I have an ASP.NET Core 2.0 Web API which will run in a very-high security corporate AD environment (no Azure, no Azure AD, which makes Googling for a solution useless).
The API uses JWT auth, and the client will be an Angular 2+ SPA.
What is the easiest way to issue a token?
My initial thought was to set up an authentication endpoint with Windows Authentication that issues the token and populates the claims appropriately.
Is this the best solution?
Or is there another way I can get the JWT token issued without connecting to any external (internet) services?
Working through this exact thing myself. What we have is a local login and a domain login. The local just authenticates to the DB and the Domain authenticates out to an LDAP. Basically what I am doing is issuing the token based off of a positive authentication regardless if it is the LDAP saying its okay or the DB saying its okay. Here is an example for the DB side of it .NET Core JWT Authentication. The LDAP logic itself is the same it always has been with DirectoryServices etc. There are a ton of examples on here and elsewhere for that, but to answer your question directly set the token issuance based off of a good authentication to AD instance. Separate the two logic sets and you should be good to go.
Related
I'm trying to setup an application to validate identity using Azure AD and acquire a token to allow access to a secure api. The front end application is written in angular and allows anonymous access. What can I use to access AAD authenticate and return an access token?
This will be an angular 6+ UI that is communicating to a secure .Net api using Azure AD for authentication. I have done a couple days research and everything points to a user logging in to authenticate using the login page. I need it to be by app and open the login page. I tried a couple examples where it utilized authentication/authorization and that didn't work because the app needs to authorization the user to talk to the api. I have seen where people were using Microsoft graph but once again it was user based and they were redirected to an azure login. I am looking for a solution that will allow me to setup an account in azure ad and authenticate the app on start to get an access token to allow communication to my secure api. If I have missed something somewhere in my research and test attempts let me know. This is my first Azure AD auth attempt and I feel like I am missing something for application authorization.
The problem is an Angular app is what we call a public client.
It cannot hold secrets and thus cannot prove its identity.
So, only user-based authentication flows should be used by public clients.
Confidential clients on the other hand can hold secrets as they run on servers that you control.
So for example, a back-end Web application or API would be a confidential client.
Those can use the client credentials flow to acquire access tokens and call APIs as themselves without a user being involved.
There is a bit of a fundamental issue in your question.
Your API requires authentication, but you want functionality to be available to anonymous users.
So you want to bypass authentication.
If you really want to bypass authentication for parts of the API, you could just make those endpoints available anonymously without a token.
I'm building a SPA (angular) with a back-end api (asp.net core), both are build and belong to the same party.
I would like to use jwt authentication instead of cookie based authentication, because both sides - the back-end and the front-end spa - are owned by the same party I'm thinking to use the OAuth Resource Owner Password Grant flow and there shouldn't be any problem exposing the users credentials to the web app.
After searching on the web, I see a lot that it's not recommended to use this flow, but why should I implement any OpenId Connect flow with a redirection to the auth server if the web client belongs to same party of the api and the auth server?
The problem in your case is not so much in exposing the credentials to the Client since as you mention, all components in the flow are controlled by the same party.
Yet there are advantages to redirection as doing so separates the authentication method and means from the Client itself. And that enables e.g.:
a change of authentication mechanism or an upgrade to multi-factor (or some other advanced form of) authentication without impacting the Client(s)
SSO across different web applications
granular per-Client permissions
easy access revocation without having to change the user's password
less confusion for end-users as to which applications(s)/Client(s) they can trust with their credentials
I am developing ASP NET Core Web API and I am confused by choosing the authentication method. I used to apply default Asp Net Identity authentication, but recently I've known about JWT. So I've implemented Authentication almost as it done in this article: https://stormpath.com/blog/token-authentication-asp-net-core.
But I can't understand the benefits of this JWT. With simple Asp Net Identity Authentication, I don't care about token storage etc. I only need to log in with signInManager and use authorized methods until logout. With JWT I need to think about the token store, expiration, and other difficulties. So, what're the benefits of this JWT? How can I store this JWT token after login? Furthermore, should I even use this JWT? In my case, I need simple authentication for simple WebApi which will be used by one or little bit more users. I've also heard about OpenIddict, Auth0, IdentityServer, so what's the difference between all of these authentication mechanisms?
This is the way I understand this, split in to 3 logical parts.
Authentication Server - this will authenticate and issue the JWT token, when the API need's to validate the token it will send the token to this server to validate it.
