The project I'm currently working on is split up in an admin console and the normal frontend.
Both front and backend are in the same Laravel instance.
In the frontend I'm trying to create a user login system that works exclusively for the frontend. It uses a different table and model and it has different relations as oposed to the User model for the admin.
What I can't figure out is a way to use the Laravel Auth class for both systems. Logically Auth uses one single config file, and more to the point, one session name.
One solution that has been brought forward is not to use a different table and model and use some form of acl for the distinction. But I don't like the idea of mixing frontend and backend in this way. Especially because it would mean I'd suddenly have to give the admin User model all the fields and relations previously unique to the frontend user.
It just doesn't seem the right way to do things. I could switch to a different authentication system or seperate the admin into a package with its own configs but the scope of the project doesn't allow for such timeconsuming changes.
I'd welcome any idea's you could provide.
This is a problem that I encountered recently too. The whole separate environment wasn't very easy, especially if you already have development and production environments.
I did however spend some time creating a package to solve this problem, which you can find at https://github.com/ollieread/multiauth. The package itself is essentially a factory class for Auth, that allows you to use multiple instances of it, so you access it like so:
Auth::admin()->check();
Auth::user()->check();
Auth::whatever()->check();
I hope the package helps you or anyone else looking for this approach.
I'm not sure, but maybe it's useful. Why not try to create to separate environment for admin. And then you will have something like app/config/admin/session.php and app/config/session.php for production(which is the default environment).
You can see here how to setup environments http://andrewelkins.com/programming/php/how-to-set-laravel-4-environments/
But as I said it's just an idea, I'm not quite sure of it :)
Sounds like you should consider splitting the app into two codebases if the different user entities rarely or never need to see the same interface. They would still query the same database obviously.
Not only will this solve your auth issues, but also make maintaining the code a heck of a lot easier. For example, while pushing updates to the admin console you would only need to put that app in maintenance mode while keeping the (presumably) more critical frontend up and running.
Related
I'm new in this area, however I would like to know, if it is better to put api inside my project, or create one back-end separate and pull into the project. I know if I use a separate back-end I will have to buy 2 hosting, if I use it within my project it would be one.
back-end integrated into the project
back-end separate
I tried to do both ways, and apparently it worked, but I would like to know if it is recommended to put the back-end inside the front-end
It depends on your needs and budget. if your project requires a lot of data processing or complex business logics it may be beneficial to separate your API from the front-end. However if your project is simple and doen't require a lot of data processing then it maybe more cost-efficient to host the API within your Next.js project with a single server.
I want to make a quick, safe and nice application.
For many years I have been programming in PHP and regular ASP. But wanted to go on with .NET and vue.js.
So I have an idea, I wanted to create and plan to do it like this:
I was thinking of using hosting from an external service.
Then I would have three projects:
domain.com/index - Vue.js which will be a SPA, where the user can filter through a catalog, press like and send few api requests (mainly get-requests).
secure.domain.com - Here I will have a .net mvc project where I can use identity. This will make it simple to handle/register users. I will also give the correct session here for authenticated users. And it will affect domain.com/index, where they only are allowed to do some of the things if they are logged in
api.domain.com - This will be the webapi api. Only authenticated users will be allowed to send some of the requests.
I have used several weeks at looking into how to structure this.
But as I do not have much experience with this.
What pitfalls and bad consequences do you see in structuring it like this?
Are there any heads up you want to give me? Or any other recommendations?
I have been trying to melt all of this together in one project, but that has been difficult, because they operate in different ways. So now I have ended up with this, and look forward to
Size of project
It will be a relative small project.
People should be able to register/authenticate themselves (through facebook/google/server login).
Authenticated People should be able to add records(links) to a database. When adding this to the database they may also want to upload files, and choose some additional information.
All people should be able to filter through the catalog of records (5000+) ( Here I am using vue.js/vuex/axios). Here they should be able to comment too on links too.
Webapi will have 8 entities/tables and one view which will GET all the information. 3 tables should be able to have POST.
So it is more or less a catalog, where people should be able to add records and find new ones.
