I wrote an API that uses JWT to authenticate the incoming requests.
I connected an ASP.NET Core application to this API. When the users login to the application, it asks the api if the credentials are goods, and if they are the api sends back a JWT token to the application.
This application finally stores the JWT to an httpOnly cookie on the client.
Now, I want to use the "User.IsAuthenticated" feature to displays the name of the actual user if he possesses a JWT cookie.
To do so, I wrote a JWTManager which analyze each requests of the application and if the user possesses a JWT cookie, the Manager will authenticates the user with HttpContext.SignInAsync by decoding the JWT, verifying his authenticity from the api then reading all the claims it contains before adding it to the User Session.
Tldr, I discuss to the api with jwt but I use cookie sessions on the application, sessions that I ironically create from jwt too.
My question is, do I need to keep sessions ?
Basically, I implemented the cookie session to use the [Authorize] annotation. But because the api already uses it, I can simply verify if the api returns unauthorized to stop the user from accessing the content he isn't authorized to use.
To display the name, I can avoid the User.Identity.IsAuthenticated and simply look for his JWT, verify if its authentic from the api then displays his name from the JWT. If he hasn't a JWT, I can display "Sign in" instead of his name.
What is the optimal way to use JWT ?
I choose it to reduce the calls to database from the api and to make the cross applications easier to use. And avoiding session will also reduce the memory used by the server to store them.
But is it worth it ? I'll ask the api if the JWT is authentic at each request from the client, then decode the JWT to at least write the username on the navigation bar to each requests (yes I can use cache and ajax to avoid reloading the navbar at each request, but I still need to verify if the user has access to the content).
Is it more efficient than just use a session with several roles and [Authorize] my content ?
Or finally my mixed use of both feature is efficient ? (Authenticate and discuss with the api from jwt will using session on the application)
Related
In Oauth and Openidconnect, the appserver endpoint invocation starts the Oauth flow and the app server gets the token from the auth server and is able to pass the token to resource server to access resources (delegation) on behalf of the resource owner.
The token exchange happens between the app server and resource server, and the token never arrives at the end users browser.
I'm working on a web api (aka app server) that will be consumed by a mobile app. There is no other server involved. Presently the login endpoint returns a signed JWT token to the user if correct credentials are supplied (validate against the db). User places this token in the header of the subsequent request.
Assuming I don't want to have a user db and validate logins, and instead delegate the auth check to another service like azure b2c or firebase (that use the Oauth), then I assume the flow is like given below:
Api registered the firebase/azure b2c (let's call this the provier) clientid, secret.
User invokes login endpoint of my api
The api invokes the provider's Oauth flow.
User gets popup to authenticate with the provider.
Eventually the provider will send the token (containing the claim like username) to the api (aka app server)
Does the user get back any token? Otherwise, when the user makes subsequent endpoint calls, then how is the endpoint able to identify who is this user and whether he is already authenticated?
Although it is okay to send back the access token to the user , but from the security best practise 's point of view , it is better not to do it which I quote the reasons as follow from this:
Because of the issues outlined above, the best security recommendation
for an SPA is to avoid keeping tokens in the browser at all. This can
be achieved with the help of a lightweight back-end component, often
described as a Backend-For-Frontend.
The backend component can then be configured as a confidential OAuth
client and used to keep tokens away from the browser. It can either be
stateful and keep tokens in custom storage, or stateless and store the
tokens in encrypted HTTP-only, same-site cookies. Whichever variant is
chosen, the backend component creates a session for the SPA, using
HTTP-only, secure, same-site cookies, thus enabling a high level of
security. Such cookies cannot be read by scripts and are limited to
the domain of the SPA. When combined with strict Content Security
Policy headers, such architecture can provide a robust protection
against stealing tokens
Also from here ,they suggest for mobile app 's OAuth2 best practise , it should perform the OAuth flow inside a system browser component.
Yet another OAuth2 question that isn't quite covered elsewhere.
I'm using NestJS backend, React frontend, Passport and my own DB for authentication. Trying to add an
OAuth2 identity provider (Google).
I configured my NestJS app as an OAuth Client. After logging in I'm receiving the callback at which point I have an access_token and the requested user details extracted from the payload of the id_token. This is encapsulated in a class extending PassportStrategy(Strategy, 'google') and an AuthGuard('google') and much of it is handled automatically. Code here.
At this point however, I need to maintain an authenticated session between backend (NestJS) and frontend (React). I suppose I need a JWT, but I'm wondering about the best approach:
Can I use a token provided by the IdP (e.g. id_token or access_token)? So that I don't have to worry about issuing tokens myself. I.e. the frontend receives the token (either from backend, or the IdP directly), sends it on every request, backend verifies it with the IdP on every request (verifyIdToken or getTokenInfo of google-auth-library).
