-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
Use Buffer.from().toString() instead of atob() to decode task payload #8843
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information. For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Summary of Changes
Hello @CodingDoug, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request resolves a critical issue in the tasks emulator where task payloads were not being decoded correctly. By switching from the less robust atob()
function to Node.js's Buffer.from().toString()
method, the emulator can now reliably parse base64 encoded task bodies, ensuring proper task execution and data integrity.
Highlights
- Task Payload Decoding Fix: The method for decoding base64 encoded
httpRequest.body
within task payloads insrc/emulator/tasksEmulator.ts
has been updated. - Improved Decoding Robustness: Replaced the
atob()
function withBuffer.from(..., "base64").toString("utf-8")
to ensure more reliable and correct handling of various character encodings in task payloads, addressing a known decoding issue.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command>
or @gemini-code-assist <command>
. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
Feature | Command | Description |
---|---|---|
Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/
folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code Review
This pull request correctly replaces the use of atob()
with the more robust Buffer.from().toString()
for decoding base64 task payloads. This is a good improvement for correctness and compatibility with Node.js environments.
I've added one suggestion to improve error handling around the decoding and parsing logic. This will make the emulator more resilient to invalid inputs by preventing unhandled exceptions.
src/emulator/tasksEmulator.ts
Outdated
req.body.task.httpRequest.body = JSON.parse( | ||
Buffer.from(req.body.task.httpRequest.body, "base64").toString("utf-8") | ||
); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
While this change to use Buffer.from
is a great improvement, the surrounding logic is still vulnerable to unhandled exceptions. If req.body.task.httpRequest.body
is not a valid base64 string, or if the decoded string is not valid JSON, JSON.parse
will throw an error.
This will likely be caught by Express's default error handler and result in a 500 Internal Server Error
response. This is not ideal for what is essentially a client-side error (invalid input).
It would be more robust to wrap this operation in a try...catch
block and explicitly return a 400 Bad Request
response.
For example, you could modify the code around this line to be:
try {
req.body.task.httpRequest.body = JSON.parse(
Buffer.from(req.body.task.httpRequest.body, "base64").toString("utf-8")
);
} catch (e: any) {
this.logger.log("WARN", `Failed to parse task body: ${e.message}`);
return res.status(400).send("Invalid task body: not a valid base64-encoded JSON object.");
}
const task = req.body.task as Task;
// ... rest of the handler
Fixes problem decoding task payload (#8836)