How to access to my own API from my web application securely? - api

I have APIs. Some of them are limited to access from third party applications by OAuth.
I also have a web application. Users can login and see their private information.
The API is called from the web application too. My question is what is the good way to access the API with security measures.
1. Third party applications -> OAuth
2. My own web application -> ???
My web application uses session id for authentication. I guess that transferring the session id with HTTP header may be good way but I don't have a confidence.
For exmaple...
$ curl -X PUT \
-H "X-Sample-Application-Id: "My own web application's ID" \
-H "X-Sample-Session-Token: yeoql2dvn7whpm4tbe61viscv" \
If API receive this request, use session for authentication instead of oauth and identify the user....
Any help will be appreciated.
Thanks,
.. I found similar questions
Questions About Consuming Your Own API with OAuth
Update1
Some say JWT(Json Web Token) is good.
https://auth0.com/blog/2014/01/07/angularjs-authentication-with-cookies-vs-token/
http://blog.mitsuruog.info/2014/08/jwtjson-web-tokenwebapicredential.html
Update2
I may be able to use OAuth's "Resource Owner Password Credentials"
https://www.ipa.go.jp/security/awareness/vendor/programmingv2/contents/709.html
Or... "Client Credentials grant" looks much better.

I'm going to elaborate a bit on this, because it's a good question, and there is a lot of confusion around it -- so bear with me here.
If the API you are trying to protect is going to exclusively be used by individuals for server-side apps, and not third-party developers, I'd highly, HIGHLY recommend you use HTTP Basic Authentication to secure your API service.
The way this works is super straight forward:
For your user(s), generate API Key pair(s) that consist of an ID and Secret. API keys are synonymous with username/passwords. Just generate random ID / Secret values using a UUID library.
When you authenticate against your API service, supply those API credentials in the HTTP Authorization header to identify yourself. Here's how it looks using curl:
$ curl --user my-api-keyid:my-api-key-secret https://api.myservice.com/blah
What's great about Basic Auth is that:
It's very simple to implement.
It's a well defined standard.
As long as you are making requests over HTTPS, and you don't publicize your API keys, you should be safe.
Now -- if you're building an API service where you want to authenticate users from a variety of environments (not just server side applications), you really need to use the OAuth2 protocol.
This is what it was designed for.
The OAuth2 protocol can authenticate users in a variety of ways -- but as a result, is quite complicated. Adding OAuth to your site can be a challenge, even if you're using popular libraries / etc.
Here's how OAuth works (a quick breakdown):
The Password Grant
The Password flow in OAuth is where you exchange a username/password for an Access Token (usually a JWT). You then use the Access Token in the HTTP Authorization header to identify yourself with your API service.
This is what most people do when building SPAs with Angular / React, as well as mobile apps.
The Client Credentials Grant
The Client Credentials flow is where you exchange an API key (just like basic auth) for an Access Token. You then use the Access Token in the HTTP Authorization header to identify yourself with your API service.
This is what people do when building server side apps with OAuth.
The Implicit Grant
This flow is what you see when you log into some place like Facebook. You click a button, are redirected to some other site to authenticate / accept permissions, and finally you're returned back to the main site with an Acccess Token that you use to identify yourself. This is NOT ideal for API services.
The Authorization Code Grant
This flow is exactly like the implicit flow, except you get back an authorization code that you then EXCHANGE for an Access Token that you use to identify yourself. This is NOT ideal for API services. It's slightly more secure.
If you are planning on going with OAuth because of your use case, I'd highly recommend checking out an authentication provider like Stormpath. They automate a lot of this stuff, and solve a lot of complexities around OAuth.
Otherwise, give Basic Auth a go!

Related

How does OAuth work API to API without interactive users?

