I have a blazor server web application and a .NET Core worker process, these both use a common class for data access (generic unit of work / generic repository).
In the database I would like to log the user names that are inserting or editing records. To do this I want to inject a ClaimsPrincipal to the shared UoW and Repo classes).
So, I would like to be able to extract the current ClaimsPrincipal in a transient service via dependency injection.
For the worker I can inject a ClaimsPrincipal via the following code;
public static IServiceCollection CreateWorkerClaimsPrincipal(this IServiceCollection services, string workerName)
{
Claim workerNameClaim = new Claim("http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity/claims/name", workerName);
ClaimsIdentity identity = new ClaimsIdentity(
new System.Security.Claims.Claim[] { workerNameClaim },
"My-Worker-Authentication-Type",
"http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity/claims/name",
"role");
ClaimsPrincipal principal = new ClaimsPrincipal(identity);
services.AddTransient<ClaimsPrincipal>(s => principal);
return services;
}
This is working and meets my needs.
For the blazor server web application I need to do something similar.
I believe that the correct way to extract the ClaimsPrincipal is via the AuthenticationStateProvider, however this needs a call to an async method GetAuthenticationStateAsync.
NOTE: I cannot user IHttpContextAccessor as this doesn't work with Azure App Service.
I want something like;
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
/// ...
services.AddTransient<ClaimsPrincipal>(); // I think I need to do something here?
/// ...
}
So when I request a ClaimsPrincipal via dependency injection I want to return the user from;
var authState = await AUthenticationStateProvider.GetAuthenticationStateAsync();
return authState.User;
Is this possible?
As is often the way, by working this through into a simple example for a SO post I have found a workable (I think) solution from https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/blazor/security/?view=aspnetcore-5.0#implement-a-custom-authenticationstateprovider
NOTE: I'm still not 100% sure if the async init pattern will always resolve the AuthenticationState before the Repository property is called, but its hanging together so far... Just beware of this if you choose to use this code.
I have changed the approach, and instead of trying to resolve ClaimsPrincipal via DI (because AuthenticationStateProvider is not available for a worker process), I have created a custom AuthenticationStateProvider in the worker.
public class WorkerAuthStateProvider : AuthenticationStateProvider
{
private readonly string _workerName;
public WorkerAuthStateProvider(string workerName)
{
_workerName = workerName;
}
public override Task<AuthenticationState> GetAuthenticationStateAsync()
{
var identity = new ClaimsIdentity(new[] {
new Claim(ClaimTypes.Name, _workerName),
}, "My-Worker-Authentication-Type");
ClaimsPrincipal user = new ClaimsPrincipal(identity);
return Task.FromResult(new AuthenticationState(user));
}
}
and then register this in configureServices to resolve for instances of AuthenticationStateProvider in the worker program.cs file (also passing a custom worker process name, so I can use this on all my workers);
services.AddScoped<AuthenticationStateProvider, WorkerAuthStateProvider>(serviceProvider =>
{
return new WorkerAuthStateProvider(Constants.Logging.RoleNames.MYWORKERNAME);
});
The AuthenticationStateProvider already works in the blazor web apps so this allows me to resolve this correctly, in the constructor for my GenericUnitOfWork pattern for data access on both Web and Workers, for example;
private TDbContext _dbContext;
private readonly ILogger<TEntity> _logger;
private GenericRepository<TEntity, TDbContext> _repository;
private ClaimsPrincipal _user;
private readonly AuthenticationStateProvider _authenticationStateProvider;
public GenericUnitOfWork(TDbContext context, ILogger<TEntity> logger, AuthenticationStateProvider authenticationStateProvider)
{
_dbContext = context;
_logger = logger;
_authenticationStateProvider = authenticationStateProvider;
UserInit = InitUserAsync();
}
/// <summary>
/// Async initialisation pattern from https://blog.stephencleary.com/2013/01/async-oop-2-constructors.html
/// </summary>
public Task UserInit { get; private set; }
private async Task InitUserAsync()
{
var authState = await _authenticationStateProvider.GetAuthenticationStateAsync();
_user = authState.User;
}
public IGenericRepository<TEntity, TDbContext> Repository
{
get
{
if (_repository == null)
{
// when accessing the repository, we are expecting to pass the current application claims principal
// however the ClaimsPrincipal is resolved using an Async method from the AuthenticationStateProvider.
