I'm a new user with SoapUI, but I feel like this process should be easy. I've read all of the documentation I can find on this matter but I can't seem to get around this.
The issue:
I am working on load testing a website for a customer, this will involve creating 1000 accounts and navigating through a course signup process. I've managed to create test cases that step through the creation process for a new user, upon creating the new user the website automatically does an OAuth2 process and redirects the user to their profile. The way this process flows is: account created > credentials sent to a token URI in the REQUEST > RESPONSE kicks back an access token > token is used to grab credentials and redirect user to profile.
I have successfully extracted the token as a variable and stored it to the local test case, however this is where I get stuck. The only way I am able to retrieve the user profile is by manually pasting the access token into the OAuth2 access token field in SoapUI, then running the test case. Since I have to do this with 1000 accounts, this is obviously not an effective method.
I've attempted to grab ElementIDs of the login page/user creation page using the automated access token script editor, but all of these fields are located in a separate .js script, therefore the ElementID doesn't exist in SoapUI.
Am I going about this wrong, or is there someway this can be done? I'm not looking for anyone to write my code, merely explain this process if I'm understanding it incorrectly.
I managed to bypass the OAuth2 Authentication method by creating a Groovy Script that grabs the "Set-Cookie" header from the token call then adds the cookie to each call afterwards.
This method appears to have solved the issue!
import com.eviware.soapui.support.types.StringToStringMap
def getcookie = context.testCase.testSteps["Token"].testRequest.response.responseHeaders["Set-Cookie"][0]
def headers = new StringToStringMap()
headers.put('Cookie', getcookie)
testRunner.testCase.getTestStepByName('Get User').testRequest.setRequestHeaders(headers)
Related
I'm building a react native app which uses the spotify web api. I'm using the authorization code flow to authorize a user. First I get a authorization code which can be used to obtain an access token and a refresh token. Everything works!
The problem is: an access token is only valid for a limited amount of time. That's where the refresh token comes in. I understand this concept, but I'm breaking my head about how to implement this.
Let's say a users opens the app, requests an access token and uses this for some time. Then, the user closes the app. After 15 minutes, the users opens the app again. The access token has now expired, so I need to request a new access token.
I've come op with several "solutions". Can someone point me to the correct solution?
Solution 1:
Every time the user opens the app, I request a new access token and use this. Problem: when the user uses the app longer than the valid time of the access token, I won't work anymore.
Solution 2:
I use the access token that's stored in the secure storage on every request. When a request comes back with 'access token invalid' (I don't know the exact error code but you guys know what I mean), I request a new access token with the stored refresh token, and then I send the previous command again (with the new access token). But my question here is: can I use some kind of "wrapper function" which checks the response of the request, and if the response is "access token invalid", it automatically requests a new access token and runs the previous request again.
I think certainly correct solution is solution 2,and i think its clear enough.
and for using solution 2 you need somthing like wrapper function,yes its intelligently.
so you should use interceptor:
what is interceptor ?
You can intercept requests or responses before they are handled by then or catch.
in link below there is a good example of implementing refresh token in axios interceptor:
https://gist.github.com/Godofbrowser/bf118322301af3fc334437c683887c5f
I agree that Solution 2 is the best, each time you do a request you can check to see if the Access Token has expired, and if it has then you can request a new Access Token using the Refresh Token as you mentioned and then make your request, in my own project I do this in a FormatRequestHeadersAsync method which calls a CheckAndRenewTokenAsync method where I perform the following check, here shown in C#:
if(AccessToken?.Refresh != null && (AccessToken.Expiration < DateTime.UtcNow))
{
AccessToken = await GetRefreshTokenAsync(
AccessToken.Refresh,
AccessToken.TokenType,
cancellationToken);
}
You can store the Access Token and the Refresh Token and then use something similar to this before you make each request to the API this will refresh your token and then you can store the new Access Token and the existing Refresh Token.
This question is has a lot in common to the previous question Google OAuth: can't get refresh token with authorization code (and I won't be offended if it's considered a duplicate) but there are some differences: that question uses the Javascript and PHP libraries, and I'm using neither of those. That question wants to know how to get a refresh token, and I want to know if I should want a refresh token, or how the mode with no refresh tokens is intended to work.
