We've got a long-running ASP.NET web-forms application that was born in the .NET 1.1/IIS6 days. We're now on .NET4.5/IIS7 but we've done nothing with MVC.
We provide a catalog to customers and give them a URL they can use:
www.ourhost.com/customername
Using a custom IHttpModule we developed we pull 'customername' out of the URL to find the customer in the database. That customer's ID is then stored in the page's context* and used by virtually all the pages on the site to customize content for that customer. After this process, the above URL would be rewritten and processed as
www.ourhost.com/index.aspx
with index.aspx having access to the customer's ID via its context and it can do its thing.
This works great and we support several thousand customers with it. the rewriting logic is fairly complex because it validates customer accounts, redirects to a 'uh oh' page if the customer is invalid and to a different 'find a dealer' page if the customer has not paid, etc. etc.
Now I'd like to build some Web API controllers and MVC-style rewriting has me worried. I see many examples where rewriting happens to make URL's like this work:
www.ourhost.com/api/{controller}
but I still need these web api 'calls' to happen in the context of a customer. Our pages are getting more sophisticated with JSON/AJAX async calls but in answering those calls I still need customer context. I would like the URL's to be
www.ourhost.com/customername/api/{controller}
But I am stumped as to how to configure routing to do this and have it play nicely with our IHttpModule.
Is this even possible?
*UPDATE: When I say 'stored in the page context' I mean the HttpContext associated with each web request that includes a dictionary where I can store some page/request-specific data.
There are two parts of the answer to your issue that I can see.
Maintaining the User Info across multiple requests
Generally an MVC API application will be stateless, that is you do not retain the current users session state between requests. Well that is what I have learned or been preached many times when writing RESTFul APIs.
That been said, you can enable session state in MVC Web API by adding the following to your global.asax.cs
protected void Application_PostAuthorizeRequest()
{
// To enable session state in the WebAPI.
System.Web.HttpContext.Current.SetSessionStateBehavior(System.Web.SessionState.SessionStateBehavior.Required);
}
Authorising A Customer in the Request
As you have shown in the Request URL you could add the customer name, then capture that and pass it to the same routine that your current http module calls to authorise on request. You could do this with an MVC Filter.
First do a similar URL Pattern to capture your customers name in the WebApiConfig.cs, something like so;
config.Routes.MapHttpRoute(
name: "WithCustomerApi",
routeTemplate: "api/{customername}/{controller}/{id}",
defaults: new { id = RouteParameter.Optional }
);
Then add an ActionFilter to your API Controller which processes each request, checks current session info and if needed calls your authorise/customer lookup code and then saves to session state for later use. Or if no good info from customer can send to a new MVC route
So you will add an attribute something like so;
[WebApiAuthentication]
public class BaseApiController : ApiController
{
}
Then create an action filter that might look like this (note I have not tested this, just done for a pattern of how to).
public class WebApiAuthenticationAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute
{
public override void OnActionExecuting(HttpActionContext actionContext)
{
var routeData = actionContext.ControllerContext.Request.GetRouteData();
var currentContext = HttpContext.Current;
if (routeData.Route.RouteTemplate.Contains("customername"))
{
try
{
var authenticated = currentContext.Request.IsAuthenticated;
if (!authenticated)
{
var customer = routeData.Values["customername"];
// do something with customer here and then put into session or cache
currentContext.Session.Add("CustomerName", customer);
}
}
catch (Exception exception)
{
var error = exception.Message;
// We dont like the request
actionContext.Response = new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest);
}
}
else
{
// No customer name specified, send bad request, not found, what have you ... you *could* potentially redirect but we are in API so it probably a service request rather than a user
actionContext.Response = new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.NotFound);
}
}
}
If you create a new MVC 5 Web API Application and add in these extras and put the filter on the default values controller like so you should be able to see this running as demo of a possible solution.
This will echo the customer name back if all works ok.
[WebApiAuthentication]
public class ValuesController : ApiController
{
// GET api/values
public IEnumerable<string> Get()
{
var session = HttpContext.Current.Session;
if (session != null)
{
return new string[] {"session is present", "customer is", session["CustomerName"].ToString()};
}
return new string[] { "value1", "value2" };
}
}
I offer this up as a possible solution as I say, there are religious arguments about storing session and authorising in an API but those are not the question.
Hope that helps,
Steve
Related
I am working in Multi-tenant solution primarily there are 2 type of applications
WebAPI
Console app to process message from queue
I have implemented dependency injection to inject all services. I have crated TenantContext class where I am resolving tenant information from HTTP header and it's working fine for API, but console application getting tenant information with every message (tenant info is part of queue message) so I am calling dependency injection register method on every incoming message which is not correct, do you have any suggestion/solution here?
