {
@@ -161,13 +146,8 @@ function loadBackground(options) {
 
     let messageListener = null;
     let windowRemovedListener = null;
-    let connectListener = null;
     const created = [];
     const removed = [];
-    // Every URL the background put on the browser action. A site approval
-    // raised through action.openPopup() opens no window at all, so this is
-    // the only place its id appears.
-    const actionPopups = [];
 
     global.chrome = {
         storage: {
@@ -183,14 +163,7 @@ function loadBackground(options) {
                     messageListener = fn;
                 },
             },
-            // Captured, not swallowed: the approval port is what carries a
+            onConnect: { addListener: () => {} },
-            // site connection's decision and the popup teardown that races
-            // it, so a no-op stub here hides the whole subject of #275.
-            onConnect: {
-                addListener: (fn) => {
-                    connectListener = fn;
-                },
-            },
             lastError: null,
         },
         windows: {
@@ -216,17 +189,7 @@ function loadBackground(options) {
             query: (q, cb) => cb([]),
             sendMessage: () => {},
         },
-        action: {
+        action: { setPopup: () => {} },
-            setPopup: (o) => {
-                actionPopups.push(o.popup);
-            },
-            // The production route for a site connection. Present only when
-            // a test asks for it, because with it the prompt is the toolbar
-            // popup: no window is created, so windows.onRemoved can never
-            // fire for it and the port disconnect is the only close signal
-            // that exists.
-            ...(opts.actionPopup ? { openPopup: () => Promise.resolve() } : {}),
-        },
     };
 
     require("../src/background/index");
@@ -285,70 +248,6 @@ function loadBackground(options) {
         };
     }
 