I was planning to use the identity from asp.net core 3.1. It is a "template" where I can easily add 3rd party logins. (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/security/authentication/identity?view=aspnetcore-3.1&tabs=visual-studio)
Additional questions:
Can you tell me how request from SPA will be authenticated in your API? (Jwt or cookie)? Why would you like to have a separate identity service, also Why you would like to use asp.net identity (is it because of ease of setup)?
I have not been thinking about authenticating API requests. Was thinking to only have authenticated users who can send POST-requests. And the rest will be get requests. Limited only from the server. Should I have some additional authentication? Does JWT make web APIs safe enough for my use?
Was thinking of using .net identity because it is simple. And I don't want to use time on setting it up.
Since this is your first project of this type, I would recommend to keep it simple.
Just create one web site. Otherwise you might get issues with the cookies not working for subdomains and you will also get issues with CORS. That is, you will get all problems at the same to time (configuration issues, infrastructure issues and the pain from writing the application itself).
You can still have a clean separation by using sub folders (or Areas in MVC) and by using class libraries for the backend (API) business logic.
Once you have mastered the basics (i.e. writing the actual application) you can start looking at other means of separation etc.
I recently finished one of my first AgilityJS projects, which is a web-based file browser that lets you create and manage folders and files, and navigate around the folder tree. I followed the various AgilityJS recommendations regarding the design and ended up with all my HTML and Javascript in a single Javascript file.
Now, I would like to provide a "read-only" version of this app which does not have the ability to add/edit/remove files and folders. I'd like to have 2 user types on the website, one type which can only read the files and folders, and another user type who can administer.
My question is, how do I proliferate these permission differences to my AgilityJS app? I know how to secure my endpoints and operations on the server side, but I'm wonder about the best way to do this on the client side. Should I create a separate version of the app with a limited set of functionality? Should I simply hide certain buttons/features? Are there theories, frameworks, etc.? which deal with this issue? Any point in the right direction would be helpful.
LOL - probably one could write books about that topic. Some very basic ideas:
I would start with the philosophical debate according to MVC. There are people argue with the help of MVC that any piece of code and also any piece of data model should never be implemented twice. Business logic and model to the server. The opposite view is focussing on serving users at any cost - even if that means to double maintain code or the model for the sake of avoiding extra round trips. The way in between defines a master source for business code and model and makes sure to follow on other places that leading master (the master will be changed first). Take your choice. Your answer to that question results into boundaries for how the user interface can/have to look like for the user.
You need to think by hard about a permissions concept. Looking at Microsoft I would assume that they invested for all their applications a couple of dozens man years to make up the permission concepts. The ideal permission concept very much depends on your application. So it is close to impossible to work this out without knowing at least a very little of your application. However the permission concept has to come up with policies deciding on roles, groups, access rigths, access levels, context driven permissions (eg. based IP address), permissions black or white listing (permissions each user has at creation). An example from Microsoft: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-sharepoint-services-help/permission-levels-and-permissions-HA010100149.aspx
Data on the client is not secured!!! Whatever you do on the client, be it data hiding, encryption, compression... - if this is done on the client there are ways to read the data (even by disabling the data manipulation) or by reverting those. Somebody can send data to your server, where the client should not even have given an update form could be implemented by hackers. So as soon as you start to implement permissions make sure, that for all data you send to clients users are permitted to read and that you inlcude permissions checking for each time you add/update data to the database.
This has been something I have been trying to work on for a good long time. It first started with Prestashop as an integration with other scripts or pieces of the puzzle I needed to make for an overall website. I am currently still using Prestashop as my webstore but have since switched to Magento.
I switched to Magento because of it's complex flexibility and because overall I think it is the best solution, best backing and best overall eCommerce script to go with.
That being said, the same issues I was having with Prestashop appear to be the same I will continue to have any in aspect that I try to integrate things together in perfect harmony.
I have Magento setup, as the main portion of the website, and inside Magento in sub folders I have Wordpress installed in a folder called "articles" and I have also went with FluxBB as my message forums because of it's simplicity in not having a crap load of bloated extra features that I could care less about and that is in a sub folder called "forums".
From this point, we know that Magento, Wordpress and FluxBB all have their own way of managing users; creating, managing, and tracking them.
