Age Rating restrictions work incorrectly

[IvanGavrilenko]

What Went Wrong?

I tryed to make a account for the child with restrictions based on Age restriction field. But the condition "allow only age 13+" did not work at all - all books were shown - look at screenshot 1 - the smart shelves show just the same value (smart shelves have the single condition - age rating is empty for the "Not rated" shelve or equal to the value for all others). The condition "restrict age 16+" - worked partially - the ages 16+ and 18+ were filtered out but books without filled Age restriction left visible (screen 2).

This situation is not normal as the logic - to restrict an account from unwanted access (i.e. the restricted account is a child) and after book import from bookdrop folder the file has empty age restrictions and thus I may forget to make the age restriction to the file, or in timeframe from downloading to the age filling the unwanted access is granted.

How Can We Reproduce This?

add several books to the library and assign different age rating to the books, leaving several books with age rating empty
create a user and try to restrict it with books i.e. 13+

try to implement the condition as "allow only 13+"
try to implement the condition as "restrict with 16+"

What Should Have Happened?

From my logic this managed account should see books with age rating 0 (aka For all ages), 6+, 10+, 13+ and nothing else.

condition as "allow only 13+" - shows all library
condition as "restrict with 16+" - shows 0 (aka For all ages), 6+, 10+, 13+ AND books with empty age rating

Screenshots or Error Messages (Optional)

Any Ideas on How to Fix This? (Optional)

As I suppose the book feed is done via SQL, so check if SQL has condition like
select * from ... where age_rating is below &customer_selected_age_rating and age_rating is not null

Your Setup

Grimmory v2.3.0
Docker
Storage local

Before Submitting

• I've searched existing issues and confirmed this bug hasn't been reported yet

[IvanGavrilenko]

still in "nightly-20260420-21b32fc6"

[IvanGavrilenko]

If the issue "needs-reproduction" I can make a seperate small library of 3 or 4 books, make age restrictions and share credentials so team could see the issue...

[balazs-szucs]

I believe that label is "auto-added" until we remove it, from what i can tell the actual issue should be rather easily reproducible. Do not worry about that.

[IvanGavrilenko]

@balazs-szucs thank you, I've got the logic.

So the single question is what behavior is intended to have ("white" or "black" list) - if I restrict books to 10+:

• unrated books are not restricted - so they are allowed (current behaviour)
• unrated books are not allowed so they are restricted

In my case (10+ is less than quarter of library) - the correct way is the second behavior, but for users wanting to restrict one or two 18+ books from the whole library - the first one is more convenient.

May be the correct way would be depend on the type of restrictions - if I use "allow only 10+" - means that restriction is strict (white list, so only 10+, 6+ and 0+ should be shown) so unrated books should not be shown, if I use "restrict 14+" - means that only specified ages should be restricted (black list) so unrated books should be allowed.

But I suppose this behaviour can be hard to be realized, so may be just a new flag (may be selectable as restriction for a user) should be added to booklore-api/src/main/java/org/booklore/service/restriction/ContentRestrictionService.java to lines 257-260:

`// add flag
private boolean allowUnratedBooks = true;

// And change logic:
if (metadata == null || metadata.getAgeRating() == null) {
return allowUnratedBooks; // true = show unrated books, false = hide unrated
}`

And may be this flag can be used not only in age rating restrictions but also for all other limitations?