-    // A dApp asking to connect. The origin defaults to one the persisted
-    // state has never allowed, so the request really does raise a prompt
-    // instead of being answered from allowedSites.
-    function requestSite(origin) {
-        let rpcResult = null;
-        messageListener(
-            {
-                type: "AUTISTMASK_RPC",
-                method: "eth_requestAccounts",
-                params: [],
-            },
-            { origin: origin || FRESH_ORIGIN },
-            (r) => {
-                rpcResult = r;
-            },
-        );
-        return {
-            // Wherever the prompt went: the toolbar popup URL when
-            // action.openPopup() carried it, the created window otherwise.
-            id: () =>
-                approvalIdIn(actionPopups) ||
-                approvalIdIn(created.map((c) => c.url)),
-            result: () => rpcResult,
-        };
-    }
-
-    // The popup's approval port, as the browser delivers it. Messages posted
-    // on a port and that port's disconnect travel one channel in FIFO order,
-    // which is exactly the property the fix rests on, so this stub delivers
-    // them in the order the caller emits them and never reorders them.
-    function connectApproval(id, senderUrl) {
-        const onMessage = [];
-        const onDisconnect = [];
-        const port = {
-            name: "approval:" + id,
-            sender: {
-                url:
-                    senderUrl === undefined
-                        ? EXT_URL + "src/popup/index.html?approval=" + id
-                        : senderUrl,
-            },
-            onMessage: { addListener: (fn) => onMessage.push(fn) },
-            onDisconnect: { addListener: (fn) => onDisconnect.push(fn) },
-        };
-        connectListener(port);
-        return {
-            decide: (approved, remember) => {
-                for (const fn of onMessage) {
-                    fn(
-                        {
-                            type: "AUTISTMASK_APPROVAL_DECISION",
-                            approved,
-                            remember: !!remember,
-                        },
-                        port,
-                    );
-                }
-            },
-            disconnect: () => {
-                for (const fn of onDisconnect) fn(port);
-            },
-        };
-    }
-
     // The user closes the approval popup. `created` is index-aligned with the
     // ids the window stub hands back, so window 1 is the first popup opened.
     function closeWindow(windowId) {
@@ -359,8 +258,6 @@ function loadBackground(options) {
         send,
         requestTx,
         requestSign,
-        requestSite,
-        connectApproval,
         closeWindow,
         broadcastTransaction,
         loadState,
@@ -1161,136 +1058,3 @@ describe("popup-only messages", () => {
         });
     });
 });
-
-// A site connection decided in a popup that closes on the next line.
-//
-// The decision and the teardown are two events the popup emits back to back,
-// and the background must not be able to reach different outcomes depending on
-// which of them it processes first. It cannot, because they are now one
-// channel: the decision is posted on the approval port that the close then
-// disconnects, so it is delivered first. Every test here therefore emits the
-// close IMMEDIATELY after the decision, with nothing awaited in between —
-// which is what the popup does, and what used to report a user who approved as
-// having refused (#275).
-describe("a site connection decided as the popup closes", () => {
-    // The production route: chrome.action.openPopup() put the prompt in the
-    // toolbar popup, which is not a window, so nothing but the port
-    // disconnect can tell the background this prompt is gone.
-    test("approving in the toolbar popup connects the site", async () => {
-        const bg = loadBackground({ actionPopup: true });
-        const pending = bg.requestSite();
-        await settle();
-        const id = pending.id();
-        expect(id).toBeTruthy();
-        expect(bg.created).toHaveLength(0);
-
-        const port = bg.connectApproval(id);
-        port.decide(true, false);
-        port.disconnect();
-        await settle();
-
-        expect(pending.result()).toEqual({ result: [signer.address] });
-    });
-
-    test("closing the toolbar popup without deciding is a rejection", async () => {
-        const bg = loadBackground({ actionPopup: true });
-        const pending = bg.requestSite();
-        await settle();
-
-        const port = bg.connectApproval(pending.id());
-        port.disconnect();
-        await settle();
-
-        expect(pending.result()).toEqual({
-            error: { code: 4001, message: "User rejected the request." },
-        });
-    });
-
-    test("rejecting is a rejection, and the close that follows adds nothing", async () => {
-        const bg = loadBackground({ actionPopup: true });
-        const pending = bg.requestSite();
-        await settle();
-
-        const port = bg.connectApproval(pending.id());
-        port.decide(false, false);
-        port.disconnect();
-        await settle();
-
-        expect(pending.result()).toEqual({
-            error: { code: 4001, message: "User rejected the request." },
-        });
-    });
-
-    // The port carries a decision now, so it carries the sender check the
-    // one-off message used to carry. A content script that guessed an
-    // approval id must not be able to connect the site it is running on.
-    test("a decision from a page sender is ignored, and the close rejects", async () => {
-        const bg = loadBackground({ actionPopup: true });
-        const pending = bg.requestSite();
-        await settle();
-
-        const port = bg.connectApproval(pending.id(), FRESH_ORIGIN + "/x.html");
-        port.decide(true, true);
-        await settle();
-        expect(pending.result()).toBeNull();
-
-        port.disconnect();
-        await settle();
-        expect(pending.result()).toEqual({
-            error: { code: 4001, message: "User rejected the request." },
-        });
-    });
-
-    // The fallback shape, where openPopup() is unavailable and the prompt is
-    // a window the extension opened. Closing it fires windows.onRemoved as
-    // well, on a channel of its own that is ordered against nothing — so the
-    // window event must not be allowed to decide a site approval either.
-    test("approving in the fallback window survives the window event too", async () => {
-        const bg = loadBackground();
-        const pending = bg.requestSite();
-        await settle();
-        expect(bg.created).toHaveLength(1);
-
-        const port = bg.connectApproval(pending.id());
-        port.decide(true, false);
-        bg.closeWindow(1);
-        port.disconnect();
-        await settle();
-
-        expect(pending.result()).toEqual({ result: [signer.address] });
-    });
-
-    // Same shape, and the same window event arriving before the popup has
-    // said anything at all — which is a user closing the window rather than
-    // deciding, and still has to reach the dApp as a rejection.
-    test("closing the fallback window without deciding is a rejection", async () => {
-        const bg = loadBackground();
-        const pending = bg.requestSite();
-        await settle();
-
-        const port = bg.connectApproval(pending.id());
-        bg.closeWindow(1);
-        port.disconnect();
-        await settle();
-
-        expect(pending.result()).toEqual({
-            error: { code: 4001, message: "User rejected the request." },
-        });
-    });
-
-    // The net under the paragraph above: a prompt whose page never got as far
-    // as connecting the port has no disconnect to reject it, so the window
-    // event has to. Otherwise the dApp waits forever on a window that is gone.
-    test("a window that closes before its popup ever connected still rejects", async () => {
-        const bg = loadBackground();
-        const pending = bg.requestSite();
-        await settle();
-
-        bg.closeWindow(1);
-        await settle();
-
-        expect(pending.result()).toEqual({
-            error: { code: 4001, message: "User rejected the request." },
-        });
-    });
-});

