Inconsistent Profile Existence Checks Enable Repeated User Count Manipulation

[aniket866]

Hi @KanishkSogani , I have gone through the project and developed a good understanding and now I found that, just go through the PSeudo execution points below:

• User A creates a profile
• setProfile("Aniket", "...", "...") is called
• The system checks the profile name length
• Name length is 0, so the profile is treated as new
• totalProfiles is increased by 1
• User A updates the same profile and clears the name
• setProfile("", "...", "...") is called
• The profile still exists
• The stored name becomes an empty string
• User A updates the profile again with a valid name
• setProfile("Aniket", "...", "...") is called
• The system again checks the profile name length
• Name length is 0 at the time of the check
• The contract treats this update as a new profile
• totalProfiles is incremented again
• No new user was actually created
• The same user can repeat this cycle indefinitely
• totalProfiles keeps increasing without new users
• The counter no longer reflects real platform adoption
• Platform metrics become misleading and unreliable

function setProfile(
        string calldata name,
        string calldata contact,
        string calldata bio
    ) external {
  
       // Check if this is a new profile (first time setting)
        bool isNewProfile = bytes(userProfiles[msg.sender].name).length == 0; //
        userProfiles[msg.sender] = Profile({
            name: name,
            contact: contact,
            bio: bio
        }); //
        // Increment profiles counter only for new profiles
        if (isNewProfile) {
            totalProfiles++; //
        }
        
        emit ProfileUpdated(msg.sender);
    }

@KanishkSogani What's your view on this , Please feel free to assign