// In the event that the Async method has not yet completed we need to throw an exception so we can determine
// if a further async code fix is required.
if (_user == null)
{
throw new InvalidOperationException("Async ClaimsPrincipal has not been loaded from the AuthenticationStateProvider");
}
_repository = new GenericRepository<TEntity, TDbContext>(_dbContext, _logger, _user);
}
return _repository;
}
}
Related
I'm building a Blazor app to see how I can persist user data after a B2C AD login.
I want to persist claim data to sql database (ef 6 core) when the user logs in to the app.
I'm trying to capture a Tenant for the user for use in filtering on the app.
I is custom middleware a good way to go with this?
This is a Blazor Server Side app
I have something like this for testing.
public class PersistUserChangesMiddleware
{
private readonly RequestDelegate _next;
public PersistUserChangesMiddleware(RequestDelegate next)
{
_next = next;
}
[Authorize]
public Task Invoke(HttpContext httpContext, MyContext context)
{
try
{
var user = httpContext.User;
var claims = user.Claims;
var tenant = claims?.FirstOrDefault(c => c.Type.Equals("extension_CompanyId", StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase));
if(tenant != null)
{
context.Tenants.Add(new Models.Tenant()
{
TenantName = tenant.Value
});
context.SaveChanges();
}
}
catch (Exception)
{
throw;
}
return _next(httpContext);
}
}
}
I'm not getting the user back from this call in the middleware. Do I need to do it a different way for Blazor? I set [Authorize] but still no user.
I can't see which AuthenticationStateProvider is configured, but it's likely to be ServerAuthenticationStateProvider.
Create a custom AuthenticationStateProvider which is essentially a pass through provider that just grabs the ClaimsPrincipal user and does whatever you want with it. (Let me know if you're using a different provider).
public class MyAuthenticationStateProvider : ServerAuthenticationStateProvider
{
public override async Task<AuthenticationState> GetAuthenticationStateAsync()
{
var authstate = await base.GetAuthenticationStateAsync();
if (authstate.User is not null)
{
ClaimsPrincipal user = authstate.User;
// do stuff with the ClaimsPrincipal
}
return authstate;
}
}
And then register it in Program:
builder.Services.AddRazorPages();
builder.Services.AddServerSideBlazor();
// sequence is crucial - Must be after AddServerSideBlazor
builder.Services.AddScoped<AuthenticationStateProvider, MyAuthenticationStateProvider>();
builder.Services.AddSingleton<WeatherForecastService>();
Test it with a break point on the first line of GetAuthenticationStateAsync.
I have web API with custom policies and authorization handlers.
I wanted to reuse authorization handlers but HttpContext is null when attribute is used on signalr's hub.
For example this is my controller.
[Authorize]
public sealed class ChatsController : ControllerBase
{
[HttpPost("{chatId}/messages/send")]
[Authorize(Policy = PolicyNames.ChatParticipant)]
public Task SendMessage() => Task.CompletedTask;
}
And this my my authorization handler. I can extract "chatId" from HttpContext and then use my custom logic to authorize user.
internal sealed class ChatParticipantRequirementHandler : AuthorizationHandler<ChatParticipantRequirement>
{
private readonly IHttpContextAccessor _httpContextAccessor;
public ChatParticipantRequirementHandler(IHttpContextAccessor httpContextAccessor)
{
_httpContextAccessor = httpContextAccessor;
}
protected override Task HandleRequirementAsync(AuthorizationHandlerContext context, ChatParticipantRequirement requirement)
{
if(_httpContextAccessor.HttpContext != null)
{
// Logic
}
return Task.CompletedTask;
}
}
However this won't work with Azure SignalR because I don't have access to HttpContext. I know that I can provide custom IUserIdProvider but I have no idea how to access "chatId" from "Join" method in my custom authorization handler.
[Authorize]
public sealed class ChatHub : Hub<IChatClient>
{
[Authorize(Policy = PolicyNames.ChatParticipant)]
public async Task Join(Guid chatId)
{
await Groups.AddToGroupAsync(Context.ConnectionId, chatId.ToString());
}
Is it possible to reuse my authorization handlers?
I would like to avoid copypasting my code.
One solution is to extract my authorization code to separate services but then I have to manually call those from my hubs and abandon [Authorize] way.
Your chat is a resource, and you want to use resource based authorization. In this case declarative authorization with an attribute is not enough, because chat id is known at runtime only. So you have to use imperative authorization with IAuthorizationService.