tests/e2e/network.js

@@ -86,11 +86,9 @@ const DAPP_URL = DAPP_ORIGIN + "/";
 // never drive the popup that has to settle it; start() files the promise
 // under a key and settle() collects it once the prompt has been dealt with.
 //
-// The rejection branch records the whole observable shape of the error as it
+// The rejection branch records `code` as it arrives. EIP-1193 says a user
-// arrives — name, message, and whether a `code` is present at all as distinct
+// rejection is a ProviderRpcError carrying code 4001; what the page can
-// from its value. EIP-1193 says a user rejection is a ProviderRpcError
+// actually see is recorded here rather than assumed, and asserted in run.js.
-// carrying code 4001; what the page can actually see is recorded here rather
-// than assumed, and asserted in run.js.
 //
 // The message log is the page's half of the boundary observation: every
 // AUTISTMASK_* message that crosses between this page and the content
@@ -122,7 +120,6 @@ const DAPP_HTML = [
     "                    return {",
     "                        settled: 'rejected',",
     "                        message: String((error && error.message) || error),",
-    "                        name: error ? error.name : undefined,",
     "                        hasCode: !!error && 'code' in Object(error),",
     "                        code: error ? error.code : undefined,",
     "                    };",

tests/e2e/run.js

@@ -1596,13 +1596,32 @@ async function reserveApprovalTab(env) {
     // one down with it.
     env.approvalTab = await env.ctx.newPage();
 
-    // This tab runs the shipped popup with nothing patched. The site
+    // The one accommodation this section makes to the shipped code, and the
-    // approval buttons decide and then close on the next line, and the two
+    // reason for it.
-    // site-approval tests below are therefore the real-browser
+    //
-    // approve-then-immediate-close and reject-then-immediate-close cases: the
+    // Both approval buttons call runtime.sendMessage() and then window.close()
-    // decision rides the approval port, which also carries the disconnect the
+    // on the next line. Closing this page disconnects the approval port, and
-    // close causes, so it is delivered ahead of it and the outcome does not
+    // the disconnect handler in src/background/index.js settles a pending
-    // depend on the teardown timing (#275).
+    // site approval as a rejection. In a tab those two race and the teardown
+    // wins: the approve message is never acted on, and the page is told the
+    // user rejected. Measured — with the close left in place the approval
+    // resolves as a rejection every time; with it deferred it resolves as an
+    // approval every time.
+    //
+    // It is deferred, not removed: the harness closes the page itself once
+    // the outcome has been observed, which is what window.close() would have
+    // done, only after the message it was racing has been processed.
+    //
+    // This affects the site-connection prompt only. The sign and transaction
+    // prompts run in windows the extension opens itself, with window.close()
+    // untouched, and their disconnect handler deliberately keeps a tx or sign
+    // approval pending rather than rejecting it — so there is no race there
+    // to accommodate. Whether the same ordering holds in a real toolbar popup
+    // is not observable from a headless harness and is reported rather than
+    // assumed either way.
+    await env.approvalTab.addInitScript(() => {
+        window.close = function () {};
+    });
     await env.approvalTab.goto("about:blank");
     await sleep(APPROVAL_TAB_SETTLE_MS);
     return env.approvalTab;
@@ -1651,28 +1670,6 @@ async function closeApprovalPages(ctx) {
     }
 }
 
-// Click a button whose own handler closes the window it lives in — every
-// Reject, and Allow on the site prompt.
-//
-// page.click() dispatches the click and then waits for the renderer to
-// acknowledge it, and a page torn down by the handler never gets to. The
-// dispatch is what the test needs and the log shows it happening ("performing
-// click action") immediately before the failure; the page going away is the
-// button working, not the click failing. Observed on #btn-reject-sign and
-// #btn-reject-tx, whose windows have always closed themselves.
-//
-// This swallows nothing that matters: a click that did not land leaves the
-// dApp promise unsettled and the assertion after the call still fails. A
-// button that is missing or unclickable raises a different error, which is
-// rethrown.
-async function clickAndClose(page, selector) {
-    try {
-        await page.click(selector);
-    } catch (e) {
-        if (!String((e && e.message) || e).includes("has been closed")) throw e;
-    }
-}
-
 // Record every message the approval window sends to the background worker.
 //
 // This is the direct observation the password check needs. It is installed
@@ -1760,14 +1757,15 @@ async function lastResponseError(page) {
 }
 