Client - this is what serves your web pages, or you app perhaps. This is what will need to request and store the the JWT token. The client will need to pass the token to the api every time it requests data.
API - this is what serves the information and needs to validate the token with the Authentication Server.
So, what're the benefits of this JWT?
JWT is issued to the client and stored on the client side. Having JWT allows multiple client's (App's or Websites) use the same authentication server which distributes JWT and states which API's the client's can use and how.
How can I store this JWT token after login?
I only tried to store it in an Ionic 2 app which uses angular 2 which has a storage module. But i'm pretty sure numerous people have done this already and asked this question:
Simple JWT authentication in ASP.NET Core 1.0 Web API
Token Based Authentication in ASP.NET Core (refreshed)
Update
If your front end is made purely html/js/css and doesn't have a back end to accommodate it you would store your token in local storage, there a multiple npm packages that help you with this like this one. You want to look for Implicit flow.
Otherwise if you do have a back end that comes with your front end you want to store the token in a session/database your pick, there are 3rd party providers to do this like IdentityServer4. You want to use Hybrid flow
Furthermore, should I even use this JWT? In my case, I need simple
authentication for simple WebApi which will be used by one or little
bit more users.
The reason for the whole separation of concerns is performance so you don't really need it since it's just one or a little more users. Do it because it's a learning experience, JWT is not easy to setup from the beginning and will require you to do a lot of reading and you will fail and you will be frustrated but at the end you will know how to set it up and how it works
I've also heard about OpenIddict, Auth0, IdentityServer, so what's the difference between all of these authentication mechanisms?
So what you did in the Stormpath tutorial is NOT production ready. That is just a little demo, to help you understand what JWT is and how it works. The above mentioned are complete libraries that tackle all the heavy lifting and do not require you to built the whole thing from scratch. And the main difference between them is the scope that they cover.
I personally used IS4 and it had me crying no more than 2 times (It was simpler than I thought):
http://identityserver4.readthedocs.io/en/release/
https://github.com/openiddict/openiddict-core
https://auth0.com/docs/quickstart/webapp/aspnet-core/00-intro
Use tokens (JWT) if you have multiple applications or services (web, mobile, other services) connection to your API. Benefits: Stateless, Scalability, No cookie, no CORS problems (if you allow it).
If your API will be used by only one web application use the default ASP default authentication system. Its easier to set up.
If you webapi and user interface are hosted in the same web application, token bases security does not buy you anything over the cookie based authentication provided by the built in authentication. That's because the authentication cookie gets sent back to the keep application on every HTTP request. When you make calls to a website other than the one you signed in on those cookies do not get sent. So JSON Web Tokens (JWT) provide a standard format for browser to send identity information to a website when a cookie isn't an option.
If your Web Api is to be accessed by AJAX calls then JWT may be a desired choice, but not mandatory. judging by the description of your app,it seems to me that the default authentication system can serve you well.
Auth2 is the authentication mechanism that enable external login such as Facebook. It is part of the default authentication system, and you need not do much in order to employ it in your app.
OpenIddict sits on top of Auth2. It is part of the default authentication system, and you need not do much in order to employ it in your app. It is the authentication mechanism that enable external login such as Google+
IdentityServer may be used for large Wep Api that is accessed by Ajax calls. As for instance, you can use IdentityServer to authenticate users longing to a front end Angular app.
Once again, the default authentication system can serve you well.
Hope this helps...
I am working on a prototype for a site re-architecture using ASP.NET 5 and I am debating using IdentityServer4 for my Authentication and Authorization. I have reviewed a lot of samples and articles about setting up IdentityServer3 and 4 and I am trying to wrap my head around if it can handle my client’s requirements in a proper way. Here are my requirements.
I have 3 sites that need authorization. Site 1 (abc.com) will require windows authentication and will be a combination of mvc and webapi calls using roles (or roles converted to claims) for authorization. Site 2 (def.com) is a trusted site that wants a login widget with a username/password/rememberme text box on their site that when submitted will authenticate the user and redirect them to site 3 (xyz.com). Site 3 will also have its own login page and will be a combination of mvc and webapi calls using claims. Site 2 and 3 will not be using windows authentication and the client does not want them redirecting to the identity server login screen, but rather having their own login screen and calling the identity server from code with the credentials to login.
Here are my questions regarding this scenario and IdentityServer4.