Now in your hub:
[Authorize]
public sealed class ChatHub : Hub<IChatClient>
{
private readonly IAuthorizationService authService;
public ChatHub(IAuthorizationService authService)
{
this.authService = authService;
}
public async Task Join(Guid chatId)
{
// Get claims principal from authorized hub context
var user = this.Context.User;
// Get chat from DB or wherever you store it, or optionally just pass the ID to the authorization service
var chat = myDb.GetChatById(chatId);
var validationResult = await this.authService.AuthorizeAsync(user, chat, PolicyNames.ChatParticipant);
if (validationResult.Succeeded)
{
await Groups.AddToGroupAsync(Context.ConnectionId, chatId.ToString());
}
}
}
Your authorization handler should look different, because it needs the chat resource in its signature to do this kind of evaluation:
internal sealed class ChatParticipantRequirementHandler : AuthorizationHandler<ChatParticipantRequirement, Chat>
{
private readonly IHttpContextAccessor _httpContextAccessor;
public ChatParticipantRequirementHandler(IHttpContextAccessor httpContextAccessor)
{
_httpContextAccessor = httpContextAccessor;
}
protected override Task HandleRequirementAsync(AuthorizationHandlerContext context, ChatParticipantRequirement requirement, Chat chat)
{
// You have both user and chat now
var user = context.User;
if (this.IsMyUserAuthorizedToUseThisChat(user, chat))
{
context.Succeed(requirement);
}
else
{
context.Fail();
}
return Task.CompletedTask;
}
}
Edit: there is actually another option I didn't know about
You can make use of HubInvocationContext that SignalR Hub provides for authorized methods. This can be automatically injected into your AuthorizationHandler, which should look like this:
public class ChatParticipantRequirementHandler : AuthorizationHandler<ChatParticipantRequirement, HubInvocationContext>
{
protected override Task HandleRequirementAsync(AuthorizationHandlerContext context, ChatParticipantRequirement requirement, HubInvocationContext hubContext)
{
var chatId = Guid.Parse((string)hubContext.HubMethodArguments[0]);
}
}
Hub method will be decorated normally with [Authorize(Policy = PolicyNames.ChatParticipant)]
You still will have two authorization handlers, AuthorizationHandler<ChatParticipantRequirement> and AuthorizationHandler<ChatParticipantRequirement, HubInvocationContext>, no way around it. As for code dublication, you can however just get the Chat ID in the handler, either from HttpContext or HubInvocationContext, and than pass it to you custom written MyAuthorizer that you could inject into both handlers:
public class MyAuthorizer : IMyAuthorizer
{
public bool CanUserChat(Guid userId, Guid chatId);
}
We have multiple tenants, and they use different authorities (their own, not just standard providers). While I know how to dynamically set the clientId and secret, I can't figure out how to set the authority. It is set once, during startup, and afterwards it cannot be changed (or so it seems).
Since we have a lot of tenants we don't want to register all at startup, and we also don't want to require a restart when tenants are added.
Any suggestions how I can go about this? I'd love to use the existing middleware, but if it's not possible I could write my own.
Appreciate any suggestion!
While a bit tricky, it's definitely possible. Here's a simplified example, using the MSFT OIDC handler, a custom monitor and path-based tenant resolution:
Implement your tenant resolution logic. E.g:
public class TenantProvider
{
private readonly IHttpContextAccessor _httpContextAccessor;
public TenantProvider(IHttpContextAccessor httpContextAccessor)
=> _httpContextAccessor = httpContextAccessor;
public string GetCurrentTenant()
{
// This sample uses the path base as the tenant.
// You can replace that by your own logic.
string tenant = _httpContextAccessor.HttpContext.Request.PathBase;
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(tenant))
{
tenant = "default";
}
return tenant;
}
}
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app)
{
app.Use(next => context =>
{
// This snippet uses a hardcoded resolution logic.