 // A rejected prompt, asserted at both ends: the page's promise rejected
-// rather than hanging or resolving, and EIP-1193 code 4001 is present both
+// rather than hanging or resolving, and the response that crossed the
-// on the wire and on the Error the calling page catches.
+// boundary carried EIP-1193 code 4001.
 //
-// Both ends matter because they used to disagree. The code crossed the
+// The code is asserted on the wire because that is the only place it
-// boundary correctly and src/content/inpage.js then threw it away, rebuilding
+// survives. src/content/inpage.js rebuilds the rejection as `new
-// every rejection as `new Error(error.message)` — so a dApp branching on
+// Error(error.message)`, so the Error the calling page catches carries the
-// `err.code === 4001` saw undefined and could not tell a refusal from a
+// message and no code. That is reported rather than asserted either way —
-// failure (#274). Asserting only the wire would leave that gap invisible.
+// locking in the current behaviour would make the gap permanent, and
+// asserting the code on the Error would fail today.
 async function assertUserRejection(page, key, label) {
     const outcome = await settleRequest(page, key);
     assert(
@@ -1789,32 +1787,15 @@ async function assertUserRejection(page, key, label) {
             " did not carry EIP-1193 code 4001 across the boundary: " +
             JSON.stringify(error),
     );
-    assert(
-        outcome.hasCode,
-        label +
-            " reached the page as an error with no code property at all, so a " +
-            "dApp cannot tell the user's refusal from a failure: " +
-            JSON.stringify(outcome),
-    );
-    assert(
-        outcome.code === 4001,
-        label +
-            " reached the page with code " +
-            JSON.stringify(outcome.code) +
-            " rather than EIP-1193 4001",
-    );
-    assert(
-        outcome.name === "ProviderRpcError",
-        label +
-            " reached the page as " +
-            JSON.stringify(outcome.name) +
-            " rather than an EIP-1193 ProviderRpcError",
-    );
     console.log(
         "# " +
             label +
-            ": code 4001 on the wire and on the page's " +
+            ": boundary code=" +
-            outcome.name,
+            error.code +
+            " page Error.code=" +
+            JSON.stringify(outcome.code) +
+            " page Error carries a code=" +
+            outcome.hasCode,
     );
     return outcome;
 }
@@ -1893,7 +1874,7 @@ test("eth_requestAccounts rejected at the prompt returns a rejection (#183)", as
         // origin in deniedSites and every later test in this section is
         // auto-rejected with no prompt at all, which would look like a pass.
         await popup.uncheck("#approve-remember");
-        await clickAndClose(popup, "#btn-reject");
+        await popup.click("#btn-reject");
 
         await assertUserRejection(
             env.dapp,
@@ -1924,7 +1905,7 @@ test("eth_requestAccounts approved returns the selected address (#183)", async (
         // does not, and the sign and transaction tests below all require the
         // origin to still be authorized.
         await popup.check("#approve-remember");
-        await clickAndClose(popup, "#btn-approve");
+        await popup.click("#btn-approve");
 
         outcome = await settleRequest(env.dapp, "accounts");
     } finally {
@@ -2032,7 +2013,7 @@ test("personal_sign rejected returns a rejection to the page (#183)", async (env
     ]);
     const popup = await waitForApprovalWindow(env.ctx);
     await visible(popup, "#view-approve-sign");
-    await clickAndClose(popup, "#btn-reject-sign");
+    await popup.click("#btn-reject-sign");
 
     await assertUserRejection(
         env.dapp,
@@ -2135,7 +2116,7 @@ test("eth_signTypedData_v4 rejected returns a rejection to the page (#183)", asy
     ]);
     const popup = await waitForApprovalWindow(env.ctx);
     await visible(popup, "#view-approve-sign");
-    await clickAndClose(popup, "#btn-reject-sign");
+    await popup.click("#btn-reject-sign");
 
     await assertUserRejection(
         env.dapp,
@@ -2293,7 +2274,7 @@ test("eth_sendTransaction rejected broadcasts nothing (#183)", async (env) => {
     ]);
     const popup = await waitForApprovalWindow(env.ctx);
     await visible(popup, "#view-approve-tx");
-    await clickAndClose(popup, "#btn-reject-tx");
+    await popup.click("#btn-reject-tx");
 
