Reject null name on POST /packs (#43032)

[juan-fdz-hawa]

Related issue: Fixes #43032

Added a nil-check in NewPack so a missing/null name returns the same BadRequestError as an empty-string name.

Checklist for submitter

If some of the following don't apply, delete the relevant line.

• Changes file added for user-visible changes in changes/, orbit/changes/ or ee/fleetd-chrome/changes.
  See Changes files for more information.

Testing

• Added/updated automated tests
• QA'd all new/changed functionality manually

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • The POST /packs endpoint now properly rejects requests with null pack names, returning a 400 Bad Request error with clear validation messaging instead of silently creating packs with empty names. This improves data integrity by aligning null-name handling with existing empty-string validation behavior.

[claude]

Claude Code Review

This repository is configured for manual code reviews. Comment @claude review to trigger a review and subscribe this PR to future pushes, or @claude review once for a one-time review.

_{Tip: disable this comment in your organization's Code Review settings.}

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: b40b09ba-eaa6-423f-a0e3-3aec45ca30d4

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9a5fae6 and 81ed9a0.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

• changes/43032-post-packs-null-name
• server/service/integration_core_test.go
• server/service/packs.go
• server/service/packs_test.go

---

Walkthrough

This PR fixes a validation bug where POST /packs accepted JSON null for the pack name field and created packs with empty names instead of rejecting the request. The fix adds an explicit nil check in the NewPack service method to reject null names with HTTP 400, aligning the behavior with existing empty-string validation. Unit and integration tests were added to verify the fix works at both the service and API levels.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The PR title clearly and concisely describes the main change: rejecting null names on the POST /packs endpoint, directly addressing issue #43032.
Description check	✅ Passed	The PR description adequately covers the change, references the issue #43032, notes that a changes file was added, and indicates testing was completed and manual QA was performed.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The changes fully address issue #43032: a nil-check was added to NewPack to return BadRequestError when Name is nil, matching empty-string validation behavior, with test coverage added.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All changes are scoped to the pack creation validation logic: changes file, NewPack nil-check, integration test, and unit test—all directly related to issue #43032.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

📝 Generate docstrings

• Create stacked PR
• Commit on current branch

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch 43032-post-packs-accepts-null-name-creating-a-pack-with-empty-string-name

---

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 and usage tips.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 66.86%. Comparing base (81bc4a3) to head (81ed9a0).
⚠️ Report is 10 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #45259      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   66.81%   66.86%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files        2724     2724              
  Lines      219027   219087      +60     
  Branches    10754    10754              
==========================================
+ Hits       146342   146501     +159     
+ Misses      59519    59421      -98     
+ Partials    13166    13165       -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	68.74% <100.00%> (+0.06%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[juan-fdz-hawa]

Failures unrelated to changes