I have a background task that runs periodically which needs to connect to a customer's Apigee OAuth2 protected API. From my understanding of OAuth2, a user must go to a sign in page on Apigee, and it will redirect to a return Url with a token. This is the way I have used previously on website projects. But in this scenario, there are no users, no website, and no return Url, it is just some code making a http request.
Is the above possible to do? Every google search I make is all about users logging in manually and getting a token to a return url.
I found some mention of 'Flows' and maybe there is some other 'Flow'? but its really hard to get a clear understanding of how it works because guides are focused on user interactive websites.
OAUTH 2.0 is an industry-standard for authorization. OAUTH 2.0 supports many authorization grant types, namely they are;
Authorization Code
Implicit
Resource Owner Password Credentials
Client Credentials
[Note that you may come up with your own custom grants as well if you are building or extending your authorization server - however it is beyond the scope of this question]
In the example you have provided, you are using the Authorization code grant type where you redirect to APIGEE and getting an authorization code. The APIGE server acts as the "intermediary between the client and resource owner" in OAUTH 2.0 terms.
For your new requirement, you should consider using the client-credentials grant type where the client is provided a client key and a secret. The client has the responsibility of calling the authorization server (like APIGEE in your previous example or anything else) and getting a token and then using that token in the subsequent requests.
I recommend you to read the ietf standard for oauth 2.0 to get a better understanding - Refer https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749.
Make sure to read on "Roles" in this link well before diving onto the content of this document.
Good luck!

How to combine user- and client-level authentication in an API gateway?

We're looking to implement web (external user) SSO and an API gateway to support web apps and mobile apps, and potentially 3rd party apps and even B2B scenarios.
My thought is to have the SSO gateway handle user-level access to websites and APIs, authenticating end users using OAuth or OpenID Connect.
Sitting behind this, for any API URLs, is the API gateway. This is intended to handle the client-/application-level authentication using something like a client ID and secret.
The idea would be that the user would log into a website or mobile app, and then if/when that app needed to call an API it would need to send its own credentials (client credentials flow) as well as a bearer token proving who the user is as well (resource owner password flow).
The client credentials are less about security and more about coarse-grained access to API functions, giving visibility of API usage, traffic shaping, SLAs etc., but the user identity is needed to enforce data-level authorisation downstream.
Most API gateways I've looked at appear to only support a single level of authentication, e.g. we're looking at Apigee at the moment that can use OAuth to authentication to handle either a user or an app, but it's not obvious how to do both at once.
Is there any way to get the SSO gateway's user bearer token to play nicely with the API gateway's client bearer token or credentials, preferably in a fairly standards-based way? Or do we just have to hack it so that one comes through in the auth header and the other in the payload? Or is there a way to have a combined approach (e.g. hybrid bearer token) that can serve both purposes at once?
I'm kind of surprised that with all the work going on in identity management (OAuth2, OpenID Connect, UMA, etc.) nobody is looking at a way of handling simultaneously the multiple levels of authentication - user, client, device, etc.
Unfortunately I don't have enough reputation points to comment on the previous post, so I'll add my two cents here. Full disclosure: I work for Apigee.
http://apigee.com/docs/api-services/content/oauthv2-policy#accesstokenelement explains how to give the access token to the Apigee OAuthV2 policy in a place other than the Authorization header. If you've stored the SSO bearer token as an attribute of the Apigee OAuth token then once the Apigee token is validated you'll automatically get the SSO bearer token as a flow variable and can use it as needed.
For example, if you send the token as a "token" query parameter on the request you can code the following in the OAuthV2 policy
request.queryparam.token
and the policy will pull it from that query parameter.