I'm following this guide:
https://developers.google.com/identity/protocols/OAuth2WebServer
The goal is to allow users to upload files from Google Drive to my web application.
I'm not using one of Google's favored programming languages, so I don't have a library abstracting away all the interaction with Google. I need to know what the HTTP requests should actually should look like.
One of the parameters in the authorization request is access_type. The description says
Set the value to offline if your application needs to refresh access tokens when the user is not present at the browser.
I won't need to do that (I'll only want to retrieve a file on my server immediately after the user selects it) so in the spirit of not asking for more privileges than you really need, I used access_type=online. This gives me an access token and no refresh token. I've successfully used the access token to make some requests to Google Drive.
The user comes back the next day and tries to upload another file. While processing this request from the user, I make a request to Google Drive. The access token is expired, so I get a 401. What's supposed to happen next?
My guess is I should pretend this is a completely new user and send them through the full authorization process again. That would mean I have to abort whatever the user was trying to do, redirect them to https://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/auth with all the parameters (scope, client_id, etc.) and embed enough information in the state parameter that I can resume the original request when the user gets back from their detour.
This seems rather difficult (in particular the part about saving and resuming the state of my application at some arbitrary point). It's a big enough obstacle that it should be explained somewhere. But the description of the access_type parameter didn't say anything about needing to insert authorization redirects everywhere. It just said the user must be "present".
You are using the right implementation. You don't need offline access if you aren't going to make requests when the user is not using the application. The thing is that access tokens expire in 1 hour. So you need to generate new access tokens if a user leaves the application and come back later.
If users have authorized your application, calling this URL with your configuration should return a new valid access token:
https://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/v2/auth?
scope=scopes&
include_granted_scopes=true&
state=state_parameter_passthrough_value&
redirect_uri=http://oauth2.example.com/callback&
response_type=token&
client_id=client_id
I have my own Login page where user enters username/password.
This username/password are used to login through Keycloak Rest API.
http://localhost:8080/auth/realms/Demo/protocol/openid-connect/token
input - {username,password,grant_type,client_secret,client_id}
And in response i get access token.
Now i wish to enable Authenticator (Google Authenticator). I have enabled it from backend. Now if user wishes to login thorugh my application, my login page i need to get below details.
1.) Somehow i need to include QR Code that appears on keycloak login page post username/password validation to show on my login screen for the first time login once user enter username/password. So do we have any API which return Keycloak QR code image in response.
2.) Subsequent login i will have OTP field, so need a REST api to pass OTP along with username/password.
Please help with REST API if keycloak has any. Integrating through Javascript.
Similar flow as described in use case 1 here
Just want to use keycloak as a database, doing all operation for me, input will be my screen. I do want redirection of URL's while login in and yet should be standalone deployed.
I've managed to implement this through the rest API of Keycloak. To realize this, you need to extend Keycloak yourself with a SPI. To do this create your own Java project and extend org.keycloak.services.resource.RealmResourceProvider and org.keycloak.services.resource.RealmResourceProviderFactory. You can find more information in the official docs (https://www.keycloak.org/docs/latest/server_development/#_extensions), github examples and other stack overflow posts how to do this.
Once you got this up and running you can implement it like this:
#GET
#Path("your-end-point-to-fetch-the-qr")
#Produces({MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON})
public YourDtoWithSecretAndQr get2FASetup(#PathParam("username") final String username) {
final RealmModel realm = this.session.getContext().getRealm();
final UserModel user = this.session.users().getUserByUsername(username, realm);
final String totpSecret = HmacOTP.generateSecret(20);
final String totpSecretQrCode = TotpUtils.qrCode(totpSecret, realm, user);
return new YourDtoWithSecretAndQr(totpSecret, totpSecretQrCode);
}
#POST
#Path("your-end-point-to-setup-2fa")
#Consumes("application/json")
public void setup2FA(#PathParam("username") final String username, final YourDtoWithData dto) {
final RealmModel realm = this.session.getContext().getRealm();
final UserModel user = this.session.users().getUserByUsername(username, realm);
final OTPCredentialModel otpCredentialModel = OTPCredentialModel.createFromPolicy(realm, dto.getSecret(), dto.getDeviceName());
CredentialHelper.createOTPCredential(this.session, realm, user, dto.getInitialCode(), otpCredentialModel);
}
The secret received with the GET must be send back with the POST. The initial code is the one from your 2FA app (e.g. Google Authenticator). The QR code is a string which can be displayed in an img with src 'data:image/png;base64,' + qrCodeString;
I know this is an old question, but I've recently been looking at something similar, and so thought it would be potentially valuable to share what I have found for others who may be looking into this and wondered what the possibilities are.
