Set value configuration.GetSection("").Value from header request - asp.net-core

I need to set in my asp.net core configuration a value from the header in every request.
I'm doing like so:
public async Task Invoke(HttpContext context)
{
var companyId = context.Request.Headers["companyid"].ToString().ToUpper();
configuration.GetSection("CompanyId").Value = companyId;
await next(context);
}
It works fine. But is this the proper way? In case of multiple request at same time is there a risk of messing the values? I've searched around but couldn't find an answer.
I'm using .Net 3.1.

As far as I know, the appsetting.json value is a global setting value, you shouldn't be modifying global state per request, this action is not thread safe. At some point, you will face a rice condition.
If you still want to use this codes, I suggest you could try to add a lock. Notice: This will make your Invoke method very slowly.
Details, you could refer to below codes:
private static Object _factLock = new Object();
lock (_factLock)
{
Configuration.GetSection("CompanyId").Value = "";
}

Related

How to return a status code from an endpoint that can then be handled by app.UseStatusCodePages() middleware?

If I return StatusCode(403) or any other error code from an endpoint, any configuration of app.UseStatusCodePages<whatever> will be ignored.
I believe this is because the StatusCode(<whatever>) will automatically create a result object, and UseStatusCodePages only kicks in if there is an error status code and no content.
So how do I set a status code result in an IActionResult type endpoint and then return without setting any content so that UseStatusCodePages will handle the job of providing a suitable resonse?
As far as I know, the UseStatusCodePages will just be fired when the action result is the StatusCodeResult.
If you put some value inside the status codes, it will return the object result which will not trigger the UseStatusCodePages.
So I suggest you could directly use StatusCodeResult(403), then if you want to put some value to the StatusCodeResult, I suggest you could put it inside the httpcontext's item.
More details, you could refer to below codes:
public IActionResult OnGet()
{
HttpContext.Items.Add("test","1");
return StatusCode(403);
}
Program.cs:
app.UseStatusCodePages(async statusCodeContext =>
{
var status = statusCodeContext.HttpContext.Items["test"];
// using static System.Net.Mime.MediaTypeNames;
statusCodeContext.HttpContext.Response.ContentType = Text.Plain;
await statusCodeContext.HttpContext.Response.WriteAsync(
$"Status Code Page: {statusCodeContext.HttpContext.Response.StatusCode}");
});
Result:
The issue was that I have the ApiController attribute on the endpoint controller. One of the things this attribute does is to automatically create a ProblemDetails response body for any failed requests, and it is this that prevents UseStatusCodePages from having any effect.
The solution is to either remove the ApiController attribute if you do not require any of its features, or alternatively its behaviour of automatically creating ProblemDetails responses can be disabled using the following configuration in Program.cs (or Startup.cs in old style projects).
builder.Services.AddControllers().ConfigureApiBehaviorOptions(options =>
{
options.SuppressMapClientErrors = true;
});

InputFormatter for Single Request

Is there a way to include an InputFormatter which only runs for a single endpoint?
We have 1 solitary endpoint which has a need for a custom InputFormatter.
So we don't really want to add an input formatter globally, for the benefit of a single endpoint. I don't really want to write a hacky middleware which would run for every request either. Some kind of ActionFilter would have been perfect.
I've seen existing SO answers on this very topic, but they all have answers which require an outdated API e.g. the InputFormatters collection is no longer available on the context in Action Filters.
Cheers
Here is an example which helps you to control the input formatter for an action method.
public class CSPContentTypeFormatterAttribute : ResultFilterAttribute
{
public override void OnResultExecuting(ResultExecutingContext context)
{
var options = context
.HttpContext
.RequestServices
.GetService(serviceType: typeof(IOptions<MvcOptions>)) as IOptions<MvcOptions>;
var mvcOptions = options.Value;
mvcOptions.InputFormatters.OfType<SystemTextJsonInputFormatter>().First()
.SupportedMediaTypes.Add(
new Microsoft.Net.Http.Headers.MediaTypeHeaderValue("application/csp-report")
);
base.OnResultExecuting(context);
}
}

