Fix KB item selection

[btry]

Error while searching for KB items. Regression introduced in a290f76277e7fb96aedb825c287be639bcb1661c (file inc/knowbiseitem.class.php)

When searching for KB items from Formcreator, the result may give items without any target (entity, profile, user or group).

The problem is in the 3rd line of the WHERE clause OR `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`is_faq` = '1'

This PR reverts a part of the above mentionned commit

here is the faulty request

SELECT
    `glpi_knowbaseitems`.*,
    `glpi_knowbaseitems_knowbaseitemcategories`.`knowbaseitemcategories_id`,
    GROUP_CONCAT(
        DISTINCT `glpi_knowbaseitemcategories`.`completename`
    ) AS category,
    COUNT(`glpi_knowbaseitems_users`.`id`) + COUNT(`glpi_groups_knowbaseitems`.`id`) + COUNT(`glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles`.`id`) + COUNT(`glpi_entities_knowbaseitems`.`id`) AS `visibility_count`
FROM
    `glpi_knowbaseitems`
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_knowbaseitems_users` ON (
        `glpi_knowbaseitems_users`.`knowbaseitems_id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`
    )
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_groups_knowbaseitems` ON (
        `glpi_groups_knowbaseitems`.`knowbaseitems_id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`
    )
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles` ON (
        `glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles`.`knowbaseitems_id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`
    )
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_entities_knowbaseitems` ON (
        `glpi_entities_knowbaseitems`.`knowbaseitems_id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`
    )
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_knowbaseitems_knowbaseitemcategories` ON (
        `glpi_knowbaseitems_knowbaseitemcategories`.`knowbaseitems_id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`
    )
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_knowbaseitemcategories` ON (
        `glpi_knowbaseitemcategories`.`id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems_knowbaseitemcategories`.`knowbaseitemcategories_id`
    )
WHERE
    (
        `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`users_id` = '3'
        OR `glpi_knowbaseitems_users`.`users_id` = '3'
        OR `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`is_faq` = '1'
        OR (
            `glpi_groups_knowbaseitems`.`groups_id` IN ('-1')
            AND (
                `glpi_groups_knowbaseitems`.`no_entity_restriction` = '1'
                OR (
                    `glpi_groups_knowbaseitems`.`entities_id` IN (
                        '0'
                    )
                )
            )
        )
        OR (
            `glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles`.`profiles_id` = '1'
            AND (
                `glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles`.`no_entity_restriction` = '1'
                OR (
                    (
                        `glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles`.`entities_id` IN (
                            '0'
                        )
                    )
                )
            )
        )
        OR (
            `glpi_entities_knowbaseitems`.`entities_id` IN (
                '0'
            )
        )
    )
    AND (
        (
            `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`is_faq` = '1'
            OR `glpi_knowbaseitems_users`.`users_id` = '3'
        )
    )
    AND `glpi_knowbaseitems_knowbaseitemcategories`.`knowbaseitemcategories_id` IN ('1', '2', '3', '4')
GROUP BY
    `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`

