feat: add account type tag label

[stanleyyconsensys]

Description

Enable account type tag label

• Add account type tag label on the right hand side of the account address to display it's account type
  • when account type is QR, it will show QR Hardware
  • when account type is simple, it will show Imported
• Update existing account type tag label render in some components , to show the label when it is QR or simple
• Add utils method getKeyringByAddress to get keyring by address for reuse logic purpose
• Add utils method isHardwareAccount to determined address is hardware account or not
• add utils method getLabelTextByAddress to return label transaction key base on account type
• add unit test for affecting components
  • replace invalid address 0x0 and 0x1 to correct format eth address to make the tests more robust.

Related issues

Manual testing steps

1. Go to this page...

Screenshots/Recordings

Before

After

Pre-merge author checklist

• I’ve followed MetaMask Coding Standards.
• I've clearly explained what problem this PR is solving and how it is solved.
• I've linked related issues
• I've included manual testing steps
• I've included screenshots/recordings if applicable
• 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.
• I’ve properly set the pull request status:
  • In case it's not yet "ready for review", I've set it to "draft".
  • In case it's "ready for review", I've changed it from "draft" to "non-draft".

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.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: 10 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (86a6593) 34.99% compared to head (34055ac) 35.08%.
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7641      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   34.99%   35.08%   +0.08%     
==========================================
  Files        1034     1034              
  Lines       27537    27530       -7     
  Branches     2298     2301       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits         9637     9658      +21     
+ Misses      17387    17355      -32     
- Partials      513      517       +4     

Files	Coverage Δ
...ts-temp/Accounts/AccountBalance/AccountBalance.tsx	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...ts-temp/Accounts/AccountBase/AccountBase.styles.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...ents/Pickers/PickerAccount/PickerAccount.styles.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
app/components/UI/AccountInfoCard/index.js	100.00% <100.00%> (+4.54%)	⬆️
app/components/UI/AddressInputs/index.js	82.85% <100.00%> (+0.50%)	⬆️
...roveTransactionHeader/ApproveTransactionHeader.tsx	80.00% <100.00%> (+0.45%)	⬆️
app/components/UI/WalletAccount/WalletAccount.tsx	83.33% <ø> (ø)
...s/SendFlow/AddressElement/AddressElement.styles.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
app/util/address/index.js	60.60% <100.00%> (+6.91%)	⬆️
...mponents-temp/Accounts/AccountBase/AccountBase.tsx	60.00% <0.00%> (-15.00%)	⬇️
... and 6 more

... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes

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

[github-actions]

E2E test started on Bitrise: https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/9d5dedcb-3171-43df-aef9-9f82cc30107c
You can also kick off another Bitrise E2E smoke test by removing and re-applying the (Run Smoke E2E) label

[NicolasMassart]

Nice work!
I only added a few suggestions, but nothing that should prevent this to go through.

[sonarqubecloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

4 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
2 Code Smells

71.2% Coverage
0.0% Duplication