chore: optimise getAccountIdForRequest #814

Sainan · 2025-01-18T07:20:51-08:00

Sainan commented

2025-01-18 07:20:51 -08:00

we only need to check for existence, not get any data back

coderabbitai[bot] commented

2025-01-18 07:20:57 -08:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces modifications to the getAccountIdForRequest function in the loginService.ts file. The changes focus on enhancing the account validation process during request handling. The updated implementation adds more rigorous checks for the presence and validity of account-related parameters, specifically the accountId and nonce.

The new approach involves verifying the existence of an account using Account.exists() with both accountId and nonce parameters, replacing the previous direct account retrieval method. The function now throws specific errors for missing or invalid parameters, improving the error handling mechanism. Instead of returning the account's internal _id, the function now directly returns the accountId from the request query after performing comprehensive validation checks.

Finishing Touches

📝 Generate Docstrings (Beta)

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
- I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
- Generate unit testing code for this file.
- Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
- @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
- @coderabbitai modularize this function.
PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
- @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
- @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
- @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
- @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

@coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
@coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
@coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
@coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
@coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
@coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
@coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
@coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
@coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

## Walkthrough The pull request introduces modifications to the `getAccountIdForRequest` function in the `loginService.ts` file. The changes focus on enhancing the account validation process during request handling. The updated implementation adds more rigorous checks for the presence and validity of account-related parameters, specifically the `accountId` and `nonce`. The new approach involves verifying the existence of an account using `Account.exists()` with both `accountId` and `nonce` parameters, replacing the previous direct account retrieval method. The function now throws specific errors for missing or invalid parameters, improving the error handling mechanism. Instead of returning the account's internal `_id`, the function now directly returns the `accountId` from the request query after performing comprehensive validation checks.      ## Finishing Touches - [ ]  📝 Generate Docstrings (Beta)   --- Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? <details> <summary>❤️ Share</summary> - [X](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A&url=https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [Mastodon](https://mastodon.social/share?text=I%20just%20used%20%40coderabbitai%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20the%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai) - [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/submit?title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&text=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code.%20Check%20it%20out%3A%20https%3A//coderabbit.ai) - [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcoderabbit.ai&mini=true&title=Great%20tool%20for%20code%20review%20-%20CodeRabbit&summary=I%20just%20used%20CodeRabbit%20for%20my%20code%20review%2C%20and%20it%27s%20fantastic%21%20It%27s%20free%20for%20OSS%20and%20offers%20a%20free%20trial%20for%20proprietary%20code) </details> <details> <summary>🪧 Tips</summary> ### Chat There are 3 ways to chat with [CodeRabbit](https://coderabbit.ai): - Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example: - `I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.` - `Generate unit testing code for this file.` - `Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.` - Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag `@coderabbitai` in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples: - `@coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.` - `@coderabbitai modularize this function.` - PR comments: Tag `@coderabbitai` in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples: - `@coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.` - `@coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.` - `@coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.` - `@coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.` Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. ### CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments) - `@coderabbitai pause` to pause the reviews on a PR. - `@coderabbitai resume` to resume the paused reviews. - `@coderabbitai review` to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository. - `@coderabbitai full review` to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again. - `@coderabbitai summary` to regenerate the summary of the PR. - `@coderabbitai generate docstrings` to [generate docstrings](https://docs.coderabbit.ai/finishing-touches/docstrings) for this PR. ([Beta](https://docs.coderabbit.ai/early-access#beta)) - `@coderabbitai resolve` resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments. - `@coderabbitai configuration` to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository. - `@coderabbitai help` to get help. ### Other keywords and placeholders - Add `@coderabbitai ignore` anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed. - Add `@coderabbitai summary` to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description. - Add `@coderabbitai` anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically. ### Documentation and Community - Visit our [Documentation](https://docs.coderabbit.ai) for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit. - Join our [Discord Community](http://discord.gg/coderabbit) to get help, request features, and share feedback. - Follow us on [X/Twitter](https://twitter.com/coderabbitai) for updates and announcements. </details>

coderabbitai[bot] (Migrated from github.com) reviewed 2025-01-18 07:22:50 -08:00

coderabbitai[bot] (Migrated from github.com) left a comment

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)

src/services/loginService.ts (2)
74-79: Consider extracting duplicate validation logic.