What I am wanting to do is find the best way to fit these three and more together for my website to make the experience for the customer as smooth and as functional as possible. After emailing the ever talented and helpful Alan Storm, he told me the best solution he was aware of working was to make a third party user management that they all point to and it manages the customers authentication. I do believe his thoughts may be the best but I wanted to put this out there here on StackOverFlow and I may post this on Magento as well to get the broad scrope of magento developers and smart guys that like challenges.
I have several thoughts, none may work, some may work half ass, or one may just be something workable. But first let me tell you what I have accomplished so far. I have done the necessary steps to integrate my overall design for the header and footer, so essentially Wordpress and FluxBB are wrapped and are contained inside Magento's outer design layer. So with that being said I have also made it where Magento will check the session to see if the user is logged in to Magento or not by saying "Hello Guest" or "Hello User". This is where I have hit a stopping point because I am out of my depth and would like assistance, whether it is something we create together out of pure challengeness or someone says if I pay them they will help me, either way I would like this accomplished. If and when I get the code figured out whether by means of paying for assistance of a group effort I would like to make it freely available for others to use the concept for their own projects.
Brain Fart #1:
Adjust the user tables for both Wordpress and FluxBB to conform more to the structure of Magento, as for the password and username/email login portion. The rest of the fields can respectively stay as they are for post counts, and etc.
From there, I would like to figure out which class in Magento does the actual input into the database when a customer is created out of registration. When I find that code, I would like to extend upon it the ability to copy the user credentials into the other two tables in the database for Wordpress and FluxBB. If necessary it can just be an added couple of fields to Wordpress and FluxBB if that seems like a better idea and yes I do mean the actual encrypted password that Magento creates, I want this to be secure as well.
From there, when we know that a customer registers with Magento the data is copied over to the other two tables then we at least have made progress, whether this progress will actually work, is still to be determined.
We then disable the login/logout and registration links in any way that we can from Wordpress and FluxBB because they will no longer be needed because we want the user to register, login and logout through one location which is Magento.
Then comes the fun part in my eyes, keep the damn session going throughout the entire website as they order products, review wordpress articles and possibly leave comments, send to friends and etc.... as well as post topics, replies and etc in the FluxBB capacity.
To me this is where the creating the fields or adding the data from Magento's customer registration comes into play, I can make it check to see if they are logged into Magento already and from there we may be able to have it validate itself. This may be over kill or this may just be how it needs to be done. But to me if the credentials are located in all three databases then they should be able to be validated by changing the code in Wordpress and FluxBB or adding code. And Yes I am aware that we will also have to do something about Profile Editing and Password Editing if a customer so desires to change their information.
But that is my first thought on this whether it is the right decision or not, I would like hear from the vast knowledge of people here who have more experience and knowledge than I get with Magento, PHP and everything else.
Brain Fart #2
This illogical idea seems like an outside stretch entirely to me because of the complexity of Magento and how it is overall setup.
But the idea is to remove/edit the Wordpress and FluxBB (and any other third party software) to pretty much ignore it's own method of registration, login, logout, edit and look to Magento for it's credentials and establishing new customers. Essentially making them an oversized module of Magento.
I just know that the way Magento is setup is to be modulerized and its complexity seems like it would take a lot more coding and troubleshooting to do this.
Brain Fart #3
Dump both Wordpress and FluxBB and look towards modules in the Magento Connection Store that pretty much has all of the functionality that I need and can add to them what is missing and not mess with trying to integrate third party software.
I love Wordpress, I think replicating it with a module, at least after the hours I have spent looking at all of the modules available that are CMS/News related is a tough call. FluxBB I could take it or leave it, if someone had an already viable solution to use phpBB or vBulletin or SimpleMachines I would go with them. I rather it be free open source software, not because I am a cheap skate but just because I support open source as much as I can.
Brain Fart #4
Can this be a cookie this, but would only be effective if they allow cookies, or could somehow addon to the session to allow things to pass through but Magento sets up different sessions or allows you too so they things to crash against each other so this may not at all be an idea or may be one as well.
I know I am not giving examples of things I have tried, files I have looked at or anything related to that and I apologize, I provide some links related but nothing specifically found so far that matches what I am trying to accomplish. And I have tried to merge things together with some fun disastrous results.