One drawback here is the extra network request every time. I'm not sure if there's a need for that because the IdP is only used to identify the user, not for access to other resources. Another drawback is that I need to store a refresh token and handle when the token expires (get new one, update it on the frontend).
So alternatively, could I just issue a JWT myself and not worry about checking in with the IdP? Once the JWT expires I'd need to prompt the user to log in again. In this case, I wouldn't need to store the IdP tokens. But is this good practice? One issue I can think of is that I won't detect if the user revokes access in the IdP (until the JWT expires).
I ended up issuing my own JWT tokens and managing User sessions in my app, as described in this article: OAuth2 in NestJS for Social Login (Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc)
probably my solution would be helpful.
you could access complete source code of my app that implemented with react typescript (redux toolkit rtk Query) and nestjs included of google oauth2 flow with passport.js. resource
The Setup
We’re building a PWA (progressive web app). The main components are the app shell (SPA) and the API. The REST API will supply the data needed for the app, while the SPA will handle the rest (as per Google recommendation).
The Problem
Authentication of the end-user seems problematic because the web browser needs to be accounted for. We want the user login to persist through closing down the browser.
We’ve done the research about the possible ways of going about it, however we’d like to ensure that we’re not going in the wrong direction.
Solutions we’ve considered
Session based authentication - the user sends username and password to /accounts/auth and receives a HTTP only cookie with the session ID. The session needs to be stored in a database or Redis. The issue with this option is that cookies are automatically sent by the browser therefore we need a CSRF protection in place. Using the Synchronizer Token Pattern a new token would be generated every time a state changing request has been made e.g. POST. This means that the application needs to supply a CSRF token with every request so that the PWA can send it via AJAX. We determined that it’s not ideal as the user can send multiple post requests in a quick succession making some of them fail and resulting in a bad user experience.
We could also use this method without the CSRF by limiting the CORS policy to same domain and adding a header requirement which technically should stop all CSRF, however we're unsure how secure it would be.
JWT token based authentication - the user sends username and password to /accounts/auth and a new JWT token is issued. The JWT then needs to be stored in localstorage or a cookie. Using localstorage means that JWT is XSS vulnerable and if the token is stolen, an attacker can impersonate the user completely. Using cookies we will still have a CSRF issue to resolve. We considered a double submit cookie method but the CSRF would only refresh every time the JWT is reissued which creates a window for the attacker to find out what the CSRF is. It is not clear which method is best to use.
Session based authentication + JWT token authentication - the user sends username and password to /accounts/auth, a session is created, a HTTP only cookie is set in the browser and a JWT token is sent back to the user. The PWA can authenticate requests with the JWT and whenever the JWT expires the app calls /accounts/auth again to acquire a new one. The /accounts/auth endpoint would still need to be CSRF protected, however the impact of it on usability would be minimised.
There seems to be a large amount of articles claiming that localStorage is insecure and shouldn't be used so why are high profile organisations like Amazon still recommending it? https://github.com/aws/amazon-cognito-auth-js - this SDK uses localStorage to store the token.
You don't need to generate new CSRF token each time a client make a request. It's much easier to use a scheme like token = hash(id + secret + current_day). You only need to update it once a day, or even employ mixed scheme (if the token is invalid today, but is okay for the previous day, the server accepts the operation and returns new token in a predefined header for client to renew it). You may also use the cookie as an id, making the token totally stateless and much easier to check, no need to store them in the database.
Here is how I look at it.
JWT token authentication : with this approach, you can always use a time-bound token with its expiration set to say 2 hours or something?
Or another approach would also be to try and see how you could use some of the approaches the Credentials Management API suggests for example, auto-sign-in of users whenever they come back.
Stuff like 2-step verification with OTPs for instance; for very important features in your web app can be a choice. In this case basic stuff are tied to whichever one time authentication method you have.
Actually, you can also use user-defined pins or short codes (seen a lot in banking apps) to grant access to some features in your web app.
Hope this helps, or sparks some ideation.
I have a weird scenario. I want to have a single backend API with multiple SPAs as frontend (all under the same domain but different subdomains). Here was the original idea for using JWT and Refresh tokens.
User logs in using USN/PWD.
Server Authenticates the request and sends back a JWT with an expiration and permission in claims.
The server sets a refresh token (that is stored in a data store for sessions) in a cookie for the domain and all subdomains.
Now all request send the JWT and cookie to the server.
If the JWT is expired then check that the refresh cookie is still valid and send a new JWT
Now if the user is in a different SPA under the same domain we can send a request to /token?grant_type=refresh_token which will send a JWT token if refresh token is stored in a cookie.
I would like to know drawbacks to this approach.
Another approach I read (https://stackoverflow.com/a/29088725/4664675) looks interesting as the JTI is basically the sessions ID.