The parameter validation logic is identical to getAccountForRequest. Consider extracting it into a shared utility function to maintain DRY principles and ensure consistent validation across the codebase.
+const validateAccountRequest = (req: Request): void => {
+    if (!req.query.accountId) {
+        throw new Error("Request is missing accountId parameter");
+    }
+    if (!req.query.nonce || parseInt(req.query.nonce as string) === 0) {
+        throw new Error("Request is missing nonce parameter");
+    }
+};

 export const getAccountIdForRequest = async (req: Request): Promise<string> => {
-    if (!req.query.accountId) {
-        throw new Error("Request is missing accountId parameter");
-    }
-    if (!req.query.nonce || parseInt(req.query.nonce as string) === 0) {
-        throw new Error("Request is missing nonce parameter");
-    }
+    validateAccountRequest(req);
     if (
         !(await Account.exists({
             _id: req.query.accountId,
88-88: Enhance type safety of the return value.

The direct cast to string might be unsafe. Consider using a type guard or MongoDB's ObjectId validation to ensure the accountId is in the correct format.
-    return req.query.accountId as string;
+    const accountId = req.query.accountId as string;
+    if (!Types.ObjectId.isValid(accountId)) {
+        throw new Error("Invalid accountId format");
+    }
+    return accountId;

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f1c3dcbefc and b95740fefb.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

src/services/loginService.ts (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (2)

src/services/loginService.ts (2)

74-88: Great optimization using Account.exists()!

The change improves performance by avoiding unnecessary data retrieval while maintaining security checks.

80-87: Verify concurrent access handling.

The existence check followed by using the ID creates a potential race condition where the account could be deleted between the check and the ID usage. Consider if this needs to be handled or if it's acceptable for your use case.

**Actionable comments posted: 0** <details> <summary>🧹 Nitpick comments (2)</summary><blockquote> <details> <summary>src/services/loginService.ts (2)</summary><blockquote> `74-79`: **Consider extracting duplicate validation logic.** The parameter validation logic is identical to `getAccountForRequest`. Consider extracting it into a shared utility function to maintain DRY principles and ensure consistent validation across the codebase. ```diff +const validateAccountRequest = (req: Request): void => { + if (!req.query.accountId) { + throw new Error("Request is missing accountId parameter"); + } + if (!req.query.nonce || parseInt(req.query.nonce as string) === 0) { + throw new Error("Request is missing nonce parameter"); + } +}; export const getAccountIdForRequest = async (req: Request): Promise<string> => { - if (!req.query.accountId) { - throw new Error("Request is missing accountId parameter"); - } - if (!req.query.nonce || parseInt(req.query.nonce as string) === 0) { - throw new Error("Request is missing nonce parameter"); - } + validateAccountRequest(req); if ( !(await Account.exists({ _id: req.query.accountId, ``` --- `88-88`: **Enhance type safety of the return value.** The direct cast to string might be unsafe. Consider using a type guard or MongoDB's ObjectId validation to ensure the accountId is in the correct format. ```diff - return req.query.accountId as string; + const accountId = req.query.accountId as string; + if (!Types.ObjectId.isValid(accountId)) { + throw new Error("Invalid accountId format"); + } + return accountId; ``` </blockquote></details> </blockquote></details> <details> <summary>📜 Review details</summary> **Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml** **Review profile: CHILL** **Plan: Pro** <details> <summary>📥 Commits</summary> Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f1c3dcbefc1dcc536c77c1accdd0c2fc3b13e04b and b95740fefb18eae7b8576d348a405ca9c956c212. </details> <details> <summary>📒 Files selected for processing (1)</summary> * `src/services/loginService.ts` (1 hunks) </details> <details> <summary>🔇 Additional comments (2)</summary><blockquote> <details> <summary>src/services/loginService.ts (2)</summary> `74-88`: **Great optimization using `Account.exists()`!** The change improves performance by avoiding unnecessary data retrieval while maintaining security checks. --- `80-87`: **Verify concurrent access handling.** The existence check followed by using the ID creates a potential race condition where the account could be deleted between the check and the ID usage. Consider if this needs to be handled or if it's acceptable for your use case. </details> </blockquote></details> </details>

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: OpenWF/SpaceNinjaServer#814