// In a real world app, you'd want to customize that.
if (context.Request.Path.StartsWithSegments("/fabrikam", out PathString path))
{
context.Request.PathBase = "/fabrikam";
context.Request.Path = path;
}
return next(context);
});
app.UseAuthentication();
app.UseMvc();
}
Implement a custom IOptionsMonitor<OpenIdConnectOptions>:
public class OpenIdConnectOptionsProvider : IOptionsMonitor<OpenIdConnectOptions>
{
private readonly ConcurrentDictionary<(string name, string tenant), Lazy<OpenIdConnectOptions>> _cache;
private readonly IOptionsFactory<OpenIdConnectOptions> _optionsFactory;
private readonly TenantProvider _tenantProvider;
public OpenIdConnectOptionsProvider(
IOptionsFactory<OpenIdConnectOptions> optionsFactory,
TenantProvider tenantProvider)
{
_cache = new ConcurrentDictionary<(string, string), Lazy<OpenIdConnectOptions>>();
_optionsFactory = optionsFactory;
_tenantProvider = tenantProvider;
}
public OpenIdConnectOptions CurrentValue => Get(Options.DefaultName);
public OpenIdConnectOptions Get(string name)
{
var tenant = _tenantProvider.GetCurrentTenant();
Lazy<OpenIdConnectOptions> Create() => new Lazy<OpenIdConnectOptions>(() => _optionsFactory.Create(name));
return _cache.GetOrAdd((name, tenant), _ => Create()).Value;
}
public IDisposable OnChange(Action<OpenIdConnectOptions, string> listener) => null;
}
Implement a custom IConfigureNamedOptions<OpenIdConnectOptions>:
public class OpenIdConnectOptionsInitializer : IConfigureNamedOptions<OpenIdConnectOptions>
{
private readonly IDataProtectionProvider _dataProtectionProvider;
private readonly TenantProvider _tenantProvider;
public OpenIdConnectOptionsInitializer(
IDataProtectionProvider dataProtectionProvider,
TenantProvider tenantProvider)
{
_dataProtectionProvider = dataProtectionProvider;
_tenantProvider = tenantProvider;
}
public void Configure(string name, OpenIdConnectOptions options)
{
if (!string.Equals(name, OpenIdConnectDefaults.AuthenticationScheme, StringComparison.Ordinal))
{
return;
}
var tenant = _tenantProvider.GetCurrentTenant();
// Create a tenant-specific data protection provider to ensure
// encrypted states can't be read/decrypted by the other tenants.
options.DataProtectionProvider = _dataProtectionProvider.CreateProtector(tenant);
// Other tenant-specific options like options.Authority can be registered here.
}
public void Configure(OpenIdConnectOptions options)
=> Debug.Fail("This infrastructure method shouldn't be called.");
}
Register the services in your DI container:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
// ...
// Register the OpenID Connect handler.
services.AddAuthentication()
.AddOpenIdConnect();
services.AddSingleton<TenantProvider>();
services.AddSingleton<IOptionsMonitor<OpenIdConnectOptions>, OpenIdConnectOptionsProvider>();
services.AddSingleton<IConfigureOptions<OpenIdConnectOptions>, OpenIdConnectOptionsInitializer>();
}
The Asp.NET Core model assumes one upstream authority per handler instance. My Saml2 component supports multiple upstream Idps in one handler and it has drawbacks in the rest of the system when that assumption no longer is true.
In Asp.NET Core it is possible to add/remove providers at runtime, without requiring a restart. So I'd recommend finding a model based on that.
If you rather want one handler that can have a per-request Authority setting, I think that a custom handler is needed - Microsoft's default implementation won't support that.
I have NET Core 2 Web API application. During the process i have to invoke Client A's API to get some data. So i am using HttpClient to invoke it. Client A also requires me to pass userid and password in header.
So instead of directly injecting HttpClient i have wrapper around HttpClient something like below
public class ClientA : IClientA
{
private readonly HttpClient _httpClient;
public ClientA(HttpClient httpClient)
{
_httpClient = httpClient;
}
public async Task<string> GetData()
{
return await _httpClient.HttpGetAsync("someurl");
}
}
Then use ClientA in Service
public class MyService :IMyService
{
private readonly IClientA _clientA
public MyService(IClientA clientA)
{
_clientA= clientA
}
public void DoSomethig()
{
_clientA.GetData();
}
}
Then i am registering everything in Startup.cs
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddScoped<IMyService, MyService>();
services.AddScoped(factory =>
{
Func<Task<IClientA>> provider = async () =>
{
using (var dbContext = factory.GetService<MyDBContext>())
{
// get userid and password from database here
var httpClient = new HttpClient();
httpClient.DefaultRequestHeaders.Add("UserId",userid);
httpClient.DefaultRequestHeaders.Add("Password",password);
return new ClientA(httpClient);
}
};
return provider;
});
}
However i am getting error
System.InvalidOperationException: Unable to resolve service for type
'System.Net.Http.HttpClient' while attempting to activate
'XXXXXXXXX.ClientA'. at
Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.ServiceLookup.CallSiteFactory.CreateArgumentCallSites(Type
serviceType, Type implementationType, ISet1 callSiteChain,
ParameterInfo[] parameters, Boolean throwIfCallSiteNotFound) at
Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.ServiceLookup.CallSiteFactory.CreateConstructorCallSite(Type
serviceType, Type implementationType, ISet1 callSiteChain)
remaining exception removed for brevity
Notice that during registration i am newing-up instance of HttpClient and passing it to ClientA class because i have to set userid and password.
To get rid the above error I can register HttpClient with UserID and Password with DI framework and i guess that would work.
However, in that case, if have another client, ClientB, that takes HttpClient then DI framework will inject same httpclient that has userid and password. and that will create security issue because ClientB would see ClientA's credentials in request headers.
public class ClientB(HttpClient client)
{
private readonly _httpClient;
public class ClientB(HttpClient client)
{
_httpClient = client;
}
public string CallClientB(string url)
{
// here ClientB will receive ClientA's credentials
return await _httpClient.HttpGetAsync(url);
}
}
You don't want to be instantiating httpclient in a scoped context, that is creating an instance of httpclient per request which is not the recommended usage pattern for that class. (won't scale well). https://aspnetmonsters.com/2016/08/2016-08-27-httpclientwrong/
Create a singleton with a separate interface per customer (assuming a small number of customers) - possibly with a code access security demand in its implementation, depending on your setup (identity impersonation enabled?)
That will a) scale well b) only run once per customer per application instance/startup and c) enforce an access check for usage.
Also, this answer is connected and relevant to your header requirements - HttpClient single instance with different authentication headers
resolved my issue
services.AddScoped<IClientA>(factory =>
{
var dbContext = factory.GetService<MyDBContext>();
// get userid and password from database here
var httpClient = new HttpClient();
httpClient.DefaultRequestHeaders.Add("UserId",userid);
httpClient.DefaultRequestHeaders.Add("Password",password);
return new ClientA(httpClient);
});
I am working on a website where I need to authorize the user through a service. I have managed to get windows authentication working if I use the AuthorizeAttribute (User.Identities will be set). My plan is to create a custom middleware that sets the roles/claims for the user but context.User is not set in the middleware. User.Identities will also not be set in the controllers where I don't add the AuthorizeAttribute.
My goal is to write a middleware that gets the windows username and calls a service with the username to get the roles the user has access to and then set the roles or claims for the user.
public class RoleMiddleware
{
private readonly RequestDelegate _next;
public RoleMiddleware(RequestDelegate next)
{
_next = next;
}
public async Task Invoke(HttpContext context)
{
if (!rolesSet)
{
var result = _service.GetRoles(context.User.Identity.Name);
//set roles
//set claims
}
await _next.Invoke(context);
}
}
Would a middleware be the correct place to do this and what do I need to do to get access to the username in the same way as I do when I use the AuthorizeAttribute in a controller?
In my opinion that's not the right way to do it. ASP.NET Identity provide rich set of classes which you can override and extend to fit your requirements.
If you want to inject roles bases on some custom service then you should override RoleStore (and maybe RoleManager too) and inject there your custom roles.
It will be also worth to take a look here: Using Role Claims in ASP.NET Identity Core
I solved it by using requirements
public class CustomFunctionRequirement : IAuthorizationRequirement
{
public CustomFunctionRequirement(string function)
{
Function = function;
}
public string Function { get; }
}
The handler
public class CustomFunctionHandler : AuthorizationHandler<CustomFunctionRequirement>
{
private readonly Service _service;
public CustomFunctionHandler(Service service)
{
_service = service;
}
protected override Task HandleRequirementAsync(AuthorizationHandlerContext context, CustomFunctionRequirement requirement)
{
var functions = _service.GetFunctions(context.User.Identity.Name);
if (functions.Any(x => x == requirement.Function))
{
context.Succeed(requirement);
}
return Task.CompletedTask;
}
}
Setup in ConfigureServices in Startup
services.AddMvc(
config =>
{
var policy = new AuthorizationPolicyBuilder()
.RequireAuthenticatedUser()
.Build();
config.Filters.Add(new AuthorizeFilter(policy));
});
services.AddAuthorization(
options =>
{
options.AddPolicy("User", policy => policy.Requirements.Add(new CustomRequirement("User")));
});
I can now in my controller specify the requirement by adding the authorize attribute [Authorize(Policy = "User")].