Here is a working requestin GLPI 9.5

SELECT
    `glpi_knowbaseitems`.*,
    `glpi_knowbaseitemcategories`.`completename` AS `category`,
    COUNT(`glpi_knowbaseitems_users`.`id`) + COUNT(`glpi_groups_knowbaseitems`.`id`) + COUNT(`glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles`.`id`) + COUNT(`glpi_entities_knowbaseitems`.`id`) AS `visibility_count`
FROM
    `glpi_knowbaseitems`
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_knowbaseitems_users` ON (
        `glpi_knowbaseitems_users`.`knowbaseitems_id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`
    )
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_groups_knowbaseitems` ON (
        `glpi_groups_knowbaseitems`.`knowbaseitems_id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`
    )
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles` ON (
        `glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles`.`knowbaseitems_id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`
    )
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_entities_knowbaseitems` ON (
        `glpi_entities_knowbaseitems`.`knowbaseitems_id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`
    )
    LEFT JOIN `glpi_knowbaseitemcategories` ON (
        `glpi_knowbaseitemcategories`.`id` = `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`knowbaseitemcategories_id`
    )
WHERE
    (
        `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`users_id` = '3'
        OR `glpi_knowbaseitems_users`.`users_id` = '3'
        OR (
            `glpi_groups_knowbaseitems`.`groups_id` IN ('-1')
            AND (
                `glpi_groups_knowbaseitems`.`entities_id` < '0'
                OR (
                    `glpi_groups_knowbaseitems`.`entities_id` IN ('0')
                )
            )
        )
        OR (
            `glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles`.`profiles_id` = '1'
            AND (
                `glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles`.`entities_id` < '0'
                OR (
                    (
                        `glpi_knowbaseitems_profiles`.`entities_id` IN ('0')
                    )
                )
            )
        )
        OR (
            `glpi_entities_knowbaseitems`.`entities_id` IN ('0')
        )
    )

    AND `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`is_faq` = '1'
    AND (
        `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`knowbaseitemcategories_id` IN ('0', '1', '2', '3', '4', '5', '6')
    )
GROUP BY
    `glpi_knowbaseitems`.`id`,
    `glpi_knowbaseitemcategories`.`completename`

[btry]

@Rom1-B : please check if my PR conflicts with the goal you wanted to acheve in your original PR : you said in the PR https://github.com/glpi-project/glpi/pull/9898 Allow access to a knowledge base article by self-service users without it being in the FAQ,

[Rom1-B]

@Rom1-B : please check if my PR conflicts with the goal you wanted to acheve in your original PR : you said in the PR #9898 Allow access to a knowledge base article by self-service users without it being in the FAQ,

This is completely in conflict, as the aim was to explicitly share articles with users (target = user) who do not have rights to the FAQ.

Reverting to the previous code removes this feature.

[btry]

@Rom1-B We need to do some extra checks on this PR : If you approved it, I assume it works as you expect in respect of https://github.com/glpi-project/glpi/pull/9898. However, I notice 2 problems

• a self service user can see KB articles (with is_faq = 0) when the user is granted to view it. But I'm disturbed by the fact that a self service user cannot access a KB article when his group is allowed to view it. I think that such difference of behaviour should be avoided
• When trying to access a KB item (still is_faq = 0), the self service user will get an "access denied" error. Your PR does not contains any change in right checks, then I believe there is a difference between your use case and the use case I tested. And maybe something to fix un the right checks when opening the KB item.

I add WIP prefix to prevent merging my PR for now.

[btry]

PR has been rebased

[carlosbmc]

knowbaseitem.class.zip Hello, I don't find this OR clause in this file.

Thank you!!

[btry]

Hi @carlosbmc

knowbaseitem.class.php does not exists anymore in GLPI 10. You cannot apply this patch on an older version of GLPI.

[AdrienClairembault]

To me, it seems more like a functional question. If Put this item in the FAQ -> Yes means that the item should be visible to everyone then there no bug and this PR should be closed (or maybe there should be a hint in the UI, like disabling the "Targets" tabs with a tooltip explaining why ?). If this is not the intended behavior then a fix will indeed be needed.

Maybe @orthagh can explain the intended behavior.

[orthagh]

➡️ https://glpi-user-documentation.readthedocs.io/fr/latest/modules/tools/knowledgebase.html

[AdrienClairembault]

FAQ items are public to everyone (within their entity) that has access to read FAQs. The additional visibility restrictions will have no affect in this case.

So not a bug for me (I still think the UI could be improved to include this information in one way or another to avoid confusions)

[carlosbmc]

Its correct, working after removing // OR glpi_knowbaseitems.is_faq = '1' in file KnowbaseItem.php

[AdrienClairembault]

#12922 should take care of it.

[btry]

Closing this PR in favor of the above mentionned one.

@carlosbmc : you may want to test that PR as I think it is better to include it in GLPI instead of this one.