TL;DR
You can only really use the existing Keycloak actions to do this or embed the user account management page found at https://{keycloak server URL}/auth/realms/{realm name}/account in an iframe. That's it, I'm afraid. In my opinion it is currently best to just assign actions directly to accounts or use the Credential Reset emails to assign actions; both of these can be done via the Admin API if desired:
Send Credential Reset email containing assigned actions:
https://www.keycloak.org/docs-api/11.0/rest-api/index.html#_executeactionsemail
Set actions directly on the account (include the actions in the requiredActions portion of the user JSON that you send in the body to the endpoint):
https://www.keycloak.org/docs-api/11.0/rest-api/index.html#_updateuser
Background is that as part of a project that I have been working on we wanted to see if we could have an integrated way for users to set up their initial password and OTP device when a new account has been created for them, since the default method of sending them an email from Keycloak using the "Credential Reset" functionality has the limitations that a) it doesn't provide a link to the application itself unless you override the theme, and if you have multiple instances of the application for different users you have no way of knowing which instance to provide the link for, so may have to end up including a list of them, and b) it often doesn't feel truly native to the application, even with changes to the theme. If you're sensible though, I'd suggest you stop and just use this functionality - please see the TL;DR section above for details.
So, in short there is NO API endpoint for receiving a QR code to set up an OTP device. There are two places, however, where the QR code can be retrieved from - the OTP device setup screen when you log in as a user who has had a "Configure OTP" action assigned to their account, and the user's own account management screen.
The first option of the Configure OTP action screen is a non-starter. It only shows up when you log in, and so by definition the user has to log in to Keycloak via the Keycloak login page in order to trigger the page to be displayed. At this point you're already on a Keycloak page instead of one of your app's pages, and so unless you can get very creative with changes to these Keycloak pages via a custom theme, tapping into this page isn't really an option.
The second option is more interesting, but far from ideal. Every user who has logged in has access to an account management page that can be found at https://{keycloak server URL}/auth/realms/{realm name}/account. This page allows you to do things like change your name, password, etc. and it also allows you to add an OTP device if you don't already have one, or delete any existing OTP devices associated with your account. This OTP device tab of the account management page can be reached directly via https://{keycloak server URL}/auth/realms/{realm name}/account/totp.
As I mentioned, there isn't an API that you can access to view the QR code that shows up on this page. The only way it is accessible is via the GET request to https://{keycloak server URL}/auth/realms/{realm name}/account/totp, which returns the HTML for the page I've already mentioned. Okay great, so can we scrape the QR code programmatically and then put it in our own page on our application? Err, no, not really. You see, whilst a lot of the Keycloak API endpoints rightly allow you to send a bearer token (e.g. access token) in the authorization header to access and endpoint, this page will not accept a bearer token as a means of authentication/authorization. Instead it uses a session cookie that is locked down to the Keycloak URL. This cookie is set when you log in to your application via the Keycloak login page, and so is available to this account management page when you navigate to it, having already logged in, and since the account management page uses the same server and domain name as the original Keycloak login page, it has access to the cookie and can let you in. This cookie cannot be sent by your application to e.g. your own REST API to then programmatically call the account management page and scrape the QR code, because your application doesn't have access to it for good security reasons. This might be something you can change in Keycloak somewhere, but if there is I would strongly recommend against changing it.
