Create user #27
Create user #27
Conversation
|
Caution Review failedThe pull request is closed. WalkthroughThe changes primarily enhance user management functionality within the application. The Changes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
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? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
src/controllers/user.ts (1)
5-8: LGTM! Consider adding input validation.The
getUsersfunction looks good overall. The use ofasyncHandlerfor error management andsuccessResponsefor standardized responses is commendable.However, consider adding input validation for the query parameters to enhance security and prevent potential issues with invalid inputs.
You could add a validation step before calling
userService.queryUsers. For example:import { validateQueryParams } from '../utils/validation' export const getUsers = asyncHandler(async (req: Request, res: Response) => { const validatedQuery = validateQueryParams(req.query) const users = await userService.queryUsers(validatedQuery) successResponse(res, users) })This assumes you have a
validateQueryParamsfunction in your utilities. If not, consider implementing one to sanitize and validate input parameters.src/services/user.ts (1)
Line range hint
1-94: Add unit tests for the updatedcreateUserfunction.The
createUserfunction has been updated to include theroleproperty and enhanced error handling. To ensure the correctness and reliability of these changes, add unit tests that cover the following scenarios:
- Successful user creation with a valid
roleproperty.- Error handling when the email is already occupied (duplicate email scenario).
- Error handling for other Prisma-related errors.
Do you want me to generate the unit testing code or open a GitHub issue to track this task?
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
- src/controllers/user.ts (1 hunks)
- src/routes/v1/user.ts (2 hunks)
- src/services/user.ts (4 hunks)
- src/validations/user.ts (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (9)
src/validations/user.ts (2)
Line range hint
1-21: Overall approval of changes with minor suggestionsThe addition of
createUserSchemacomplements the existinggetUsersSchemawell, providing a comprehensive set of validations for user-related operations. The consistent use of Zod and the clean file structure maintain good code quality and readability.While the changes are approved, please consider the suggestions in the previous comments to further enhance the robustness of the user creation schema.
14-21: Verify usage of createUserSchema in user creation logicThe
createUserSchemais well-integrated into the existing file structure. To ensure its proper implementation:
- Verify that this schema is imported and used in the relevant controller or service where user creation is handled.
- Ensure that the schema is applied to validate the request body before processing the user creation.
To confirm the correct usage of the schema, please run the following script:
This script will help identify where and how the
createUserSchemais being used in the application.src/controllers/user.ts (1)
1-3: LGTM! Imports are clean and well-organized.The import statements are concise and import only the necessary dependencies and utilities. Good job on keeping the imports clean and organized.
src/routes/v1/user.ts (3)
5-5: LGTM: Import statement updated correctlyThe import statement has been updated to use
userValidationfrom the../../validationsmodule. This change is consistent with the usage in the route definitions and likely improves the organization of validation logic.
Line range hint
1-24: Overall, the changes look good and align with the PR objectivesThe modifications to this file successfully implement the user creation functionality as intended. The code is well-structured, uses appropriate middleware, and follows consistent patterns. The only suggestion is to review the role permissions for the new route, but this doesn't block the PR from moving forward.
17-22: New POST route for user creation looks good, but consider reviewing role permissionThe new POST route for user creation is well-structured with appropriate middleware for JWT verification and validation. It aligns well with the PR objective.
However, I have a minor concern:
The 'manageUsers' role used for this route might be too broad for user creation. Consider using a more specific role like 'createUsers' to adhere to the principle of least privilege.
To verify the current roles and permissions, you can run the following script:
This will help us understand the current role structure and how 'manageUsers' is used across the application.
✅ Verification successful
Role Permission for User Creation Verified
The 'manageUsers' role is appropriately scoped under
Role.ADMINand is consistently used for administrative operations. This ensures adherence to the principle of least privilege in the user creation process.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for role definitions and usages in the codebase echo "Searching for role definitions:" rg --type typescript "enum.*Role" -g "!*.test.ts" echo "\nSearching for 'manageUsers' role usage:" rg --type typescript "manageUsers" echo "\nSearching for other role verifications in routes:" rg --type typescript "verifyRoles\\(" src/routesLength of output: 526
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for role definitions and usages in TypeScript files echo "Searching for role definitions:" rg "enum.*Role" --glob "!*.test.ts" -g "*.ts" echo "\nSearching for 'manageUsers' role usage:" rg "manageUsers" -g "*.ts" echo "\nSearching for other role verifications in routes:" rg "verifyRoles\\(" src/routes -g "*.ts"Length of output: 772
src/services/user.ts (3)
21-26: Improved error handling for duplicate email scenario.The error handling in the
createUserfunction is enhanced by specifically checking for theP2002error code, which indicates that the email is already occupied. This results in a more descriptive error message being thrown in this scenario, improving the clarity of the error for the calling code.