Link Examples?:
http://www.magentocommerce.com/wiki/doc/webservices-api/api/customer#customer.create
http://www.magentogarden.com/blog/how-are-passwords-encrypted-in-magento.html
http://www.nicksays.co.uk/magento_events_cheat_sheet/
http://www.magentocommerce.com/wiki/5_-_modules_and_development/customers_and_accounts/registration_fields
How to access Magento customer's session from outside Magento?
Any assistance with this would be nice, I am trying to work on several parts of the website at once and this one is troublesome and I would say that everyone is going to find it hard or have found it hard. Anyone like challenges? :)
--------- EDIT:
I have got Magento and Wordpress to work perfectly together with James Kemp's module found on CodeCanyon's website (Single Sign-On for Magento and Wordpress) and I am going to adapt it to work for FluxBB or anything else I do.
Just passing along the information... I see this was edited, don't know what was edited and don't care. Just passing along information I have since found since posting this.
I am managing/customizing a combo of magento+vanilla forums+a custom app made in Yii framework. The users are "shared" between the apps. None of the two links are good. As Alan already replied to you, the correct SSO will be with an external user database/manager. But well, not everyone is up to recoding three apps just to get 1 post a week forum and 1 article a month blog to work with magento. So we are left with less options. First of all, if you don't want (most probably not) to rewrite a good portion of already written open source project that is being updated and maintained and then maintain your changes against periodical updates (you want them), then you have to duplicate the user data over three databases. Unless the project you adapt has some way to manage users data as plugin or external module. AFAIK both of your choice don't.
So, how to implement it? Assuming you choose Magento as mother-of-all, you need it to export an API for authentication, which may work over browser using cookies and javascript but this is rather tricky, or you can use it's frontend cookie to validate the sessions doing server-server API requests from children apps. This is a preferred option as far as "classical" SSO goes. Technically, what should happen when your users open forum or blog, the respective apps detect magento's cookie and check if the session is valid and who is the user. If the user is found, his data is copied to the blog or forum tables. Then you need to start an authenticated session on blog or forum app using the newly created user record.
So far so good, but yet some work. you need to disable the user profiles management in the children apps or modify it so the data held in Magento is always the correct one and you need to invent something to synchronize the Magento's representation of user profile down to the children. This is better to be hooked up on Magento's events so every time a user changes his profile the data is updated in the children app. But there is another but too. You probably want to keep some data app specific, a display name on the forum is not necessary the FirstName+LastName from the Magento and some would like to keep it private.
The above is just what I can recall as interesting facts about keeping it running. There are certainly many other things I've left out, more or less specific. But hopefully my comment can help your brain farting.
We've tried to evaluate other options but anything without duplicate data seems to be too expensive to implement or to maintain. Maybe later. With budget and time.
I am trying to use BetterAuthorizationSample rather then go the so called "malicious" way of using setuid in order to get root privileges.
Currently I am using AuthorizationCreate(); with BLAuthentication to have root access to changing some files, but I am somewhat irritated by the fact that I have to constantly enter my password in every time the app launches.
So I came across Apple's method of a HelperTool, and I just can't figure it out.
I've been working with Cocoa for a couple months now, but this is just out of my reach, yet I still need it. How would I implement this tool to do simple root-privileged tasks?
Is there a simpler way to use the concept of a HelperTool, so that my users can just enter their password once and it would grant root-privileges forever?
The "modern" way to do a helper tool on Mac OS X is to ship it as part of your app, and use the ServiceManagement framework to deploy it. Your users enter their password once, when deploying the tool. That installs it as a launchd job; from then on you use any launchd on-demand mechanism to launch the helper and get it to do work for you.
Notice that the blog post linked above recommends that you protect subsequent invocations of the helper with an Authorization Services escalation, to avoid having an arbitrary privilege escalation that anyone can use. This seems like it somewhat impacts the "users can just enter their password once" benefit, although you can use AuthorizationRightSet() to create your app's authorization token in the policy database, so you can actually define whether users need to present passwords on first deployment.
The sample code from that post is on GitHub, and demonstrates using ServiceManagement to deploy the helper tool and Authorization Services to control access to it.