So if we can't scrape the page from our own server, can we do something on the front-end? Well, as mentioned, your application doesn't have access to the session cookie but if you make a request (e.g. using fetch or axios) in your front-end JavaScript to the account management page then that request will send the cookie along with it, so that could work right? Umm, well actually you will get hit with an error message in this scenario due to CORS. CORS is Cross-Origin-Resource-Sharing and in order to allow the Keycloak page to be accessed then you would have to open up the settings on the server to allow it to be accessed from your website's address. I've seen some articles that look at how you can open up your CORS settings on Keycloak if you wish but I'd be very nervous about doing this. I don't know enough about the internals of Keycloak and how it operates to comment on how much of a security risk this is, but I certainly wouldn't recommend it. There some information here (Keycloak angular No 'Access-Control-Allow-Origin' header is present) on changing the "Web Origins" setting of your application's Keycloak client, but this opens up your application to some serious potential abuse. There is also the MAJOR issue that even if you scraped the QR code, the device isn't actually added to the user's account (even though it appears in the authenticator app) until you enter a code into the page that the QR code is on and click Save. Since there isn't an API endpoint that you can use to complete this operation, I therefore don't think that this option is viable either. I've tried out whether or not you can use the token retrieval endpoint at https://{keycloak server URL}/auth/realms/{realm name}/protocol/openid-connect/token to see if making a request with your username/password/otp code will somehow "register" your device and complete the process, but although you can get a token this way, and it doesn't complain about the otp code, it doesn't actually take any notice of the code because as far as it's concerned the user's account doesn't have a device registered with it. So we have to use the form on the account management page in order to complete this registration process.
So the final way of possibly doing this is.... an iframe. Sorry, yeah it's rubbish but that's all your left with. You can have the iframe point at your account management page, and because the user is logged in then they will be able to see the contents from your application's page. You can use relative positioning, fixed width and height and remove scroll bars to ensure that you ONLY show the QR code and the fields for the one time code, device name, and the Save/Cancel buttons. This, sadly, seems to be the only option at the moment, and due to how nasty and unreliable iframes can be in general - they certainly don't feel native to your application, and you'll need to override your Keycloak theme to get the page in question to look more like your app - I'd recommend steering clear of this and using the standard approach of using Keycloak actions and the Admin API instead.
If you've made it this far, congratulations, you win at Stack Overflow :-)
I know this is not the first time the topic is treated in StackOverflow, however, I have some questions I couldn't find an answer to or other questions have opposed answers.
I am doing a rather simple REST API (Silex-PHP) to be consumed initially by just one SPA (backbone app). I don't want to comment all the several authentication methods in this question as that topic is already fully covered on SO. I'll basically create a token for each user, and this token will be attached in every request that requires authentication by the SPA. All the SPA-Server transactions will run under HTTPS. For now, my decision is that the token doesn't expire. Tokens that expire/tokens per session are not complying with the statelessness of REST, right? I understand there's a lot of room for security improvement but that's my scope for now.
I have a model for Tokens, and thus a table in the database for tokens with a FK to user_id. By this I mean the token is not part of my user model.
REGISTER
I have a POST /users (requires no authentication) that creates a user in the database and returns the new user. This complies with the one request one resource rule. However, this brings me certain doubts:
My idea is that at the time to create a new user, create a new token for the user, to immediately return it with the Response, and thus, improving the UX. The user will immediately be able to start using the web app. However, returning the token for such response would break the rule of returning just the resource. Should I instead make two requests together? One to create the user and one to retrieve the token without the user needing to reenter credentials?
If I decided to return the token together with the user, then I believe POST /users would be confusing for the API consumer, and then something like POST /auth/register appears. Once more, I dislike this idea because involves a verb. I really like the simplicity offered in this answer. But then again, I'd need to do two requests together, a POST /users and a POST /tokens. How wrong is it to do two requests together and also, how would I exactly send the relevant information for the token to be attached to a certain user if both requests are sent together?
For now my flow works like follows:
1. Register form makes a POST /users request
2. Server creates a new user and a new token, returns both in the response (break REST rule)
3. Client now attaches token to every Request that needs Authorization
The token never expires, preserving REST statelessness.
EMAIL VALIDATION
Most of the current webapps require email validation without breaking the UX for the users, i.e the users can immediately use the webapp after registering. On the other side, if I return the token with the register request as suggested above, users will immediately have access to every resource without validating emails.
Normally I'd go for the following workflow:
1. Register form sends POST /users request.
2. Server creates a new user with validated_email set to false and stores an email_validation_token. Additionally, the server sends an email generating an URL that contains the email_validation_token.
3. The user clicks on the URL that makes a request: For example POST /users/email_validation/{email_validation_token}
4. Server validates email, sets validated_email to true, generates a token and returns it in the response, redirecting the user to his home page at the same time.