2-2: Verify the usage ofPrismaimport in the codebase.The import statement now includes
PrismaalongsideUserfrom the@prisma/clientpackage. This change is necessary for the new error handling logic. However, ensure thatPrismais being used correctly and consistently throughout the codebase.Run the following script to verify the usage of
Prisma:✅ Verification successful
Prisma Import Usage Verified
src/services/user.ts:Prismais used correctly for error handling.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of `Prisma` import in the codebase. # Test: Search for the usage of `Prisma`. Expect: Consistent and correct usage. rg --type typescript $'Prisma\\.'Length of output: 68
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the usage of `Prisma` import in the codebase. # Test: Search for the usage of `Prisma`. Expect: Consistent and correct usage. rg 'Prisma\.' --glob '*.ts' --glob '*.tsx'Length of output: 128
16-16: Verify theroleproperty in the user creation payload.The
createUserfunction now includes theroleproperty from theuserobject when creating a new user in the database. This change aligns with the updated function signature. However, ensure that theroleproperty is being passed correctly from the calling code and that it matches the expected format.Run the following script to verify the usage of the
createUserfunction:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
src/validations/auth.ts (1)
Line range hint
14-14: Align password validations in registration and login schemas.There's an inconsistency between the password validations used in the
userRegisterSchemaanduserLoginSchema. The login schema still uses the oldz.string().min(6)validation, while the registration schema uses the importedpasswordvalidation. This discrepancy could lead to situations where a user can register but not log in, or vice versa.Consider updating the
userLoginSchemato use the same importedpasswordvalidation:export const userLoginSchema = z.object({ body: z.object({ email: z.string().email(), - password: z.string().min(6), + password, }), })src/validations/common.ts (1)
10-17: Good implementation with some suggestions for improvement.The password validation schema is well-implemented with clear requirements and error messages. However, consider the following suggestions:
Anchor the regex with
^and$to ensure the entire string matches the pattern:/^(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[A-Z])(?=.*\d)(?=.*[@$!%*?&])[A-Za-z\d@$!%*?&]{8,}$/Consider allowing a broader range of special characters to improve user experience while maintaining security. For example:
/^(?=.*[a-z])(?=.*[A-Z])(?=.*\d)(?=.*[!@#$%^&*()_+\-=\[\]{};':"\\|,.<>/?])[A-Za-z\d!@#$%^&*()_+\-=\[\]{};':"\\|,.<>/?]{8,}$/Be aware that these strict requirements might frustrate some users. Consider providing clear guidance on password requirements during user registration or password change processes.
src/controllers/user.ts (1)
10-18: Good improvements, but consider adding input validation.The
createUserfunction has been implemented with several good practices:
- Use of
asyncHandlerfor error management.- Checking for existing users to prevent duplicates.
- Appropriate use of status codes (409 for conflict, 201 for created).
However, there's still room for improvement:
- Input Validation: Consider adding validation for the user data in the request body to prevent invalid or malicious data from being processed.
Here's a suggested implementation to add input validation:
import { validateUserInput } from '../utils/validation' export const createUser = asyncHandler(async (req: Request, res: Response) => { const newUser = validateUserInput(req.body) const existingUser = await userService.getUserByEmail(newUser.email) if (existingUser) { return errorResponse(res, 'User already exists', 409) } const user = await userService.createUser(newUser) successResponse(res, user, 201) })This implementation assumes you will create a
validateUserInputfunction in your utilities. This function should throw an error if the input is invalid, which will be caught by theasyncHandler.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
- src/controllers/user.ts (1 hunks)
- src/validations/auth.ts (1 hunks)
- src/validations/common.ts (1 hunks)
- src/validations/user.ts (2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
src/validations/auth.ts (1)
7-7: Ensure consistent password validation across schemas.The use of a common password validation for user registration is a good practice. However, we should verify that the imported
passwordvalidation is at least as strict as the previousz.string().min(6)validation.Let's check if there are any other schemas using different password validations:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for inconsistent password validations across schemas # Test: Search for other password validations in schema definitions rg --type typescript 'password:.*z\.string\(\)\.min\([0-9]+\)'src/validations/user.ts (1)
14-21: LGTM! Consider adding a minimum length for the email field.The
createUserSchemaimplementation looks good and addresses most of the suggestions from the previous review. Great job on implementing constraints for the name field and using an enum for the role.To ensure that the password requirements have been fully implemented as suggested in the previous review, please run the following script:
Consider adding a minimum length for the email field to prevent extremely short emails:
- email: z.string().email().max(255), + email: z.string().email().min(5).max(255),This change ensures that the email is at least 5 characters long (e.g., "[email protected]"), which is the shortest valid email format.
src/controllers/user.ts (1)
5-8: LGTM! Improved error handling.The update to use
asyncHandlerenhances the error management for this asynchronous operation. This change aligns with best practices for Express.js applications and provides a more robust error handling mechanism.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation