I need to customize LDAP federation, so I extended LDAPStorageProvider and appropriate LDAPStorageProviderFactory. It is called, but however in admin panel there are no configuration options shown at all. What I would like is to set the edit mode to read-only so it can not be changed. I tried also some existing solutions found in github, doing similar thing, but they also does not show options in admin console.
To add a context to the question: what I want to achieve is to make my
#Override
public boolean isValid(RealmModel realm, UserModel user, CredentialInput input) {
return super.isValid(realm, user, input);
}
because when user is created initially, administrator creates a temporary password that has to be changed on next login. We have an internal REST for this, but I need that initial password user got from admin, since its required parameter. Then, I can intercept input and use for example:
authSession.setAuthNote("password-old", input.getChallengeResponse());
To add it to session temporarily.
If I can get CredentialInput somehow from KeycloakSession - that would be the best, but have not find a way so far.
Many thanks
Related
Question: How can I enforce existing users to set up 2FA in .Net Core 3.1 Identity?
I have seen a couple of answers here already, but I have issues with them as follows:
Redirect user to set up 2FA page on login if they do not have it set up. Problem with this is that the user can simply jump to a different url to avoid this, therefore it is not actually enforced.
Have some on executing filter that checks if the user has 2FA enbaled or not and if not redirect them to MFA set up page. The issue I have with this is that on every single navigation the server must go to the database to check whether the user has this field enabled, thus creating a significant performance hit on each request. I know one trip to the database may not sound like much but I have worked with applications where this was the norm and other things used this method, causing a pile up of pre action db queries. I want to avoid this kind of behavior unless absolutely necessary.
My current idea is to on login:
Check the users credentials but NOT log them in
userManager.CheckPasswordAsync(....)
If the credentials pass, check if the user has 2FA enabled or not. If they do, continue through login flow, if not:
Generate a user token:
userManager.GenerateUserTokenAsync(.......)
and store this along with the username in a server side cache. Then pass a key to the cached items with a redirect to the 2FA setup page, which will not have the [authorize] attribute set, allowing users not logged in to access it.
Before doing anything on the 2FA set up page, retrieve the cached items with the provied key andverify the token and username:
userManager.VerifyUserTokenAsync(......)
If this doesn't pass, return Unauthorized otherwise continue and get the current user from the supplied UserName in the url that was passed via a cache key. Also dump the cached items and key so that should the url be snatched by a dodgy browser extension it can't be used again.
Continue to pass a new cache key to new user tokens and usernames to each 2FA page to authenticate the user as they navigate.
Is this an appropriate use of user tokens? And is this approach secure enough? I'm concerned that having the user not logged in presents security issues, but I think it is necessary in order to avoid the previously mention problem of going to the database on every request to check 2FA, as with this method trying to navigate away will just redirect to login.
I implemented this via a Filter Method
I have a BasePageModel which all my pages inherit
public override async Task OnPageHandlerExecutionAsync(PageHandlerExecutingContext context, PageHandlerExecutionDelegate next)
{
if (!User.Identity.IsAuthenticated)
{
await next.Invoke();
return;
}
var user = await UserManager.GetUserAsync(User);
var allowedPages = new List<string>
{
"Areas_Identity_Pages_Account_ConfirmEmail",
"Areas_Identity_Pages_Account_ConfirmEmailChange",
"Areas_Identity_Pages_Account_Logout",
"Areas_Identity_Pages_Account_Manage_EnableAuthenticator",
"Areas_Identity_Pages_Account_ResetPassword",
"Pages_AllowedPageX",
"Pages_AllowedPageY",
"Pages_Privacy"
};
var page = context.ActionDescriptor.PageTypeInfo.Name;
if (!user.TwoFactorEnabled && allowedPages.All(p => p != page))
{
context.Result = RedirectToPage("/Account/Manage/EnableAuthenticator", new { area = "Identity" });
}
else
{
await next.Invoke();
}
}
I then changed both the Disable2fa and ResetAuthenticator pages to redirect to the main 2fa page
public IActionResult OnGet() => RedirectToPage("./TwoFactorAuthentication");
And removed the reset/disable links from that page
I chose to implement a more modern and OAuth friendly solution (which is inline with .Net Core Identity).
Firstly, I created a custom claims principal factory that extends UserClaimsPrincipalFactory.
This allows us to add claims to the user when the runtime user object is built (I'm sorry I don't know the official name for this, but its the same thing as the User property you see on controllers).
In here I added a claim 'amr' (which is the standard name for authentication method as described in RFC 8176). That will either be set to pwd or mfa depending on whether they simply used a password or are set up with mfa.
Next, I added a custom authorize attribute that checks for this claim. If the claim is set to pwd, the authorization handler fails. This attribute is then set on all controllers that aren't to do with MFA, that way the user can still get in to set up MFA, but nothing else.
The only downside with this technique is the dev needs to remember to add that attribute to every non MFA controller, but aside from that, it works quite well as the claims are stored in the users' cookie (which isn't modifiable), so the performance hit is very small.
Hope this helps someone else, and this is what I read as a base for my solution:
https://damienbod.com/2019/12/16/force-asp-net-core-openid-connect-client-to-require-mfa/
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/security/authentication/mfa?view=aspnetcore-5.0#force-aspnet-core-openid-connect-client-to-require-mfa
I want to guarantee that all of my users on sign-in have signed our EULA, and to me, it's similar to the built-in SignInResult.TwoFactorRequired, because I'd like to kick them through the EULA signing process before finalizing their sign-in. Does anyone know of any resources that shows how to create a custom SignInResult so that all of the users of my Identity server will have to follow the same rules on sign-in?