This looks overcomplicated and totally ruins the UX. How'd you go about it?
LOGIN
This is quite simple, for now I am doing it this way so please correct me if wrong:
1. User fills a log in form which makes a request to POST /login sending Basic Auth credentials.
2. Server checks Basic Auth credentials and returns token for the given user.
3. Web app attached the given token to every future request.
login is a verb and thus breaks a REST rule, everyone seems to agree on doing it this way though.
LOGOUT
Why does everyone seem to need a /auth/logout endpoint? From my point of view clicking on "logout" in the web app should basically remove the token from the application and not send it in further requests. The server plays no role in this.
As it is possible that the token is kept in localStorage to prevent losing the token on a possible page refresh, logout would also imply removing the token from the localStorage. But still, this doesn't affect the server. I understand people who need to have a POST /logout are basically working with session tokens, which again break the statelessness of REST.
REMEMBER ME
I understand the remember me basically refers to saving the returned token to the localStorage or not in my case. Is this right?
If you'd recommend any further reading on this topic I'd very much appreciate it. Thanks!
REGISTER
Tokens that expire/tokens per session are not complying with the statelessness of REST, right?
No, there's nothing wrong with that. Many HTTP authentication schemes do have expiring tokens. OAuth2 is super popular for REST services, and many OAuth2 implementations force the client to refresh the access token from time to time.
My idea is that at the time to create a new user, create a new token for the user, to immediately return it with the Response, and thus, improving the UX. The user will immediately be able to start using the web app. However, returning the token for such response would break the rule of returning just the resource. Should I instead make two requests together? One to create the user and one to retrieve the token without the user needing to reenter credentials?
Typically, if you create a new resource following REST best practices, you don't return something in response to a POST like this. Doing this would make the call more RPC-like, so I would agree with you here... it's not perfectly RESTful. I'll offer two solutions to this:
Ignore this, break the best practices. Maybe it's for the best in this case, and making exceptions if they make a lot more sense is sometimes the best thing to do (after careful consideration).
If you want be more RESTful, I'll offer an alternative.
Lets assume you want to use OAuth2 (not a bad idea!). The OAuth2 API is not really RESTful for a number of reasons. I'm my mind it is still better to use a well-defined authentication API, over rolling your own for the sake of being RESTful.
That still leaves you with the problem of creating a user on your API, and in response to this (POST) call, returning a secret which can be used as an access/refresh token.
My alternative is as follows:
You don't need to have a user in order to start a session.
What you can do instead is start the session before you create the user. This guarantees that for any future call, you know you are talking to the same client.
If you start your OAuth2 process and receive your access/refresh token, you can simply do an authenticated POST request on /users. What this means is that your system needs to be aware of 2 types of authenticated users:
Users that logged in with a username/password (`grant_type = passsword1).
Users that logged in 'anonymously' and intend to create a user after the fact. (grant_type = client_credentials).
Once the user is created, you can assign your previously anonymous session with the newly created user entity, thus you don't need to do any access/refresh token exchanges after creation.
EMAIL VALIDATION
Both your suggestions to either:
Prevent the user from using the application until email validation is completed.
Allow the user to use the application immediately
Are done by applications. Which one is more appropriate really depends on your application and what's best for you. Is there any risk associated with a user starting to use an account with an email they don't own? If no, then maybe it's fine to allow the user in right away.
Here's an example where you don't want to do this: Say if the email address is used by other members of your system to add a user as a friend, the email address is a type of identity. If you don't force users to validate their emails, it means I can act on behalf of someone with a different email address. This is similar to being able to receive invitations, etc. Is this an attack vector? Then you might want to consider blocking the user from using the application until the email is validated.
You might also consider only blocking certain features in your application for which the email address might be sensitive. In the previous example, you could prevent people from seeing invitations from other users until the email is validated.
There's no right answer here, it just depends on how you intend to use the email address.
LOGIN
Please just use OAuth2. The flow you describe is already fairly close to how OAuth2 works. Take it one step further an actually use OAuth2. It's pretty great and once you get over the initial hurdle of understanding the protocol, you'll find that it's easier than you thought and fairly straightforward to just implement the bits you specifically need for your API.
Most of the PHP OAuth2 server implementations are not great. They do too much and are somewhat hard to integrate with. Rolling your own is not that hard and you're already fairly close to building something similar.