restful api authentication confusion with oauth2

I did some investigation about restful api authentication. Most people pointed to Oauth2 for restful api authentication. I looked into some of resouces, especially this link https://developers.google.com/accounts/docs/OAuth2.
It seems to me Oauth2 is for a third party app to access users' data in google/facebook(or other data provider).
Our problem is that we own the data, we don't need to access our client's any third party data and our clients don't have to any third party data. We want to protect our api with some sort of authentication.
For our case what is the convenient technologies for our restful api authentication ? We will expose our api like this
https://ourdomain.com/api/<endpoint>
Our clients can access a website first to register https://ourdomain.com and they should be able to get clientId and clientKey from our website for accessing apis. Our clients should be able to consume through some sort of authentication
In oAuth 2.0, there are several types of grant types. A grant type is just a way to exchange some sort of credentials for an access token. Typically oAuth refers to 3rd party usage with a Authorization Code Grant. This means redirecting the user to the resource owner's website for authentication, which will return back an Authorization Code.
This clearly doesn't make sense for 1st party oAuth use, since you ARE the resource owner. oAuth 2.0 has considered this and included the Resource Owner Password Credentials Grant for this purpose. In this case, you can exchange a username and password for an access token at the first party level.
See https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749#section-4.3 for more details.
If I understand correctly, what you need it similar to OAuth in a way that you do the exact same thing minus granting a 3rd party app access to a user's resources.
In OAuth, there is a central system that manages authentication and authorization by checking an app's credentials + user's credentials and dishing out authorization tokens. There are multiple endpoints that will accept these authorization tokens.
The tokens are basically encrypted strings that contain info about the user's credentials and some other info that might be needed by your app.
What you need (i believe) is a similar authentication endpoint, that the client hits with its credentials and gets a token.
So,
i) Create a registration form/console where a client can register and get his credentials. Have a look at this.
ii) Define a HTTP endpoint where the user exchanges his credentials for an access token + refresh token.
iii) The client can hit the resource endpoint with the access tokens to make authenticated calls to any of your endpoint.
iv) At the back-end you'd need a common service that verifies the tokens and extracts info from it.
PS - This is just a minimal system, there would be a lot of security considerations like what if some unauthorized app gets access to some client's access tokens.
You can find much information about CSRF attacks, noonces, timestamps and other methods of mitigating security concerns.
Just to be clear with the original question:
OAuth2 needs at least a client and a server
OP was wondering how to secure a REST API, and why everyone is talking about third party authentication providers (Google, Facebook, ...)
There are 2 different needs here:
1 - Being able to secure a personal API (ourdomain.com)
Client Server
Consumers <----> Your API
2 - Being able to consume a public API (For example getting a user's Google contact list)
Client Server
You <----> Google APIs
OP actually needs the 1st: implement an OAuth2 server in front of its own API.
There are many existing implementations for all languages/frameworks on Github
Finally, here is one nice Oauth2 technical explanation, and I'm shamelessly taking one of its schemas here:
No I'm not working at Google, I'm just taking Google as a public API supplier example.

Security for "Private" REST API

I am currently developing a web application that is right now comprised of a front end which displays and interacts with the data using a REST API we have written. The only thing that will ever use the API is our front end website, and at some point a mobile app that we will develop.
I have done a lot of reading about how OAuth is the ideal mechanism for securing an API and at this point I am starting to have a good understanding of how it works.
My question is -- since I am never granting access to my API to a third-party client, is OAuth really necessary? Is there any reason it is advantageous? Furthermore, because the back end is simply the API, there is no gateway for a user to authenticate from (like if you were writing an app using the Twitter API, when a user authenticates they would be directed to the Twitter page to grant to access then redirected back to the client).
I am not really sure which direction to go in. It seems like there must be some approach halfway between http authentication and OAuth that would be appropriate for this situation but I'm just not getting it.
From my point of view, one of the scenarios that favor OAuth over other options is to work with untrusted clients, no matter if these are developed by you or a third party.
What's an untrusted client? Think from the point of who handles the credentials that grant access to your API.
For example, your web application could interact with your API in two falvors:
Your web app server side talks to your API. Your web app server is a trusted client because the credentials to access your API can only be access by whom have access to the server...You and your team. You could authenticate your web app server with a client_id and a client_secret.
You may want to make calls directly to your API from your Web app client, which runs on the end user's browser using JavaScript. The end user's browser is an untrusted client. If you were to deliver the credentials to your API down to the browser, anyone could check the JavaScript code and steal your credentials.
A third party Native App is also untrusted. A malicious developer that uses your API could save the credentials of and end user of your platform.
Your Native App is a trusted client and could manage the authentication with a simple username , password and a client id identifying your App.
How can OAuth help? OAuth Authorization code and Implicit grants can help you with this issue. These flows only work with clients that support a redirect, like a browser. And let you authenticate an untrusted client and a user against your Authorization Server to gain access to your Resource Server, your API, without exposing the credentials. Take a look at the RFC to see how it is done.
The good thing of OAuth is that it not only supports these redirect based authentication flows, but it also supports client credentials grant and user credentials grant. So an OAuth Authorization Server would cover all cases.
OAuth 2.0 originally seems like a PITA if you think about having to build a lot of it yourself, but most languages have some really solid OAuth 2.0 setups which you can just bolt in with varying amounts of fiddling. If you're using a framework like Laravel or RoR then it's barely any work.
PHP: http://oauth2.thephpleague.com/
Ruby (Rails or Grape): https://github.com/doorkeeper-gem/doorkeeper
If you don't want to redirect users as suggested in your post then ignore other comments and answers that talk about two legged flows. You can use the client_credentials grant type to have apps just provide their client id and secret in return for an access token, which is nice and easy.
I would ask how private are we talking, because if the only systems talking to it are within the backend and have no interaction with the outside world you could probably leave it wide open and just rely on the network to keep it safe (VPN/Firewall).
But if it's private in the sense of "our iPhone app uses it" then you definitely want to go with OAuth 2.0, or something like it.
2 legged OAuth is probably what you want to use. It's basically hashing a shared key, but you have the advantage of not having to write the code yourself.
Here's a related question: Two-legged OAuth - looking for information
You should use Oauth for mobile device to API layer communication.
However, there is no benefit of Oauth in this web UI layer to middle-layer access (machine to machine).
On the other hand there are some potential issues
Managing the access token expiry becomes a pain. Consider that your UI has to cache the access token across multiple nodes in a cluster. Refresh it when expired, and the fact that UI layer is negotiating security with backend will just take extra time once in a while.
In two legged Oauth (OAuth Client Credential as in v2.0) does not support any encryption. So you still need to send key and secret both to the server for getting an access token.
Backend has to implement issuing access token, refresh token, validating access token etc, without any significant benefit

How to use OpenID in RESTful API?

I'm building Pylons-based web application with RESTful API, which currently lacks any authentication. So I'm going to implement that and in order to avoid all the trouble and caution with storing user passwords, I'd like to use OpenID for authentication. What would be the best way to do this? Are these two things compatible? Are there existing REST APIs that use OpenID that I can take inspiration from?
I've now spent some time researching the options and would like to summarize the findings.
First, a little bit more context -- I develop and control both the service and API consumer. Consumer is Flash-based app that is served from the same host the API is now and is supposed to be used in browser. No third party clients in sight yet.
So the question can be divided in two parts,
how do I do the OpenID authentication via API
how do I maintain the "authenticated" state in subsequent requests
For first part, OpenID authentication almost always includes interactive steps. During the authentication process there will most likely be a step where user is in OpenID provider's web page, signing in and pressing some "I agree" button. So API cannot and shouldn't handle this transparently (no "tell me your OpenID provider and password and I'll do the rest"). Best it can do is pass forth and back HTTP links that client has to open and follow instructions.
Maintaining "authenticated" state
REST APIs should be stateless, each request should include all the information needed to handle it, right? It wouldn't make any sense to authenticate against OpenID provider for each request, so some kind of session is neccessary. Some of the options for communicating session key (or "access token" or username/password) are:
HTTPS + BASIC authentication ("Authorization: Basic ..." header in each request)
Signing requests Amazon-style ("Authorization: AWS ... " header in each request)
OAuth: acquire Access Token, include that and a bunch of other parameters in each request
Cookie that stores session key ("Cookie: ... " header in each request)
Signed cookie that stores session information in the cookie itself
There's just one API consumer right now, so I chose to go for simplest thing that could possibly work -- cookies. They are super-easy to use in Pylons, with help of Beaker. They also "just work" in the Flash app -- since it runs inside browser, browser will include relevant cookies in the requests that Flash app makes -- the app doesn't need to be changed at all with respect to that. Here's one StackOverflow question that also advocates using cookies: RESTful authentication for web applications
Beaker also has nice feature of cookie-only sessions where all session data is contained in the cookie itself. I guess this is about as stateless as it gets. There is no session store on server. Cookies are signed and optionally encrypted to avoid tampering with them in client side. The drawback is that cookie gets a bit bigger, since it now needs to store more than just session key. By removing some stuff I didn't really need in the session (leftovers from OpenID authentication) I got the cookie size down to about 200 bytes.
OAuth is a better fit for API usage. Here's an example of OAuth in use in Python: oauth-python-twitter. Leah Culver's python-oauth library is the canonical implementation of OAuth in Python, but python-oauth2 is a recent contender that is getting some buzz. As for inspiration, django-piston has support for using OAuth to do auth when creating RESTful APIs for Django, though the documentation isn't as nice as I'd like for that particular topic.
If you build API, you could check OAuth protocol. It's complementary to OpenID.