fix(bookmarks): anonymize doubts through toPublicDoubt

[Kirtan-pc]

User description

Description

Fixes a privacy leak in GET /api/bookmarks. The route was serializing raw doubtsTable records (via a plain ...doubt spread), exposing each bookmarked doubt's author userEmail, the internal embedding pgvector, and deletedAt to authenticated clients, bypassing the anonymity system entirely. Bookmarked doubts are now passed through toPublicDoubt(doubt, email) — the same chokepoint used by GET /api/doubts, GET /api/doubts/[id], and the classroomexport route — so responses only expose the anonymized author handle, authorInitial, and isOwnPost flag, while preserving hasLiked, hasBookmarked, and replyCount.

Related Issue

Closes #1101

Type of Change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)
• Documentation update (README, guides, comments)
• Style / UI change (no logic change)
• Code refactor (no behavior change)
• Test addition or update
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

How Has This Been Tested?

• Tested locally with npm run dev
• Ran existing test suite
• Verified on mobile viewport (375px)
• Verified on desktop viewport (1440px)

Checklist

• I have tested my changes locally (npm run dev)
• My code follows the existing code style (TypeScript, Tailwind, no any types)
• I have not introduced unrelated changes (each PR should address one issue)
• I have added comments where necessary
• My branch is up to date with main
• I have linked the related issue above
• Screenshots are included (if this is a UI change)

---

CodeAnt-AI Description

Protect author privacy in bookmarked doubts

What Changed

• Bookmarked doubts now hide author emails and internal fields such as embeddings and deletion timestamps
• Anonymous doubts show a consistent author handle and initial, while identifying the viewer's own posts
• Like, bookmark, reply count, and doubt content details remain available
• Added coverage for authentication, privacy filtering, author ownership, and preserved bookmark metadata

Impact

✅ No author email leaks from bookmarked doubts
✅ Consistent anonymous author display
✅ Preserved likes, bookmarks, and reply counts

💡 Usage Guide

Checking Your Pull Request

Every time you make a pull request, our system automatically looks through it. We check for security issues, mistakes in how you're setting up your infrastructure, and common code problems. We do this to make sure your changes are solid and won't cause any trouble later.

Talking to CodeAnt AI

Got a question or need a hand with something in your pull request? You can easily get in touch with CodeAnt AI right here. Just type the following in a comment on your pull request, and replace "Your question here" with whatever you want to ask:

@codeant-ai ask: Your question here

This lets you have a chat with CodeAnt AI about your pull request, making it easier to understand and improve your code.

Example

@codeant-ai ask: Can you suggest a safer alternative to storing this secret?

Preserve Org Learnings with CodeAnt

You can record team preferences so CodeAnt AI applies them in future reviews. Reply directly to the specific CodeAnt AI suggestion (in the same thread) and replace "Your feedback here" with your input:

@codeant-ai: Your feedback here

This helps CodeAnt AI learn and adapt to your team's coding style and standards.

Example

@codeant-ai: Do not flag unused imports.

Retrigger review

Ask CodeAnt AI to review the PR again, by typing:

@codeant-ai: review

Check Your Repository Health

To analyze the health of your code repository, visit our dashboard at https://app.codeant.ai. This tool helps you identify potential issues and areas for improvement in your codebase, ensuring your repository maintains high standards of code health.

[vercel]

@Kirtan-pc is attempting to deploy a commit to the Karan Mani Tripathi 's projects Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[codeant-ai]

🤖 CodeAnt AI — Review Status

Status	Commit	Started (UTC)	Finished (UTC)
✅ Incremental review completed	a392b32	Aug 15, 2026 · 01:18	01:18
✅ Reviewed your PR	2ceb525	Aug 05, 2026 · 16:43	16:45

[codeant-ai]

---

Thanks for using CodeAnt! 🎉

We're free for open-source projects. if you're enjoying it, help us grow by sharing.

Share on X ·
Reddit ·
LinkedIn

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@Kirtan-pc, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 49 minutes

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: ad47a421-e4c5-4c78-a70d-4d75f149109c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a1ec0f0 and 8ad8094.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• src/app/api/bookmarks/route.ts

✨ Finishing Touches 💡 2

⚔️ Resolve merge conflicts 💡

• Resolve merge conflict in branch fix/1101-bookmarks-anonymize

🛠️ Fix failing CI checks 💡

• Create stacked PR
• Commit on current branch

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[codeant-ai]

Suggestion: The response is now wrapped in an object containing data and pagination, but the bookmarks page assigns the entire JSON response to state and immediately calls bookmarks.filter(...). This makes the page throw at runtime because the stored value is an object rather than an array. Either preserve the previous array response contract or update the client to consume data.publicDoubts/data as appropriate. [api mismatch]

Severity Level: Major ⚠️

- ❌ Bookmarks page crashes after successful API responses.
- ❌ Users cannot view or search saved doubts.
- ⚠️ Retry requests reproduce the same client-side failure.

(Use Cmd/Ctrl + Click for best experience)

Prompt for AI Agent 🤖

This is a comment left during a code review.

**Path:** src/app/api/bookmarks/route.ts
**Line:** 99:100
**Comment:**
	*Api Mismatch: The response is now wrapped in an object containing `data` and `pagination`, but the bookmarks page assigns the entire JSON response to state and immediately calls `bookmarks.filter(...)`. This makes the page throw at runtime because the stored value is an object rather than an array. Either preserve the previous array response contract or update the client to consume `data.publicDoubts`/`data` as appropriate.

Validate the correctness of the flagged issue. If correct, How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, implement it and please make it concise.
Once fix is implemented, also check other comments on the same PR, and ask user if the user wants to fix the rest of the comments as well. if said yes, then fetch all the comments validate the correctness and implement a minimal fix

👍 | 👎

[knoxiboy]

Hi @Kirtan-pc! Thanks for routing doubt bookmarks through oPublicDoubt (#1101).

Stripping author details on anonymous bookmarked doubts is an important privacy fix. Before merging:

• Unit Test Coverage: Please add a test case in src/tests/api/bookmarks.test.ts verifying that fetching bookmarked doubts strips user email and author fields when isAnonymous is rue.

Thanks for your work!

[codeant-ai]

---

Thanks for using CodeAnt! 🎉

We're free for open-source projects. if you're enjoying it, help us grow by sharing.

Share on X ·
Reddit ·
LinkedIn

[Kirtan-pc]

Hey @knoxiboy,
I have implemented the changes:
Added src/tests/api/bookmarks.test.ts with 7 test cases.
Could you please review it?