[Tasks] Users can not see a task that is assigned to a Surveillance Officer, Surveillance Supervisor, or Admin Surveillance Supervisor

[adinaflorea9]

Bug Description

Users can not see a task (even if they created that specific task - i.e. if they have task_create user right; or they have create_entity user right and a task is created automatically with the entity) if the task is assigned to a Surveillance Officer, Surveillance Supervisor or Admin Surveillance Supervisor.

Steps to Reproduce

1. Log in with one of the following users: Surveillance Officer, Case Officer, Hospital Informant, Community Officer, Community Informant, Contact Officer, Lab Officer;
2. Create a task for an entity (eg. 'Case investigation task' for a case; or create a new case and a 'Case investigation task' is created automatically);
3. In the task's 'Edit form' set the assignee to a Surveillance Officer, or Surveillance Supervisor, or Admin Surveillance Supervisor;
4. Save the task.

Actual Behavior

Surveillance Officer, Case Officer: they can not see the task if it is assigned to a Surveillance Supervisor or Admin Surveillance Supervisor.

Hospital Informant, Community Officer, Community Informant, Contact Officer, Lab Officer: they can not see the task if it is assigned to a Surveillance Officer, Surveillance Supervisor or Admin Surveillance Supervisor.

Expected Behavior

Users should be able to see the tasks that are related to their jurisdiction.

Screenshots

GIF of the steps to reproduce and the behavior:

System Details

• Device: Windows 10
• SORMAS version: 1.68.0-SNAPSHOT
• Android version/Browser: Chrome
• Server URL: local machine and test.sormas.netzlink.com
• User Role: Surveillance Officer

[bernardsilenou]

I think this may also apply to community officers or hospital informants, in case they can create a task.

• Maybe the change can be that: the reporting user should always have full assess to the task associated to entities that they have full access to.

[adinaflorea9]

Starting from @bernardsilenou 's comment, I have verified the behavior described in the ticket for other users as well.

The ticket's description has been edited accordingly.

[StefanKock]

Needs to be checked, it might be a severe defect or some side effect.

[syntakker]

Comments in the code indicate that this is the intended behaviour.

[kwa20]

@syntakker Can you tell me what the comments in the code say? This behaviour might need to be reviewed and possibly changed