Bumps webdriverio and vulnerable dependencies elliptic, ws, and express

[mhassan1]

This PR resolves npm audit findings for elliptic, ws, and express. As part of this, it bumps webdriverio from v8 to v9, which requires some minor configuration changes.

[mhassan1]

I'm seeing increased incidence of ECONNREFUSED in the pipeline, which may be caused by webdriverio/webdriverio#13553. Let's wait for that issue to be resolved and see if the problem goes away.

[romainmenke]

Apparently still not fixed: webdriverio/webdriverio#13553 (comment)

[mhassan1]

@romainmenke Do you have any idea what's going on with the BrowserStack test failures? I see a mix of error messages in different steps. Do you think we should give up on the webdriverio upgrade, for now?

[romainmenke]

This seems problematic and something that should be configurable for our use case: https://github.com/webdriverio/webdriverio/blob/74346f930b035a475733748974dcec8893c08865/packages/webdriverio/src/index.ts#L86-L90

Webdriver should not be applying their own polyfills as that makes it impossible for us to test polyfills.

So I think we should reach out and try to resolve those issues.

---

I will try to do a run with those things manually disabled and check if tests start to pass.

[mhassan1]

Webdriver should not be applying their own polyfills as that makes it impossible for us to test polyfills.

It looks like we can skip polyfills by not using BiDi: https://github.com/webdriverio/webdriverio/blob/74346f930b035a475733748974dcec8893c08865/packages/webdriverio/src/polyfill.ts#L33

I will try that.

[mhassan1]

I am also opening an issue with webdriverio to see if they will use a safer polyfill.

[mhassan1]

Here's a PR against webdriverio to fix NAME_POLYFILL for old browsers: webdriverio/webdriverio#13751.

[mhassan1]

@romainmenke This PR is ready for review.

[romainmenke]

LGTM!

Thank you for working on this 🙇