Add the possibility to flag a HTML field as `sanitize_overridable`.
The sanitizer will then be bypassed if the user doing the operation is
part of the new group `base.group_sanitize_override`.
The "Settings" users are part of that new group.
If such a user wrote some HTML that would have normally been removed by
the sanitizer, then users without the right to bypass the sanitizer
won't be able to write on that field anymore.
Otherwise, it would sanitize the previously written data.
Such cases are detected, and the modification prevented by the system,
which will warn the user about it.
For instance, with a `field.html(sanitize_overridable=True)`: one being
part of `group_sanitize_override` could write `<script></script>`.
Then, someone not part of the group trying to add an element inside that
field like appending a `<p/>` -> `<script></script><p>New Content</p>`
would not be able to because it would go through the sanitizer and
ultimately, removing part of the original value:
`<p>New Content</p>` (`<script></script>` would be removed).
== Real use case ==
In the website builder, there is 2 editor rights:
- group_website_publisher: restricted editor
- group_website_designer: editor & designer
The designer editor can edit pages and views, while the restricted
editor can't do anything unless he is part of other groups.
In edit mode, the restricted editor will only be able to edit fields of
record he has access to.
For instance, being a sales manager allows you to edit a product
description on the website.
Being an event manager -> edit event. Slide manager -> Slides etc.
As those restricted editor are able to edit those fields, they are
(almost) always sanitized to prevent them to introduce malicious code.
Since those fields are sanitized, even admins / designer editor are not
able to fully use the website builder in such fields.
Some clients don't really care about that sanitation, they'd prefer to
avoid it as they trust their manager and would prefer to have the full
builder capability instead.
This is typically the case in small project (butcher, hairdresser,
reseller etc) and in SMEs.
With the new `sanitize_overridable` feature, they will be able to do
that, as the "Designer & Editor" group now also receive the group
`base.group_sanitize_override` (done in next commit).
Part-of: odoo/odoo#97398
For bugfix purposes, app administration groups have been given to
(implied by) the "Settings" group because without those rights,
opening/saving the settings crashed.
1) Do not load hidden view content
This commit uses the conditional inheritance of views
(depending on user groups) to avoid loading unnecessary view
& record content client-side.
This improves performance for admins without the specific application
admin rights, but also fixes the main bugfix problem,
caused by the webclient querying name_get for the records in relational
fields content.
Example:
sale_management adds a res.config.settings field to specify
the default sale.order.template for the current company.
If a 'Settings' user without 'sale.group_sale_manager' opens the
settings, he won't see this setting, but if a default template is
specified for the current company, the webclient will still request
the name_get of this template to the server, because the field
was present in the view, only hidden with a groups attribute.
With this commit change in sale, the field won't be in the view unless
you have the Sale manager group, avoiding the error/traceback/bug.
2) Remove implied application administration groups
Do not force the specific application groups on all 'Settings' user,
they globally do not need those rights, and if they need it, they
can add it to their account themselves.
3) Add a test to make sure settings user are able to manage settings.
4) Enforce 'settings' -> 'access rights' -> 'internal user' groups
As the previous test highlighted some 'false positives' because
it considered a settings user unable to read `crm.team`
and `stock.warehouse` records, we also took the opportunity to enforce
the fact that 'Settings' & 'Access rights' users must be internal users.
It makes no sense for a portal/public user to have access to the
settings, and didn't work anyway.
Part-of: odoo/odoo#91909
Add a new group allowing administrators to remove the ability for
users to bulk-export data from the database. It's pretty minor as
technically the user can still access the underlying object through
the basic methods but it's still a bit of a roadblock.
Users can export by default.
Task 2170900
closesodoo/odoo#45400
Signed-off-by: Xavier Morel (xmo) <xmo@odoo.com>
Purpose
=======
Allow the user to select the allowed companies for which he wants to see records
on top of selecting his current company.
It is confusing for users to see the records from the company he is connected to
and the records of the children companies.
Instead of using the hierarchy of companies to access records across companies,
the user can now select (from his set of allowed companies) the companies for
which he wants to access records.
/!\ This means that the user will interact with records from company A when in
company B.
Example: a SO has been created and confirmed in A. When in B, I create the
invoice from it.
Specifications
==============
1/ Deprecate the parent/children hierarchy on the res.company model. The fields are
kept on the res.company model to ensure the retro-compatibility, but won't be used
accross the standard code anymore. The only functional usage for this mechanism
was to allow to see records from several companies by creating a virtual parent
company, which will be possible with the new mechanism.
2/ By default, a user will only see the records of the company he is connected
to (or records without a company). (It is still editable by the user if needed).
For that, put this information in the user context, to allow having different
configurations on different browser tabs. Instead of having domains like
['|',
('company_id', '=', False),
('company_id', 'child_of', user.company_id.id)]
you'll have something like
['|',
('company_id', '=', False),
('company_id', 'in', company_ids)]
Note that the 'company_ids' is a value that is passed in the evaluation
context on the record rule, as we already have user, or time.
company_ids is a list of the ids of all the enabled companies in the
user's context.