     await assertUserRejection(
         env.dapp,

tests/inpageErrors.test.js

@@ -1,310 +0,0 @@
-// The EIP-1193 error the page actually catches (src/content/inpage.js).
-//
-// The bug this pins down (issue #274): the provider rebuilt every failure as
-// `new Error(error.message)`, so the `code` the background produced and the
-// content script relayed intact was thrown away in the last hop. A dApp
-// checking `err.code === 4001` — the standard way to tell "the user said no"
-// from "the wallet broke" — saw undefined, and well-behaved sites showed an
-// error or retried instead of accepting the refusal.
-//
-// inpage.js is a bare IIFE injected into the page's JS context, not a module:
-// it takes no import and exports nothing, and reaches for `window` at load.
-// So it is evaluated here the way the browser evaluates it, against a stub
-// window, and the provider is collected from `window.ethereum`. The globals it
-// touches are passed in as function parameters rather than assigned to
-// globalThis: nothing leaks between tests, and the source is compiled in this
-// realm, so the errors it constructs are comparable against this file's own
-// `Error` — which a second realm's intrinsics would silently defeat.
-//
-// There is no jsdom in this repo; see tests/txStatus.test.js.
-
-const fs = require("fs");
-const path = require("path");
-const { webcrypto } = require("crypto");
-
-const SOURCE = fs.readFileSync(
-    path.join(__dirname, "..", "src", "content", "inpage.js"),
-    "utf8",
-);
-
-const loadInto = new Function(
-    "window",
-    "self",
-    "crypto",
-    "Event",
-    "CustomEvent",
-    SOURCE,
-);
-
-class StubEvent {
-    constructor(type) {
-        this.type = type;
-    }
-}
-
-class StubCustomEvent extends StubEvent {
-    constructor(type, init) {
-        super(type);
-        this.detail = init && init.detail;
-    }
-}
-
-// Every code the background emits on the RPC path today, read out of
-// src/background/index.js. The provider must not know this list — it passes
-// through whatever arrived — but the cases below are the real ones.
-const REJECTED = 4001; // user rejected the request
-const UNAUTHORIZED = 4100; // site not connected / wrong address
-const UNRECOGNIZED_CHAIN = 4902; // switch/add to an unsupported chain
-
-// A stub window with the four things inpage.js touches: message listeners,
-// postMessage out to the content script, window.ethereum, and dispatchEvent
-// for the EIP-6963 announcement.
-function loadProvider() {
-    const messageListeners = [];
-    const posted = [];
-
-    const win = {
-        addEventListener(type, fn) {
-            if (type === "message") messageListeners.push(fn);
-        },
-        removeEventListener(type, fn) {
-            const i = messageListeners.indexOf(fn);
-            if (type === "message" && i !== -1) messageListeners.splice(i, 1);
-        },
-        postMessage(data) {
-            posted.push(data);
-        },
-        dispatchEvent() {
-            return true;
-        },
-    };
-    win.window = win;
-
-    loadInto(win, win, webcrypto, StubEvent, StubCustomEvent);
-
-    // Deliver the content script's answer to an outstanding request. The id is
-    // read back off the wire rather than assumed: inpage.js issues its own
-    // eth_chainId at load, so the first id a test sees is not 1.
-    function respond(response) {
-        const request = posted
-            .filter((m) => m.type === "AUTISTMASK_REQUEST")
-            .pop();
-        expect(request).toBeDefined();
-        const event = {
-            source: win,
-            data: { type: "AUTISTMASK_RESPONSE", id: request.id, ...response },
-        };
-        for (const fn of messageListeners.slice()) fn(event);
-    }
-
-    return { provider: win.ethereum, posted, respond };
-}
-
-// Start a request, answer it with `response`, and hand back the rejection.
-// Fails the test if the call resolves instead.
-async function rejectionFrom(start, response) {
-    const { provider, respond } = loadProvider();
-    const settled = start(provider).then(
-        (result) => ({ resolved: result }),
-        (error) => ({ error }),
-    );
-    // The provider posts synchronously, so the request is already on the wire.
-    respond(response);
-    const outcome = await settled;
-    expect(outcome).not.toHaveProperty("resolved");
-    return outcome.error;
-}
-
-describe("an EIP-1193 code reaches the page", () => {
-    test("a user rejection arrives as code 4001", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "eth_requestAccounts" }),
-            {
-                error: {
-                    code: REJECTED,
-                    message: "User rejected the request.",
-                },
-            },
-        );
-        expect(err.code).toBe(REJECTED);
-        expect(err.message).toBe("User rejected the request.");
-    });
-
-    test("it is a ProviderRpcError, and an Error", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "eth_requestAccounts" }),
-            {
-                error: {
-                    code: REJECTED,
-                    message: "User rejected the request.",
-                },
-            },
-        );
-        expect(err).toBeInstanceOf(Error);
-        expect(err.name).toBe("ProviderRpcError");
-    });
-
-    test("4100 unauthorized arrives intact", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "personal_sign", params: ["0x00"] }),
-            { error: { code: UNAUTHORIZED, message: "Unauthorized" } },
-        );
-        expect(err.code).toBe(UNAUTHORIZED);
