Sanitize strategy switch account examples#36
Conversation
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: c0dc2c7caf
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| assert.ok(indexHtml.includes("function hasPrivateConfig()")); | ||
| assert.ok(indexHtml.includes('el("quick-form").hidden = !showPrivateControls')); | ||
| assert.equal(indexHtml.includes("u15998061"), false); | ||
| assert.equal(indexHtml.includes("ibkr-primary"), false); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because the sanitization goal is to prevent the real-looking IBKR account identifiers from leaking into the public page, replacing this assertion with the new placeholder weakens the regression test: if index.html or the served HTML accidentally reintroduces u15998061 later, this check still passes as long as ibkr-primary is absent. Keep an assertion for the removed sensitive identifier(s) in addition to any placeholder check so the test continues to cover the leak this commit is meant to prevent.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Summary
Tests