I am not too worried about 15 minutes expiration tokens and a refresh token of about 1-week sliding session. All connection from the SPA to API are over HTTPS as well.
What would someone recommend the best way to handle this situation (One login that is used for many apps like Google does for mail, drive, photos, youtube, etc.)? I like the idea of JWT so that I don't have to hit the datastore on every request.
A little further down the road, I would like to make native apps that consume the same API so an authentication and authorization process that can handle both would be ideal! Seems like I need a Single Sign On approach?
PS. This is all from research and this will be the first authentication/authorization workflow that I will be writing.
I'm having some trouble deciding how to implement authentication for a RESTful API that will be secure for consumption by both a web app and a mobile app.
Firstly, I thought to investigate HTTP Basic Authentication over HTTPS as an option. It would work well for a mobile app, where the username and password could be stored in the OS keychain securely and couldn't be intercepted in transit since the request would be over HTTPS. It's also elegant for the API since it'll be completely stateless. The problem with this is for the web app. There won't be access to such a keychain for storing the username and password, so I would need to use a cookie or localStorage, but then I'm storing the user's private details in a readily accessible place.
After more research, I found a lot of talk about HMAC authentication. The problem I see with this approach is there needs to be a shared secret that only the client and server knows. How can I get this per-user secret to a particular user in the web app, unless I have an api/login endpoint which takes username/password and gives the secret back to store in a cookie? to use in future requests. This is introducing state to the API however.
To throw another spanner into the works, I'd like to be able to restrict the API to certain applications (or, to be able to block certain apps from using the API). I can't see how this would be possible with the web app being completely public.
I don't really want to implement OAuth. It's probably overkill for my needs.
I feel as though I might not be understanding HMAC fully, so I'd welcome an explanation and how I could implement it securely with a web app and a mobile app.
Update
I ended up using HTTP Basic Auth, however instead of providing the actual username and password every request, an endpoint was implemented to exchange the username and password for an access key which is then provided for every authenticated request. Eliminates the problem of storing the username and password in the browser, but of course you could still fish out the token if you had access to the machine and use it. In hindsight, I would probably have looked at OAuth further, but it's pretty complicated for beginners.
You should use OAuth2. Here is how:
1) Mobile App
The mobile app store client credentials as you state yourself. It then uses "Resource Owner Password Credentials Grant" (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749#section-4.3) to send those credentials. In turn it gets a (bearer) token it can use in the following requests.
2) Web site
The website uses "Authorization Code Grant" (see https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749#section-4.1):
Website sees unauthorized request and redirects browser to HTML-enabled autorization endpoint in the REST api.
User authenticates with REST service
REST site redirects user back to website with access token in URL.
Website calls REST site and swaps access token to authorization token.
Here after the website uses the authorization token for accessing the REST service (on behalf of the end-user) - usually by including the token as a "bearer" token in the HTTP Authorization header.
It is not rocket science but it does take some time to understand completely.
3) Restricting API access for certain applications
In OAuth2 each client is issued a client ID and client secret (here "client" is your mobile app or website). The client must send these credentials when authorizing. Your REST service can use this to validate the calling client
I resolved this for my own API quite easily and securely without the need to expose any client credentials.
I also split the problem into 2 parts. API authentication - is this a valid request from a recognised entity (website or native app). API authorisation, is that entity allowed to use this particular endpoint and HTTP verb.
Authorisation is coded into the API using an access control list and user permissions and settings that are set up within the API code, configuration and database as required. A simple if statement in the API can test for authorisation and return the appropriate response (not authorised or the results of processing the API call).
Authentication is now just about checking to see if the call is genuine. To do this I issue self signed certificates to clients. A call to the API is made from their server whenever they want - typically when they generate their first page (or when they are performing their own app login checks). This call uses the certificates I have previously provided. If on my side I am happy the certificate is valid I can return a nonce and a time limited generated API key. This key is used in all subsequent calls to other API endpoints, in the bearer header for example, and it can be stored quite openly in an HTML form field or javascript variable or a variable within an app.
The nonce will prevent replay attacks and the API key can be stolen if someone wants - they will not be able to continue using after it expires or if the nonce changes before they make the next call.
Each API response will contain the next nonce of if the nonce doesn't match it will return an authentication error. In fact of the nonce doesn't match I kill the API key too. This will then force a genuine API user to reauthenticate using the certificates.
As long as the end user keeps those certificates safe and doesn't expose the method they use to make the initial authentication call (like making it an ajax request that can be replayed) then the API's are nice and secure.
One way of addressing the issue of user authentication to the API is by requesting an authentication token from the API when the user logs in. This token can then be used for subsequent requests. You've already touched on this approach - it's pretty sound.
With respect to restricting certain web apps. You'll want to have each web app identify itself with each request and have this authentication carried out inside your API implementation. Pretty straight forward.