Skip to content

Conversation

nolramaf
Copy link
Contributor

@nolramaf nolramaf commented Oct 11, 2025

📋 Description

Replaces a direct 'messageContextInfo' in msg.message check with a safer Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call() check.

This change ensures the check does not fail in rare scenarios where the in operator might behave unexpectedly due to object inheritance or prototype shadowing. It's a more robust and explicit way to check for an own property on the object.

This prevents false positives when validating if a message contains only messageContextInfo.

🧪 Type of Change

  • 🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • ✨ New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • 💥 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • 📚 Documentation update
  • 🔧 Refactoring (no functional changes)
  • ⚡ Performance improvement
  • 🧹 Code cleanup
  • 🔒 Security fix

🧪 Testing

  • Manual testing completed
  • Functionality verified in development environment
  • No breaking changes introduced
  • Tested with different connection types (if applicable)

📸 Screenshots (if applicable)

✅ Checklist

  • My code follows the project's style guidelines
  • I have performed a self-review of my code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have manually tested my changes thoroughly
  • I have verified the changes work with different scenarios
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published

Summary by Sourcery

Improve the robustness of media content validation by replacing the use of the in operator with Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call for checking messageContextInfo presence, preventing false positives due to prototype inheritance issues.

Bug Fixes:

  • Avoid treating messages that only contain messageContextInfo as valid media content

Enhancements:

  • Replace 'messageContextInfo' in msg.message checks with hasOwnProperty.call in WhatsApp and channel services

Copy link
Contributor

sourcery-ai bot commented Oct 11, 2025

Reviewer's guide (collapsed on small PRs)

Reviewer's Guide

Replaces direct in operator checks for messageContextInfo with a robust Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call approach and adjusts condition order to ensure accurate one-key message validation in both the WhatsApp integration and the general channel service.

Class diagram for updated message validation in BaileysStartupService and ChannelStartupService

classDiagram
class BaileysStartupService {
  +validateMessage(msg: object)
}
class ChannelStartupService {
  +validateMessage(msg: object)
}
BaileysStartupService --|> ChannelStartupService
BaileysStartupService : validateMessage(msg)
ChannelStartupService : validateMessage(msg)
BaileysStartupService : // Now uses hasOwnProperty for 'messageContextInfo' check
ChannelStartupService : // Now uses hasOwnProperty for 'messageContextInfo' check
Loading

File-Level Changes

Change Details Files
Introduced safer own-property check and reordered condition in WhatsApp message validation
  • Replaced 'messageContextInfo' in msg.message with hasOwnProperty.call
  • Moved the Object.keys(msg.message).length === 1 check to precede property check
  • Refactored the conditional into a clearer multi-line expression
src/api/integrations/channel/whatsapp/whatsapp.baileys.service.ts
Applied the same robust property check in the channel service
  • Replaced 'messageContextInfo' in msg with hasOwnProperty.call
  • Kept the single-key length check to gate the validation
src/api/services/channel.service.ts

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

  • Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
  • Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
  • Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
    issue from a review comment by replying to it. You can also reply to a
    review comment with @sourcery-ai issue to create an issue from it.
  • Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
    request title to generate a title at any time. You can also comment
    @sourcery-ai title on the pull request to (re-)generate the title at any time.
  • Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
    the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time exactly where you
    want it. You can also comment @sourcery-ai summary on the pull request to
    (re-)generate the summary at any time.
  • Generate reviewer's guide: Comment @sourcery-ai guide on the pull
    request to (re-)generate the reviewer's guide at any time.
  • Resolve all Sourcery comments: Comment @sourcery-ai resolve on the
    pull request to resolve all Sourcery comments. Useful if you've already
    addressed all the comments and don't want to see them anymore.
  • Dismiss all Sourcery reviews: Comment @sourcery-ai dismiss on the pull
    request to dismiss all existing Sourcery reviews. Especially useful if you
    want to start fresh with a new review - don't forget to comment
    @sourcery-ai review to trigger a new review!

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

  • Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
    summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
  • Change the review language.
  • Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
  • Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

Copy link
Contributor

@sourcery-ai sourcery-ai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hey there - I've reviewed your changes and they look great!


Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨
Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.

@DavidsonGomes DavidsonGomes merged commit 37571c0 into EvolutionAPI:develop Oct 13, 2025
5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants