I'm trying to a CSRF protection to an existing MVC4 web application which uses DevExpress grids. I've added the Html.AntiForgeryToken() into the forms on the aspx pages (which contain ascx as partials containing the grids) and can see the __RequestVerificationToken and it's value clearly in developer tools when a save is called.
I've tried commenting out all my ValidateAntiForgeryToken attributes bar one - I went with the delete post method for simplicity (And also to eliminate the DevExpress grids messing with it) and I still keep coming up against this error:
There was a HttpAntiForgeryException
Url: http://localhost:54653/Users/Delete/f86ad393-0039-44e8-beed-a66dbab9266e?ReturnURL=http%3A%2F%2Flocalhost%3A54653%2FUsers
The exception message is
The required anti-forgery form field "__RequestVerificationToken" is not present.
Does anyone have any idea why this might be happening? Could it be that the error is non-descriptive and it's actually that the token doesn't match rather than that it doesn't exist? In previous answers to this question people just say "oh, you have to add the token," which is obviously not helpful here.
Are you submitting the form manually through Ajax? If that's the case, you need to pass the anti forgery token as another parameter with the name "__RequestVerificationToken".
Point 1 : Make sure if your application is has https secure protocol. Please load in https.
Point 2 : In case of DevExpress you have to call in the below pattern.
ViewContext.Writer.Write(Html.AntiForgeryToken().ToHtmlString());
After struggling with this for days I had a thought - maybe the browser is stopping the cookie being written. I did a search for dev servers and cookies not being written, and found that with Chrome and IE10 and up that there's problems writing the cookies.
I downloaded Firefox and tried it with that and it worked instantly. I then reapplied all the validate attributes to the all the controller methods and the all worked, every single one of them! Even the DexExpress postbacks seem to be working correctly.
I'll carry out more exhaustive testing, but for now, I think we're there.
Not exactly. If MVC AntiForgeryToken is already defined on page where you are using MvcxGridView and you want to protect grid actions you should send this token back to server during grid client side begin callback event.
settings.ClientSideEvents.BeginCallback = "function(s,e) { e.customArgs[\"__RequestVerificationToken\"] = $('input[name=\"__RequestVerificationToken\"]', $(s.GetMainElement())).val(); }";
Related
I have a Web Resource that is working fine, except for one major headache.
I need to be able to click on a link and open an existing entity record. These two methods both almost get me there, but are blocked by different reasons:
1. Calling it directly with a link like this:
window.open('http://OurCRM/main.aspx?etc=10088&id=%7bc1d0db62-aa9e-e911-80e0-0a94ef08472f%7d&pagetype=entityrecord', '_self');
The problem with this one is that it doesn't work due to CRM saying
"Sys.InvalidOperationException: Sys.InvalidOperationException: Service Xrm.Interfaces.Services.IMostRecentlyViewedService already has an implementation"
note : If I take out the '_self' it works but then that defeats the purpose of what we're trying to do (need to keep it in the same tab).
2. using the Client API:
parent.Xrm.Utility.openEntityForm('ourentity', guid, '', '');
This one is blocked due to Cross Origin Frames being blocked by browsers.
Does anyone know how to do this?
Below snippet should work: (this will be onclick of button or link)
onclick="window.location.href='http://OurCRM/main.aspx?etc=10088&id=%7bc1d0db62-aa9e-e911-80e0-0a94ef08472f%7d&pagetype=entityrecord';"
To help others out, this was resolved in another, similar question
accessing the logged in CRM user from custom page
Basically we were looking at two different ways to handle the same problem of working with webforms inside CRM.
Background
In our Apache configuration we use mod-auth-external (previously on Google Code) to invoke PAM authentication.
Now there is a request for proper handling of shadow-based password expiration:
If password is before warning period Apache should respond with HTTP status code 200. Nothing new here.
If password is in warning period (its validity end is near) Apache should respond with HTTP status code 200, but include somehow information about the warning period.
If password is in expiration period (it is no longer valid but user can still change it on his own) Apache should respond with HTTP status code 401 and include somehow information about expiration period.
If password is beyond expiration period (it is no longer valid and account was locked, administrator must unlock it) Apache should respond with HTTP status code 401 and include somehow information about the locked state.
(There are also corner cases of page missing or some other errors. It is not clear what to do then. But it seems that solving above points would allow to solve those corner cases as well.)
Our PAM authenticator (used through mod-auth-external) is able to differentiate those cases by adjusting return values. That we already have.
The problem is however how to get information from the authenticator to the associated action serving the page (either actual page with 200 status code or 401 error document).
Current investigations
It should be noted that there is significant difference between requirement 2 and requirements 3 and 4.
Requirements 3 and 4 alone are somewhat easier because they both involve our mod-auth-external authenticator returning error (access denied). So we only need to know how to get that error code in 401 error page. I even raised issue on that on mod-auth-external page.
Requirement 2 is much more difficult. In that case our authenticator must return 0 (access granted) and still somehow propagate information about the warning to whatever gets served in the end.
Logs parsing
Obvious (and ugly) idea is to parse logs. mod-auth-external description on Google Code Wiki mentions that authenticator return value gets written to Apache syslog. Also whatever authenticator prints to standard error stream gets logged as well.
This could be used to pass information from authenticator to some other entities.
The difficulty here is that it is not clear how to do it safely. What to print to be sure that "the other entity" will match properly current request with log entry. Mere URL doesn't seem to be enough since there can be multiple requests for the same URL at the same time. While I don't see anything more useful in what authenticator gets.
Another issue here is that it seems that to be able to parse the logs you have to have some non-trivial code running for "the other entity". And this complicates things further since how should we do it?
Another idea
If we could make the authenticator somehow modify "request session" (or whatever, maybe just environment? - I don't know, I'm new to Apache) to add arbitrary data to it we would be (almost) at home.
Our authenticator would somehow store "password status" and also possibly days remaining to the end of warning/expiration period (if applicable). Then upon serving 401 error page we would retrieve that back and use it to dynamically generate content of the page.
Or even better we would have it stored in session so that the other end could read that data directly. (For cases where it is not simply a browser showing page.)
But so far I fail to see how to do that.
Do you have any idea how to meet those requirements?
For over a month I got no answer here. Nor on GitHub issue that I opened for mod-auth-external.
So I ended doing a custom modification to our mod-auth-external. I don't like modifying third party software but this one seems dead anyway. And also it turned out we are using pretty old version (2.2.9 which I upgraded to 2.2.11, the last in 2.2.x line). Which already had some customizations anyway.
I explained details of the solution in a comment to my GitHub issue so I will not repeat them here.
I will however comment on shadow details as they were not mentioned there.
I had two choices: either use getspnam function to retrieve shadow data or to parse messages generated by PAM. First attempts based on getspnam function but in the end I used PAM messages. I didn't have strong reasons for any of those. However I decided to propagate in HTTP response not only shadow status but any PAM message that was generated and so it seemed easier to follow that way.
I am performing an integration to a third party site and they have asked me to redirect to their URL with a bunch of POST variables.
The only way I can work out how to do this is by creating an HTML form with hidden fields, and then trigger a JS click event on a button to POST the form to their site.
Ideally I would like to do this from the VB code as the data may be sensitive and there are bits I don't want to render in the client side.
Has anyone any experience of doing this successfully. I have googled around but can only find ways to use GET variables on the URL or POST and read the response.
I have a page tab app that I am hosting. I have both http and https supported. While I receive a signed_request package as expected, after I decode it does not contain page information. That data is simply missing.
I verified that like schemes are being used (https) among facebook, my hosted site and even the 'go between'-- facebook's static page handler.
Also created a new application with page tab support but got the same results-- simply no page information in the signed_request.
Any other causes people can think of?
I add the app to the page tab using this link:
https://www.facebook.com/dialog/pagetab?app_id=176236832519816&next=https://www.intelligantt.com/Facebook/application.html
Here is the page tab I am using (Note: requires permissions):
https://www.facebook.com/pages/School-Auction-Test-2/154869721351873?id=154869721351873&sk=app_176236832519816
Here is the decoded signed_request I am receiving:
{"algorithm":"HMAC-SHA256","code":!REMOVED!,"issued_at":1369384264,"user_id":"1218470256"}
5/25 Update - I thought maybe the canvas app urls didn't match the page tab urls so I spent several hours going through scenarios where they both had a trailing slash or not. Where they both had a trailing ? or not, with query parameters or not.
I also tried changing the 'next' value when creating the page tab to the canvas app url and the page tab url.
No success on either count.
I did read where because I'm seeing the 'code' value in the signed_request it means Facebook either couldn't match my urls or that I'm capturing the second request. However, I given all the URL permutations I went through I believe the urls match. I also subscribed to the 'auth.authResponseChange' which should give me the very first authResponse that should contain the signed_request with page.id in it (but doesn't).
If I had any reputation, I'd add a bounty to this.
Thanks.
I've just spent ~5 hours on this exact same problem and posted a prior answer that was incorrect. Here's the deal:
As you pointed out, signed_request appears to be missing the page data if your tab is implemented in pure javascript as a static html page (with *.htm extension).
I repeated the exact same test, on the exact same page, but wrapped my html page (including js) within a Perl script (with *.cgi extension)... and voila, signed_request has the page info.
Although confusing (and should be better documented as a design choice by Facebook), this may make some sense because it would be impossible to validate the signed_request wholly within Javascript without placing your secretkey within the scope (and therefore revealing it to a potential hacker).
It would be much easier with the PHP SDK, but if you just want to use JavaScript, maybe this will help:
Facebook Registration - Reading the data/signed request with Javascript
Also, you may want to check out this: https://github.com/diulama/js-facebook-signed-request
simply you can't get the full params with the javascript signed_request, use the php sdk to get the full signed_request . and record the values you need into javascript variabls ...
with the php sdk after instanciation ... use the facebook object as following.
$signed_request = $facebook->getSignedRequest();
var_dump($signed_request) ;
this is just to debug but u'll see that the printed array will contain many values that u won't get with js sdk for security reasons.
hope that helped better anyone who would need it, cz it seems this issue takes at the min 3 hours for everyone who runs into.
atm i have a JSP (my Host page) where i set the Session id via scriptlet with the Request Object. I save this Information in an hidden field and read it with the gwt DOM Object. Is there à better way to do this ? Thanks in advance for help.
Kuku
Depending on your setup this is a valid way to get a hold to a session ID. I assume you have written just a part of you web application in GWT and integrate it into something bigger written in some other language. Since your host page is JSP, I assume the non GWT part of your application is also dynamic.
I don't think that the proposed solution using a GWT service call works in this case. Since you can not match the session ID on the server to the incoming AJAX call.
Instead of using a hidden field, you could encode the session ID in the URL and get it from there, see getParameter(...):
http://google-web-toolkit.googlecode.com/svn/javadoc/2.2/com/google/gwt/user/client/Window.Location.html#getParameter%28java.lang.String%29
But I actually prefer the solution with the hidden filed, because it does not affect the URL. If you encode transient information in the URL you may lose the ability to bookmark it.