LOGOUT
The two reasons you might want a logout endpoint are:
If you use cookie/session based authentication and want to tell the server to forget the session. It sounds like this is not an issue for you.
If you want to tell the server to expire the access/refresh token earlier. Yes, you can just remove them from localstorage, and that might be good enough. Forcing to expire them server-side might give you that little extra confidence. What if someone was able to MITM your browser and now has access to your tokens? I might want to quickly logout and expire all existing tokens. It's an edge case, and I personally have never done this, but that could be a reason why you would want it.
REMEMBER ME
Yea, implementing "remember me" with local storage sounds like a good idea.
I originally took the /LOGON and /LOGOUT approach. I'm starting to explore /PRESENCE. It seems it would help me combine both knowing someone's status and authentication.
0 = Offline
1 = Available
2 = Busy
Going from Offline to anything else should include initial validation (aka require username/password). You could use PATCH or PUT for this (depending how you see it).
You are right, SESSION is not allowed in REST, hence there is no need to login or logout in REST service and /login, /logout are not nouns.
For authentication you could use
Basic authentication over SSL
Digest authentication
OAuth 2
HMAC, etc.
I prefer to use PUBLIC KEY and PRIVATE KEY [HMAC]
Private key will never be transmitted over web and I don't care about public key. The public key will be used to make the user specific actions [Who is holding the api key]
Private key will be know by client app and the server. The private key will be used to create signature. You generate a signature token using private key and add the key into the header. The server will also generate the signature and validate the request for handshake.
Authorization: Token 9944b09199c62bcf9418ad846dd0e4bbdfc6ee4b
Now how you will get private key? you have to do it manually like you put facebook, twitter or google api key on you app.
However, in some case you can also return [not recommended] the key only for once like Amazon S3 does. They provide "AWS secret access key" at the registration response.
I am quite new in Facebook application development. I was playing the all day with "how to post a message on the wall of a page?". I finally succeeded but each message got "via Graph API Explorer". I tried to find how to change it to my application name without success. I tried to see if I could force the value of application in the api command but it did not take it into account. Maybe I miss something :( If someone can help, that would be great!
I am still quite confused. Let me try to explain what I want to do: I would like to automatically publish on a page (as the page) some event that are defined on a website (in a kind of agenda). What I miss, I think, is how everything is working together on Facebook side:
1. the login process: as the application will run in a cron, this should not display a login dialog box.
2. the access token: application or page one?
3. the permissions: from my understanding, I need manage_pages (and publish_stream) but not clear how this should be set.
Thx for any clarification and maybe a clear example :o)
You need the user to authorise your own App using one of the Login flows and grant you one of the publishing Permissions -
If it says 'via Graph API Explorer' on the posts your app makes you're using the access token you retrieved when you were testing the API using the Graph API Explorer tool, not one produced by your own app
OK I think I have finally found the way to do it. I needed a page access code and not an application access code. The token must be generated outside the application as a long live one.
Get a code using:
https://www.facebook.com/dialog/oauth?client_id={app_id}&redirect_uri={my_url}&scope=manage_pages,publish_stream
app_id is your application ID
my_url is your application URL
scope is the permission you want to be granted
In the redirected URL, you will have a code parameter. Copy it.
Generate the user access code using:
https://graph.facebook.com/oauth/access_token?client_id={app_id}&redirect_uri={my_url}&client_secret={app_secret}&code={code}
app_secret is your application secret key
code is the code from step 1
You will get as output the user access token. This one is a short live one.
convert the short live to a long live user access token using:
https://graph.facebook.com/oauth/access_token?grant_type=fb_exchange_token&client_id={app_id}&client_secret={app_secret}&fb_exchange_token={short live access token}
Replace the "short live access token" by the one you got on step 2
You will get as output the infinite user access token.
Get the page access token (this one will be infinite access token as
the user access token is now an infinite access token too):
https://graph.facebook.com/me/accounts?access_token={infinite user access token}
Replace the "infinite user access token" with the value you got on step 3.
This command will list all the pages you administer. The output contains the page access token you need in field "access_token". You can so use this token in any API command in your application.
The best of the best is to do all those steps via a server side program (PHP for me) as the application secret key should remain "secret".