3/ Out of the generic improvements brought by this task, this will illustrate
issues that could exist since several versions. For example, it should not be
possible to create a scrap order for the company A with a package of the company
B, or it should not be possible to create an invoice on the company A with
payment terms from the company B. Before the version 12.0, it was easy to
encounter this kind of issues as the admin was the SUPERUSER_ID. A positive side
effect of the fact that the SUPERUSER_ID has become an inactive user was to
make it more difficult to introduce mismatch on the records, but haven't solved
the issue, as it was still possible to do it with parent companies
configuration. Some of these issues have been fixed in this commit, but all the
business flows should be re-tested to check if an ir.rule should be introduced
(eg: a multi company rule for stock.quand.package), if the company of a record
is correctly transfered to another record created from the first record (eg:
From a SO, create an invoice and a payment, the company of the sales order
should be transfered on the invoice and the payment, even if the company of the
sales order is A and I'm logged into the company B with the company A enabled.
4/ Currently, if I click on a button on a notification email (example 'View
Task'), I face a traceback if I'm not logged into the company of the record.
Now, if you click on a button and if you have access to the record, the correct
company will be automatically set.
5/ If I display a kanban view with several records from several companies (and
an image), all the images should be displayed.
6/ Currently if you copy paste an url, this will crash if you're not in the
correct company. This won't be fixed because it's quite impossible to do it in
a clean way. This task brings a workaround. Copy/Paste -> Traceback -> Log into
the correct company, re-copy/paste -> Ok.
7/ 2 property methods have been added on the environment to retrieve the company
on which the user is logged in and the companies the user enabled, on a specific
tab.
That way, when creating a record, instead of doing
default=lambda self: self.env.user.company_id
do
default=lambda self: self.env.company_id
On the other hand, to retrieve the enabled companies, do
companies = self.env.company_ids
8/ Modify the Company Switcher widget to allow to log into another company
WITHOUT writing on the res.users (and thus bringing cache invalidation issues
and so on). Also allow to enable several companies and see records from several
companies, and independantly of the other browser's tabs.
9/ When focusing on a tab, save the current company configuration on the local
storage. That way, when doing 'CTRL+T' or a middle click, the context is
propagated to the new tab.
10/ Improve the error message in case of multi company access errors. Now, when
the user is in debug mode, display the related names of the records and the name
of the user who brings the issue.
11/ Remove the context erasing when writing on a res.users
This is probably coming from the migration to new API of the base module.
The context was not propagated at this moment, which was a common mistake at
that time. When migrating the module, probably by using the 'black box' method,
as the context was not propagated, it was erased on the new version. This is
now an issue because the context (i.e. the enabled companies) was erased when
writing on a res.users, leading to tracebacks.
See: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/7eab8e26d3d46c53f4be924d6a34e80a66e74960#diff-4c2e738ee8f64f11806c889ea097b5e7R624
12/ Fix the crash manager on redirect warnings. The issue is the following
- Create an invoice on a company without a configured CoA.
- Set a partner
- On the onchange_partner_id, a redirect warning is raised to propose you
to configure a CoA
- Click on 'Go to the configuration panel'
- A generic warning says something like 'Do you want to discard your changes?'
- Click on yes, the page refreshes, but not on the redirect action.
Now, set correctly the action on the hash, and reload instead. The breadcrumb is
lost for example, but you reach the correct action at least.
13/ Introduce a res.group to enable/disable the multi company per tab
feature.
14/ To help the users to know which tab is in which company, add the
possibility to have a favicon per company. When creating a company,
the classical 'O' icon is colored by default in a random color.
15/ Remove the company switcher on the frontend. This was mainly there
to allow a user to swicth to the company linked to the website.
This behavior is now transparent to the user. If the website A is
activated, then the company set on the context is the company of the
website.
16/ Deprecated the _company_default_get method on the res.company
model. Remove the method _get_company on the res.users model.
17/ Add 'allowed_company_ids' and 'current_company_id' on the pyeval
context. You can now use those variables on domains in the views to
access directly to the activated company.ies on the current tab.
TaskID: 1960971
closesodoo/odoo#32341
Signed-off-by: Yannick Tivisse (yti) <yti@odoo.com>
Purpose
=======
Access group terminology is missleading. Yous have to be manager to administrate
an application. This task consists to rename groups to be understandable for everyone.
Groups should be reorganised on the users form to be more explicit.
Specification
=============
1/ Rename 'Manager' to 'Administrator' in users groups.
2/ Define a hierarchy on access groups by using the category_id in the manifests
A category 'Operations/Project' will create a category Project with a parent
category 'Operations', and something smart is already developed (in modules/db.py)
to avoid duplicating categories.
3/ Add a group in expenses to be able to approve expenses reports for my team.
4/ Add a group in timesheets to be able to approve timesheets for my team.
5/ Remove partially the useless crap in ir_module_category_data.xml
6/ Sort access rights groups on users form according to its parent category
closesodoo/odoo#29362
Signed-off-by: "Yannick Tivisse (yti)" <yti@odoo.com>
Purpose
=======
Add the possibility to create private addresses, only accessible for a subset
of users.
Specification
=============
- Add a new 'Private' partner type
- Add a res.groups in base 'Access to Private Addresses'
- Add ir.rules for the following behavior:
- Every employees/internal users can read non-private addresses
- Only users in group_private_addresses can access private addresses
- Add in base a simplified form view for private addresses
- A HR Officer is automatically granted in group_private_addresses
- Use the simplified form view to open the address_home_id form on employees
Purpose of this commit is to standardize portal user behavior and creation.
As all portal required features (user, group, support) have moved to
base let us move the template user used to create portal users to base.
'Portal User Template' is therefore moved from auth_signup to base module.
Various config parameters are updated due to the change in xml id.
This commit is related to task ID 31399 .
The is_portal flag was used before to define if a group is a portal group. This is not true anymore since the default portal group should be used for this purpose. All logic associated to this flag can be removed.
TASK: 47937
Romain Derie