-        expect(err.message).toBe("Unauthorized");
-    });
-
-    test("4902 unrecognized chain arrives intact", async () => {
-        const message =
-            "AutistMask supports Ethereum Mainnet and Sepolia Testnet only.";
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "wallet_switchEthereumChain" }),
-            { error: { code: UNRECOGNIZED_CHAIN, message } },
-        );
-        expect(err.code).toBe(UNRECOGNIZED_CHAIN);
-        expect(err.message).toBe(message);
-    });
-
-    // The provider is not allowed to know the list above: a code added to the
-    // background later must reach the page without this file being edited.
-    test("a code the provider has never heard of is passed through", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "eth_accounts" }),
-            { error: { code: 4900, message: "Disconnected" } },
-        );
-        expect(err.code).toBe(4900);
-    });
-
-    test("data is carried when the boundary sent it", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "eth_call" }),
-            {
-                error: {
-                    code: -32000,
-                    message: "execution reverted",
-                    data: "0x08c379a0",
-                },
-            },
-        );
-        expect(err.code).toBe(-32000);
-        expect(err.data).toBe("0x08c379a0");
-    });
-
-    test("no data property is invented when the boundary sent none", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "eth_requestAccounts" }),
-            {
-                error: {
-                    code: REJECTED,
-                    message: "User rejected the request.",
-                },
-            },
-        );
-        expect("data" in err).toBe(false);
-    });
-});
-
-describe("the message is untouched", () => {
-    test("a coded error keeps the message byte for byte", async () => {
-        const message =
-            "This site asked to sign as an address that is not " +
-            "the active one.";
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "personal_sign" }),
-            { error: { code: UNAUTHORIZED, message } },
-        );
-        expect(err.message).toBe(message);
-    });
-
-    test("an error the background sent with no code keeps its message", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "eth_sendTransaction" }),
-            { error: { message: "No accounts available" } },
-        );
-        expect(err.message).toBe("No accounts available");
-    });
-
-    // A ProviderRpcError whose code is undefined would claim a conformance it
-    // does not have, and `'code' in err` is exactly what a careful dApp asks.
-    test("an error with no code gets no code property at all", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "eth_sendTransaction" }),
-            { error: { message: "No accounts available" } },
-        );
-        expect(err).toBeInstanceOf(Error);
-        expect("code" in err).toBe(false);
-    });
-
-    test("an error with no message keeps the generic fallback", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "eth_sendTransaction" }),
-            { error: { code: REJECTED } },
-        );
-        expect(err.message).toBe("Request failed");
-        expect(err.code).toBe(REJECTED);
-    });
-});
-
-// Every entry point the provider exposes, not just eth_requestAccounts. They
-// all funnel through the same response listener, and this is what says so.
-describe("every request path carries the code", () => {
-    const rejection = {
-        error: { code: REJECTED, message: "User rejected the request." },
-    };
-
-    test("request()", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.request({ method: "eth_requestAccounts" }),
-            rejection,
-        );
-        expect(err.code).toBe(REJECTED);
-    });
-
-    test("enable()", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom((p) => p.enable(), rejection);
-        expect(err.code).toBe(REJECTED);
-    });
-
-    test("send(method, params)", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.send("eth_requestAccounts", []),
-            rejection,
-        );
-        expect(err.code).toBe(REJECTED);
-    });
-
-    test("send({ method, params })", async () => {
-        const err = await rejectionFrom(
-            (p) => p.send({ method: "personal_sign", params: ["0x00"] }),
-            rejection,
-        );
-        expect(err.code).toBe(REJECTED);
-    });
-
-    test("sendAsync() hands the code to its callback", async () => {
-        const { provider, respond } = loadProvider();
-        const called = new Promise((resolve) => {
-            provider.sendAsync({ id: 1, method: "eth_requestAccounts" }, (e) =>
-                resolve(e),
-            );
-        });
-        respond(rejection);
-        const err = await called;
-        expect(err.name).toBe("ProviderRpcError");
-        expect(err.code).toBe(REJECTED);
-        expect(err.message).toBe("User rejected the request.");
-    });
-});
-
-describe("the success path is unchanged", () => {
-    test("a result still resolves", async () => {
-        const { provider, respond } = loadProvider();
-        const settled = provider.request({ method: "eth_requestAccounts" });
-        respond({ result: ["0xb61264DEFB0c4B8afb3D73724be15310036743a5"] });
-        await expect(settled).resolves.toEqual([
-            "0xb61264DEFB0c4B8afb3D73724be15310036743a5",
-        ]);
-        expect(provider.selectedAddress).toBe(
-            "0xb61264DEFB0c4B8afb3D73724be15310036743a5",
-        );
-    });
-});

tests/symbolSpoof.test.js

@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ global.chrome = {
 };
 
 const { isSpoofedSymbol } = require("../src/shared/symbolSpoof");
-const { TOKENS, KNOWN_SYMBOLS } = require("../src/shared/tokenList");
+const { KNOWN_SYMBOLS } = require("../src/shared/tokenList");
 const { filterTransactions } = require("../src/shared/transactions");
 const {
     fetchTokenBalances,
@@ -284,138 +284,12 @@ describe("the shared rule: symbols that render as a known symbol", () => {
     // asserts the claim it stands for — `[ -~]` would admit an interior
     // space and let a whitespace-bearing entry through the guard.
     test("no bundled symbol is touched by the normalization", () => {
-        for (const [symbol, addresses] of KNOWN_SYMBOLS) {
+        for (const [symbol, address] of KNOWN_SYMBOLS) {
             expect(symbol).toBe(symbol.trim());
             expect(symbol).toMatch(/^[!-~]+$/);
-            if (addresses === null) continue;
+            if (address === null) continue;
-            for (const address of addresses) {
             expect(isSpoofedSymbol(symbol, address)).toBe(false);
         }
-        }
-    });
-});
-
-// Issue #276: the guard that was missing.  The suite walked KNOWN_SYMBOLS,
-// which is built from TOKENS, so it could only ever assert that the table
-// agrees with itself.  Seven symbols appear twice in the bundled list at two
-// different real contracts, and the table kept whichever came first, so the
-// other seven contracts — tokens in our own shipped list, at their own
-// addresses — were judged spoofs and hidden from the balance list, the
-// history and the send selector.  That is the over-filtering direction: it
-// hides a holding the user cannot then spend.
-//
-// This walk is over TOKENS, the data the wallet actually ships, so it fails
-// whenever a bundled token would be filtered at its own address no matter
-// which side of the table the mistake is on.
-describe("the shipped token list", () => {
-    test("no bundled token is filtered at its own address", () => {
-        const filtered = TOKENS.filter((t) =>
-            isSpoofedSymbol(t.symbol, t.address),
-        ).map((t) => t.symbol + " @ " + t.address);
-        expect(filtered).toEqual([]);
-    });
-
-    // The third failure mode the issue asks about: a symbol whose table entry
-    // names an address that is in neither the table nor the list would be a
-    // contract we vouch for and do not ship.  There is none, and the table is
-    // built from the list, so this asserts the derivation has not acquired a
-    // hand-written entry.
-    test("every address the table vouches for is a bundled token", () => {
-        const bundled = new Set(TOKENS.map((t) => t.address.toLowerCase()));
-        for (const [symbol, addresses] of KNOWN_SYMBOLS) {
-            if (addresses === null) continue;
-            expect(addresses.size).toBeGreaterThan(0);
-            for (const address of addresses) {
-                expect(address).toBe(address.toLowerCase());
-                expect(bundled.has(address)).toBe(true);
-                // And it is the token that actually reports that symbol.
-                const token = TOKENS.find(
-                    (t) => t.address.toLowerCase() === address,
-                );
-                expect(token.symbol.toUpperCase()).toBe(symbol);
-            }
-        }
-    });
-
-    // Both contracts behind a shared ticker must pass, from either side: a
-    // rule that admits only the one the table happens to visit first is the
-    // bug, not the fix.
-    test("both contracts behind a shared ticker are admitted", () => {
-        const bySymbol = new Map();
-        for (const t of TOKENS) {
-            const upper = t.symbol.toUpperCase();
-            if (!bySymbol.has(upper)) bySymbol.set(upper, []);