.NET Core service startup configuration

I've been assigned to upscale a project built by a former coworker. I'm not a .NET Core specialist, I understand most of it as is similar to any other language, but I'm having trouble understanding the Fluent configuration made at startup.
At the Startup.cs, there is this function declared:
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app)
At some point, there is an initialzation of a service that listens for something. I can manage that from the already initialized class/service, but I'd like to understand what is this:
app.UseRawRequestRequestBodyHandler(options => options
.Handlers
.AddRange(new[] {
new RawRequestHandler
{
ContentType = NotificationSubscriber.ContentType,
StartSegments = NotificationSubscriber.StartSegments,
Response = "[OK]",
Endpoint = new Uri(_configManager.Client.BaseAddress, "v1/payments").ToString(),
ModifyRequestBodyAsyncFunc = async (handler, context, bodyContent) =>
{
using (var scope = app.ApplicationServices.CreateScope())
{
var subscriber = scope.ServiceProvider
.GetRequiredService<INotificationSubscriber>();
await subscriber.QueueAndAkcknowledgeAsync(handler, context, bodyContent);
}
return bodyContent;
}
},
I'm having special trobule with the ModifyRequestBodyAsyncFunc function, that is declared (in the interface) like this:
public Func<RawRequestHandler, HttpContext, string, Task<string>> ModifyRequestBodyAsyncFunc { set; get; }
Also, I don't get how or where are initialized handler, context and bodyContent (RawRequestHandler handler, HttpContext context, string bodyContent as declared in the NotificationSubscriber class). I pressume these are loaded by Dependency Injection, but It would be different for other DI implementations I've seen.
Any help would be appreciated; also, I take reading recommendations.
Thank you very much!
I'm having special trobule with the ModifyRequestBodyAsyncFunc function
This is a special C# type, called a delegate. The delegate in question is a function that accepts RawRequestHeader, HttpContext, string and returns a Task<string>, which tells us that it's asynchronous.
Next, this is a syntax to create an anonymous async function and assign it to the delegate property:
/* SomeProp */ = async (handler, context, bodyContent) =>
{
// ...
return bodyContent;
}
Also, I don't get how or where are initialized handler, context and bodyContent
The .UseRawRequestRequestBodyHandler(...) registers a middleware which is basically a piece of code which runs for every request. So, somewhere inside that middleware, there is code that has access to said parameters and probably passes them like that:
// the params are not necessarily named exactly like this, only the types must match
string content = await rawRequestHeader.ModifyRequestBodyAsyncFunc(handler, context, bodyContent);
Notice the await keyword (we must await asynchronous functions) and also the fact that the delegate is invoked just like a normal method.

ASP MVC async Controller and HttpContext.Cache - Correct Pattern?

Given an async action method on an ASP MVC Controller and an async method that gets some data:
public async Task<ActionResult> Index()
{
var apiClient = new apiClient();
var data = await apiClient.GetDataAsync(id);
I want GetDataAsync to store the result as a Cache item, so it doesn't have to request from an external api next time.
I can sometimes get this to work by passing in a reference to the cache object, (often inexplicably null even though passed from what I thought was the starting thread. Must not be the starting thread I guess?).
var data = await apiClient.GetDataAsync(id, System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Cache);
But I seem to remember that this is not a good idea (something to do with thread safety).
What is the recommended way to handle caching in an async method? Should I move cache handling into the controllers? Seems a shame as it made sense for the cache management to happen closer to the data source.

LockRecursionException calling Route.GetVirtualPath from another route's GetVirtualData in .Net 4

I have a route defined last in my ASP.Net MVC 2 app that will map old urls that are no longer used to the appropriate new urls to be redirected to. This route returns the action and controller that is responsible for actually performing the redirect and it also returns a url to the controller action which is the url to redirect to. Since the route is responsible for generating the new url to redirect to, it is calling the router to get the appropriate urls. This has worked just fine with .Net 3.5, but when I upgraded to .Net 4, the GetVirtualPath method throws a System.Threading.LockRecursionException: "Recursive read lock acquisitions not allowed in this mode.". The following code resolves the problem but is pretty ugly:
public static string GetActionUrl(HttpContextBase context, string routeName, object routeValues)
{
RequestContext requestContext = new RequestContext(context, new RouteData());
VirtualPathData vp = null;
try
{
vp = _Routes.GetVirtualPath(requestContext, routeName, new RouteValueDictionary(routeValues));
}
catch (System.Threading.LockRecursionException)
{
var tmpRoutes = new RouteCollection();
Router.RegisterRoutes(tmpRoutes);
vp = tmpRoutes.GetVirtualPath(requestContext, routeName, new RouteValueDictionary(routeValues));
}
if (vp == null)
throw new Exception(String.Format("Could not find named route {0}", routeName));
return vp.VirtualPath;
}
Does anybody know what changes in .Net 4 might have caused this error? Also, is calling a route from another route's GetRouteData method just bad practice and something I should not be doing at all?
As you figured out, it is not supported to call a route in the global route table from within another route in the global route table.
The global route table is a thread-safe collection to enable multiple readers or a single router. Unfortunately the code you have was never supported, even in .NET 3.5, though in some scenarios it may have coincidentally worked.
As a general note, routes should function independent of one another, so I'm not sure what your scenario is here.
v3.5 RouteCollection uses the following code:
private ReaderWriterLockSlim _rwLock;
public IDisposable GetReadLock()
{
this._rwLock.EnterReadLock();
return new ReadLockDisposable(this._rwLock);
}
v4.0 RouteCollection uses the following code:
private ReaderWriterLock _rwLock;
public IDisposable GetReadLock()
{
this._rwLock.AcquireReaderLock(-1);
return new ReadLockDisposable(this._rwLock);
}
GetRouteData(HttpContextBase httpContext) in both versions use the following code:
public RouteData GetRouteData(HttpContextBase httpContext)
{
...
using (this.GetReadLock())
{
GetVirtualPath uses the same logic.
The ReaderWriterLock used in v4.0 does not allow Recursive read locks by default which is why the error is occurring.
Copy routes to a new RouteCollection for second query, or change the ReaderWriterLock mode by reflecting in.