SORMAS-Project icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
SORMAS-Project copied to clipboard

Published 20 hours ago • verified publisher icon SORMAS-Foundation

Person directory: Don't include persons based on entity types the user cannot access

Open MartinWahnschaffe opened this issue 3 years ago • 2 comments

Problem Description

#10352 pointed out problems accessing persons related to entities the user should not be able to access. For example the person directory currently still lists persons related to a case to a user that does not have the right to view cases.

Proposed Change

Only show persons that are related to entity types the user can access.

Acceptance Criteria

Implementation Details

  • [ ] The PersonService.createUserFilter method should not join entity types the user does not have access to (e.g. exclude travelEntryFilter, when the user is not allowed to view travel entries).
  • [ ] For consistency we should do the same in PersonService.getAllAfter

Additional Information

MartinWahnschaffe avatar Sep 21 '22 13:09 MartinWahnschaffe

@MartinWahnschaffe there is some differences between PersonService.getAllAfter and PersonService.createUserFilter.

  1. PersonService.createUserFilter already checks if FeatureType.IMMUNIZATION_MANAGEMENT is not FeatureTypeProperty.REDUCED. But this is not considered for
  2. PersonService.getAllAfter additionally takes persons in the users district into account.

More methods I found that go into the same direction but implementation is redundant and needs to be changed also:

  • PersonService.getAllUuids also does it's own logic to find persons (similar to getAllAfter).
  • PersonService.getSimilarPersonDtos looks in every PersonAssociation without considering feature configurations or user rights.
  • PersonFacadeEjb.count needs to match PersonFacade.getIndexList (-> createUserFilter).
  • PersonService.inJurisdictionOrOwned -> PersonJurisdictionPredicateValidator

The decision which PersonAssociation is allowed will be needed for this ticket and #10352 so we have a dependency between these tickets.

StefanKock avatar Sep 22 '22 08:09 StefanKock

After discussing my findings with @MartinWahnschaffe we came to the conclusion that this ticket is to big/wide ranging for a hotfix/micro release. There is a high risk of merge conflicts and diverging changes between development branch.

StefanKock avatar Sep 22 '22 09:09 StefanKock

Code review was done, will wait for 1.76.1 to be finished (avoid merge conflicts) and then upstream merge development, recheck tests work and then merge it.

StefanKock avatar Nov 01 '22 08:11 StefanKock

Verified ticket on the local machine using the latest version of SORMAS from the development branch - 1.77.0-SNAPSHOT(c6512f2).

adinaflorea9 avatar Nov 07 '22 12:11 adinaflorea9