I'd implement a custom SignInManager, but PasswordSignInAsync still returns a concrete SignInResult and I'm not sure if it's possible to wedge in my additional desired states there.
Yeah, you're not going to be able to just override PasswordSignInAsync, but you could create a new method that returns your custom result class and simply hands off the actual sign-in part to PasswordSignInAsync.
However, by the time you get done create derived types, with custom methods and states, and bootstrap everything, it probably is just simpler and more straight-forward to just read the value from the user after sign in, and react accordingly. For example, you can (and probably should) set the EULA acceptance as a claim on the user. Then, you can just do something like:
// sign in user
if (User.FindFirstValue("eula") == null)
{
return Redirect("/eula");
}
Even better, you can create a custom action filter that checks if the user is authenticated, and if so, whether they have the claim. If not, then you redirect to your EULA acceptance page. Then that action filter can be made global in Startup.cs and you don't even need to think about it anymore.
so!
I have a question: how to allow access some part of module only for adminisitrator, for example.
For example, I have module album. It has controllers index, delete, add, edit, full. I want full and index controller be available for all roles, but edit, delete and add action only for administrators.
What module I have to use to do that? I found Zend\Authentification.
Table is: username, password, role.
How to authentificate user?:
// do the authentication
$auth = Zend_Auth::getInstance();
$result = $auth->authenticate($authAdapter);
if ($result->isValid()) {
// success: store database row to auth's storage
// system. (Not the password though!)
$data = $authAdapter->getResultRowObject(null, 'password');
$auth->getStorage()->write($data);
$this->_redirect('/');
} else {
// failure: clear database row from session
$this->view->message = 'Login failed.';
}
After that I will get access to user data, for example, by:
Zend_Auth::getInstance()->getIdentity()->username;
So, in action, in which I want to restrict access I just need to use:
if(Zend_Auth::getInstance()->getIdentity()->role == admin) {
redirect("auth/login");
}
Right?
The questions:
Is my suggestion about how to check user role in each contoller correct?
Do I understand correctly how to work with Zend\Authentification and restrict access to some actions? So in future I will just use same for each action, right?
Additional question: Does Aclmodule uses for managing permissions? So Acl is needed to help Zend_Auth with permissions, right?
To be able to do this you have to build or implement an ACL (Access Control List). You can also use a third party solution in combination with the earlier mentioned Zend_Auth (or any other authentication module). You can read more on Zend ACL here: Zend ACL introduction
You could for example also take a look at BjyAuthorize. This ACL module provides a complete authorization solution for your application but depends on ZfcUser for user authentication and registration. It might be a good way to get started.
If you are done building or implementing BjyAuthorize you can easily tie your access permission checking to your routes (but there are many other ways). You can see how this works here on the BjyAuthorize GitHub page
These modules will teach you a lot about how authentication and authorization can be build into your Zend Framework 2 application.
I have read many questions like my question title, none of them give me a solution.
I am implement a website (using struts2 framework) and I dont know what is the most secure way to check if user is already logged or not. My site has the payment feature, so I should really be careful about this.
All the solution I have read are similar like this:
// Is there a "user" object stored in the user's HttpSession?
Object user = session.getAttribute (USER_HANDLE);
if (user == null) {
// The user has not logged in yet.
}
else {
// the user has logged in
}
I was wondering is there any chance some bad guys can create a fake session object like the user object and then can logged in the system without a valid password?
I also want to know is it practice way, at every required logged in page, not just check the user object is not null, but also check the username and password in the database?
Maybe you should use a security framework like spring security or Apache Shiro.
Security issues are always based on your requirements, in simple which kind of security you want ,because there are various layers of security regarding web. But as you have mentioned, This you can achieve using Struts2-Interceptors, because It provides you terminology to perform some essential operation before and after your action is called.For example refer this link.
Here is the scenario. I have two objects Users (with username/password) and UserInfo with rest of the data related to user. The Users is an old table with thousands of records and UserInfo is fairly new. I want to get as much UserInfo as I can when the user first logs in.
I'd like to force user to a custom screen after first login and ask for the UserInfo data. Once I get the "required" data in the new screen, I dont show it till the user voluntarily wants to fill in the data under "Profile".
Since there are multiple entry points to the application, I dont want to update all the controllers to check for this.
Is there a way I can use a Spring Security filter or something which is executed on successful login? I had a look at ApplicationListener<AuthenticationSuccessEvent> but it doesnt solve the problem as if I copy paste the link in the browser, it lets me go ahead to the destination without asking for "extra information".
In a nutshell, I want a check after each login which, if fails, user is not allowed to enter the application. No matter how he tries to get in.
In your Config.groovy, configure Spring Security's defaultTargetUrl and tell it to always redirect there:
grails.plugins.springsecurity.successHandler.alwaysUseDefault = true
grails.plugins.springsecurity.successHandler.defaultTargetUrl = '/userInfo/edit'
In your UserInfoController's edit action, you can check that the required fields are present (userInfo.validate() perhaps?) and if they are, redirect to wherever you like, perhaps '/', otherwise render the edit info view.
You can adopt what #doelleri proposed and enhance the rule by those steps:
run a batch task to assign a temporary ROLE_DISABLED role to each user who does not provide supplemental information yet. If the user already had some roles, save them in some property.
setup your authorization rule as that users with ROLE_DISABLED role only allowed to access /userInfo/edit.
in /userInfo/edit, if the user has a ROLE_DISABLED role, render the information input view, and resume user's role after it successfully updated its information. Otherwise redirect to '/' or the path it requested.