anonymize all data in "remove" case #936
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request primarily affect 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: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
src/components/tools/search.js (2)
243-248: Add input validation for the person objectThe
correctfunction assumes the presence of required fields without validation. Consider adding validation to prevent potential runtime errors:const correct = (person) => { + // Validate input + if (!person || typeof person !== 'object') { + throw new Error('Invalid person object'); + } + + // Validate required fields + const requiredFields = ['name', 'birth']; + for (const field of requiredFields) { + if (!(field in person)) { + throw new Error(`Missing required field: ${field}`); + } + } if (dataCorrections[person.id]) { // ... existing code ...
Line range hint
271-271: Improve clarity of removal filteringThe current filtering of removed records is embedded in a complex chain. Consider extracting this logic into a named function for better readability and maintainability:
+const isNotRemoved = (person) => !(person.correction && person.correction.change === "remove"); + export const searchSubmit = async (newCurrent) => { if (searchTrigger(mySearchInput) && (!myWaitSearch)) { await waitSearch.update( v => true); const state = await search(mySearchInput, newCurrent); - await searchResults.update( v => state.persons.map(correct).filter(x => ! (x.correction && (x.correction.change === "remove")))); + await searchResults.update( v => state.persons.map(correct).filter(isNotRemoved));
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/components/tools/search.js(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/components/tools/search.js (1)
243-248: Verify consistent anonymization handling
Let's verify that the anonymization logic is consistently handled across the codebase:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more context about the anonymization implementation to ensure consistency.
Let me check one final aspect to verify the complete anonymization implementation.
Anonymization implementation is consistent and properly handled
The anonymization logic follows a clear pattern:
- For "cancel" changes: Partial anonymization (first name masking) is applied unless explicitly disabled via
anonymize: false - For "remove" changes: Full anonymization is applied, matching the implementation in the reviewed code
- The anonymization is centrally managed in
search.jswith a single source of configuration indataCorrections.js
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for inconsistent anonymization patterns across the codebase
# Look for other anonymization patterns that might need alignment
echo "Checking for various anonymization patterns..."
rg -i "anonym|inconnu|xxxx" --type js
# Look for direct person.death assignments that might bypass the correct function
echo "Checking for direct death field assignments..."
ast-grep --pattern 'person.death = $_'
# Look for other implementations of person data correction
echo "Checking for other correction implementations..."
rg -l "correct.*person" --type js
Length of output: 2496
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the implementation details in search.js and dataCorrections.js
echo "Checking anonymization implementation in search.js..."
rg -A 10 "correction.anonymize" src/components/tools/search.js
echo -e "\nChecking data corrections implementation..."
cat src/components/tools/dataCorrections.js
Length of output: 5623
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the complete anonymization logic in search.js
echo "Checking complete anonymization context in search.js..."
rg -B 5 -A 15 "person.correction.anonymize" src/components/tools/search.js
# Check for any other files that might handle person data
echo -e "\nChecking for other files handling person data..."
rg -l "person\." --type js
Length of output: 1361
| person.sex = undefined; | ||
| person.birth.date = "XXXX"; | ||
| person.birth.location = { | ||
| departmentCode: "", | ||
| country: person.birth.location.country, | ||
| countryCode: person.birth.location.countryCode | ||
| departmentCode: undefined, | ||
| country: undefined, | ||
| countryCode: undefined |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Standardize the anonymization approach
The current implementation mixes different anonymization strategies:
- Some fields use "INCONNU" (name fields)
- Some use "XXXX" (birth.date)
- Others use
undefined(sex, location fields)
This inconsistency could lead to confusion in downstream processing. Consider standardizing the approach:
- Either use
undefinedfor all fields to clearly indicate absence of data - Or use consistent placeholder values (e.g., "ANONYMIZED") for all fields
Example standardization using undefined:
-person.name = { first: ["INCONNU"], last: "INCONNU"};
-person.birth.date = "XXXX";
+person.name = undefined;
+person.birth.date = undefined;Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
deathproperty to ensure proper data handling.Documentation