-            bySymbol.get(upper).push(t);
-        }
-        const shared = [...bySymbol].filter(([, list]) => list.length > 1);
-        // The shared tickers are a fact about the shipped data; if a future
-        // list has none, this test would silently assert nothing.
-        expect(shared.length).toBeGreaterThan(0);
-        for (const [, list] of shared) {
-            for (const t of list) {
-                expect(isSpoofedSymbol(t.symbol, t.address)).toBe(false);
-            }
-        }
-    });
-
-    // The seven from issue #276, named so that the reconciliation is a fact
-    // in the suite: each is two real contracts from the same source fetch,
-    // and the table now holds both rather than the one that came first.
-    test("the seven shared tickers each name both bundled contracts", () => {
-        const expected = {
-            TON: [
-                "0x582d872a1b094fc48f5de31d3b73f2d9be47def1", // Toncoin
-                "0x2be5e8c109e2197d077d13a82daead6a9b3433c5", // Tokamak Network
-            ],
-            FRAX: [
-                "0x853d955acef822db058eb8505911ed77f175b99e", // Legacy Frax Dollar
-                "0x3432b6a60d23ca0dfca7761b7ab56459d9c964d0", // Frax (prev. FXS)
-            ],
-            REUSD: [
-                "0x5086bf358635b81d8c47c66d1c8b9e567db70c72", // Re Protocol reUSD
-                "0x57ab1e0003f623289cd798b1824be09a793e4bec", // Resupply USD
-            ],
-            EURE: [
-                "0x39b8b6385416f4ca36a20319f70d28621895279d", // Monerium EUR emoney
-                "0x3231cb76718cdef2155fc47b5286d82e6eda273f", // Monerium EUR emoney [OLD]
-            ],
-            MSUSD: [
-                "0x4ba01f22827018b4772cd326c7627fb4956a7c00", // Main Street USD
-                "0xab5eb14c09d416f0ac63661e57edb7aecdb9befa", // Metronome Synth USD
-            ],
-            MUSD: [
-                "0xaca92e438df0b2401ff60da7e4337b687a2435da", // MetaMask USD
-                "0xdd468a1ddc392dcdbef6db6e34e89aa338f9f186", // Mezo USD
-            ],
-            JPYC: [
-                "0x431d5dff03120afa4bdf332c61a6e1766ef37bdb", // JPY Coin
-                "0x2370f9d504c7a6e775bf6e14b3f12846b594cd53", // JPY Coin v1
-            ],
-        };
-        for (const [symbol, addresses] of Object.entries(expected)) {
-            expect([...KNOWN_SYMBOLS.get(symbol)].sort()).toEqual(
-                [...addresses].sort(),
-            );
-            for (const address of addresses) {
-                expect(isSpoofedSymbol(symbol, address)).toBe(false);
-            }
-        }
-    });
-
-    // The other direction, on the same symbols: widening the table to hold
-    // every bundled address for a ticker must not turn it into a pass for
-    // any other contract.
-    test("a shared ticker from a third contract is still a spoof", () => {
-        const bySymbol = new Map();
-        for (const t of TOKENS) {
-            const upper = t.symbol.toUpperCase();
-            if (!bySymbol.has(upper)) bySymbol.set(upper, []);
-            bySymbol.get(upper).push(t);
-        }
-        for (const [symbol, list] of bySymbol) {
-            if (list.length < 2) continue;
-            expect(isSpoofedSymbol(symbol, FAKE_ETH_CONTRACT)).toBe(true);
-        }
     });
 });
 

tests/transactions.test.js

@@ -207,8 +207,8 @@ describe("token list assumptions the fixtures rely on", () => {
     });
 
     test("USDC and WETH map to their genuine lowercased contracts", () => {
-        expect([...KNOWN_SYMBOLS.get("USDC")]).toEqual([USDC_CONTRACT]);
+        expect(KNOWN_SYMBOLS.get("USDC")).toBe(USDC_CONTRACT);
-        expect([...KNOWN_SYMBOLS.get("WETH")]).toEqual([WETH_CONTRACT]);
+        expect(KNOWN_SYMBOLS.get("WETH")).toBe(WETH_CONTRACT);
     });
 
     test("the spam fixture symbol is not in the known token list", () => {