fix: fix/1723 broken sign verification on test dapp

[Cal-L]

Description

The PR that introduced permission controller middleware #9521, broke verifying personal sign on the test dapp. This PR resolves a few areas in the app that needed to use lowercased account addresses. Another note: Since permission middleware now handles eth_accounts, we migrated a condition to use the correct origin based on SDK, WC, or dapp in the BackgroundBridge. This code is a temporary fix and should be refactored in the future. To keep this PR smaller, we can follow up with removing eth_accounts from RPCMethodMiddleware in another PR.

Related issues

Fixes: #1723, https://app.zenhub.com/workspaces/mobile-release-testing-6249e5242464b70013315a98/issues/gh/metamask/metamask-mobile/9628

Manual testing steps

Before fix:

1. Connect to the MM test dapp
2. Trigger personal sign
3. Trigger verify
4. Results will not appear

After fix:

1. Connect to the MM test dapp
2. Trigger personal sign
3. Trigger verify
4. Results should show address used to sign
5. Switch/connect another account
6. Trigger personal sign
7. Results should show address used to sign

Screenshots/Recordings

Before

broken-sign.mov

After

Signing verification works even after switching accounts
https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-mobile/assets/10508597/5c43af3b-7c9f-456b-a870-a5345027642b

WC connects and is able to trigger a transaction

RPReplay_Final1715841769.MP4

Pre-merge author checklist

• I’ve followed MetaMask Coding Standards.
• I've completed the PR template to the best of my ability
• I’ve included tests if applicable
• I’ve documented my code using JSDoc format if applicable
• I’ve applied the right labels on the PR (see labeling guidelines). Not required for external contributors.

Pre-merge reviewer checklist

• I've manually tested the PR (e.g. pull and build branch, run the app, test code being changed).
• I confirm that this PR addresses all acceptance criteria described in the ticket it closes and includes the necessary testing evidence such as recordings and or screenshots.

[github-actions]

CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes.

[Cal-L]

Will run E2E on release branch

[Gudahtt]

I have tried testing this PR locally, and it does not appear to work. However I did confirm that #9521 seems to introduce the problem.

[github-actions]

Bitrise

✅✅✅ pr_smoke_e2e_pipeline passed on Bitrise! ✅✅✅

Commit hash: bc38117
Build link: https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/fea3ed76-e815-4d0b-9018-1c8336ba2b24

Note

• You can kick off another pr_smoke_e2e_pipeline on Bitrise by removing and re-applying the Run Smoke E2E label on the pull request

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 61.53846% with 5 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (release/7.23.0@0df83c7). Click here to learn what that means.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...ts/Views/AccountPermissions/AccountPermissions.tsx	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...nts/UI/AccountSelectorList/AccountSelectorList.tsx	66.66%	1 Missing ⚠️
...ountPermissionsRevoke/AccountPermissionsRevoke.tsx	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
app/core/Permissions/index.ts	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                Coverage Diff                @@
##             release/7.23.0    #9627   +/-   ##
=================================================
  Coverage                  ?   46.11%           
=================================================
  Files                     ?     1339           
  Lines                     ?    32665           
  Branches                  ?     3475           
=================================================
  Hits                      ?    15062           
  Misses                    ?    16679           
  Partials                  ?      924           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
2 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
40.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[tommasini]

Should we target main and then cherry pick it to the release?

[Cal-L]

Closing in favor of #9656