Can Idsvr4 handle one client using windows authentication and
another using username/password authentication?
If so, is there a
reason to have windows auth in idsvr4 or should it just use standard
windows auth within the webapp?
Can idsvr4 be setup to have the client collect the username/password/rememberme values and pass them through code to
get the proper jwt tokens for both mvc and webapi?
If so, can it
log them into both the mvc and webapi applications on another site?
If so, is this circumventing the real purpose of identityserver4
and therefor is a bad idea?
If it can handle this scenario and is a good idea, how would I setup the client, scopes and code to handle the login through code and redirect?
Examples are great and very welcome, but I am not even sure what verbiage to use to search for this scenario so even pointing me in the right direction would be of great help.
Not sure if this question is still active. But yes, i believe you can do all that.
1) You can setup which ldp is available for each client by setting IdentityProviderRestrictions on the client (docs)
1.1) - Not sure what you mean, i believe one of the points of having idsrv is to sentralize you authentication, and it makes it easier for future websites to integrate with the same service.
2) When logging in using a client (application), you also specify which apiResource the client has access to - and the application needs to add this to the requested scopes when signing in. So if your client is the mvc application, you just add the ApiResource in the AllowedScopes - and set the request_type to id_token code - this would then give the user a access_token that is passed with each request to the backend api. (docs)
2.1) - This would basically log the user in on both sites - using an access token that says that the user is authorized to use the backend api.
2.2) - In my opinion this flow is one of the things that makes idsrv great - and they even mention this as a great feature of idsrv themself. You just need 1 trip to the authserver to gain access to all systems.
as for pt. 3 - Take an extra look at the docs, try to setup a blank project following the quickstarts.
For logging in from your own login page, you need to use the grant type Resource Owner password - Altough they dont recommend doing this for security issues (transmitting passwords over the wire) - it is supported.
I'm trying to investigate possibility of using claims aware security in the system I'm developing. The more I read about all this stuff the more confused i get.
So i decided to describe what I know already and I would ask that You correct my statements. I got lost with all those protocols and technologies used.
Below is a simple diagram of my system. There are two services - a REST service implemented using WCF and an ASP MVC web application.
I know I need to get an STS which will be a trusted identity issuer for both of my services. I'll be using roles to differentiate certain levels of access.
The STS functionality might be accomplished by using ADFS (or is there anything more needed in addition to it) or WSO2 Identity Server.
By saying STS I mean a service which will get credentials from a client wanting to authenticate and will return a set of claims (which will beside other information contain the role assigned to the user). This set of claims will be in the form of a token.
On the diagram I marked different client types with different colors. No I'll try to describe what protocols/formats i think will be used. I am pretty confused on what is a format and what is a protocol. But let me try:
Red scenario: rich WCF client authenticates agains REST service
Request to STS will be sent using WS-trust (is there any other possibility in ADFS or WSO2?). The credentials might be in one of several forms such as X.509 certificate, password digest, kerberos, windows authentication, SAML token (this is used in federation scenarios, right?), and few other.
The answer to the client will be in a form of SWT token sent over OAuth protocol since this is the way we do it when trying to authenticate against REST services.
Does ADFS support SWT and OAuth? I couldn't find the information.
The client then send the token received from STS to the REST service. Once again this is SWT token on OAuth.
I guess as for the client code all can be easily implemented using Windows Identity Framework.
Green scenario: rich android client authenticates against REST service
All protocols/formats are the same as in previous scenario. Is there any framework which can let me easily implement this?
Blue scenario: user of web browser authenticates against ASP MVC web application
User goes to the web app's main page. The webapp detects that he isn't authenticated yet so redirects him to the sign on page on STS (the sign on page is on STS, right?).
and 3. STS authenticates the user and sends HTTP response containing SAML token and redirection to webapp. So here is HTTP used, not WS-Trusts.
Another question. In this web browser scenario there will be a cookie written on a client's machine. So whenever client will try to authenticate once again, he'll just send the cookie to sts to obtain the token. There will be no need to send the credentials. STS will issue a token basing on the cookie without any real authentication logic involved. Is that statement correct?
ADFS / WIF out the box only supports SAML tokens - no OAuth support.
ADFS / WCF uses WS-Trust.
The sign-on page is part of ADFS.
The answer is "Yes" to your last question but (at some point) it will expire and the user will have to authenticate again.
Update:
Have a look at Claims Based Identity & Access Control Guide