The way I am resolving ITenantContext in API
services.AddScoped<ITenantContext>(serviceProvider =>
{
//Get Tenant from JWT token
if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(tenantId))
{
//1. Get HttpAccessor and processor settings
var httpContextAccessor =
serviceProvider.GetRequiredService<IHttpContextAccessor>();
//2. Get tenant information (temporary code, we will get token from JWT)
tenantId = httpContextAccessor?.HttpContext?.Request.Headers["tenant"]
.FirstOrDefault();
if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(tenantId))
//throw bad request for api
throw new Exception($"Request header tenant is missing");
}
var tenantSettings =
serviceProvider.GetRequiredService<IOptionsMonitor<TenantSettings>>();
return new TenantContext(tenantId, tenantSettings );
});
Create two different ITenantContext implementations. One for your Web API, and one for your Console application.
Your Web API implementation than might look as follows:
public class WebApiTenantContext : ITenantContext
{
private readonly IHttpContextAccessor accessor;
private readonly IOptionsMonitor<TenantSettings> settings;
public WebApiTenantContext(
IHttpContextAccessor accessor,
IOptionsMonitor<TenantSettings> settings)
{
// Notice how the dependencies are not used in this ctor; this is a best
// practice. For more information about this, see Mark's blog:
// https://blog.ploeh.dk/2011/03/03/InjectionConstructorsshouldbesimple/
this.accessor = accessor;
this.settings = settings;
}
// This property searches for the header each time its called. If needed,
// it can be optimized by using some caching, e.g. using Lazy<string>.
public string TenantId =>
this.accessor.HttpContext?.Request.Headers["tenant"].FirstOrDefault()
?? throw new Exception($"Request header tenant is missing");
}
Notice that this implementation might be a bit naive for your purposes, but hopefully you'll get the idea.
This class can be registered in the Composition Root of the Web API project as follows:
services.AddScoped<ITenantContext, WebApiTenantContext>();
Because the WebApiTenantContext has all its dependencies defined in the constructor, you can do a simple mapping between the ITenantContext abstraction and the WebApiTenantContext implementation.
For the Console application, however, you need a very different approach. The WebApiTenantContext, as shown above, is currently stateless. It is able to pull in the required data (i.e. TenantId) from its dependencies. This probably won't work for your Console application. In that case, you will likely need to manually wrap the execution of each message from the queue in a IServiceScope and initialize the ConsoleTenantContext at the beginning of that request. In that case, the ConsoleTenantContext would look merely as follows:
public class ConsoleTenantContext : ITentantContext
{
public string TenantId { get; set; }
}
Somewhere in the Console application's Composition Root, you will have to pull messages from the queue (logic that you likely already have), and that's the point where you do something as follows:
var envelope = PullInFromQueue();
using (var scope = this.serviceProvider.CreateScope())
{
// Initialize the tenant context
var context = scope.ServiceProvider.GetRequiredService<ConsoleTenantContext>();
content.TenantId = envelope.TenantId;
// Forward the call to the message handler
var handler = scope.ServiceProvider.GetRequiredService<IMessageHandler>();
handler.Handle(envelope.Message);
}
The Console application's Composition Root will how have the following registrations:
services.AddScoped<ConsoleTenantContext>();
services.AddScoped<ITenentContext>(
c => c.GetRequiredServices<ConsoleTenantContext>());
With the registrations above, you register the ConsoleTenantContext as scoped. This is needed, because the previous message infrastructure needs to pull in ConsoleTenantContext explicitly to configure it. But the rest of the application will depend instead on ITenantContext, which is why it needs to be registered as well. That registration just forwards itself to the registered ConsoleTenantContext to ensure that both registrations lead to the same instance within a single scope. This wouldn't work when there would be two instances.
Note that you could use the same approach for Web API as demonstrated here for the Console application, but in practice it's harder to intervene in the request lifecycle of Web API compared to doing that with your Console application, where you are in full control. That's why using an ITenantContext implementation that is itself responsible of retrieving the right values is in this case an easier solution for a Web API, compared to the ITenantContext that is initialized from the outside.
What you saw here was a demonstration of different composition models that you can use while configuring your application. I wrote extensively about this in my series on DI Composition Models on my blog.
Consider that I have .NET Controller with Policy-based authorization:
public class ImportantController: Controller {
[HttpGet]
[Authorize(Policy = "CanAccessVIPArea")]
public IActionResult ShowInformation() {
...
return OK(VipData);
}
[HttpPost]
[Authorize(Policy = "CanChangeVIPData")]
public IActionResult SaveInformation([FromBody] VipData) {
...
return CreatedAtAction(...);
}
}
Obviously, the real example is much more complex; I apologize if my simplification leads to too much make-believe in it. Also, real application is SPA with Angular front end; but I don't think it makes any difference for the purposes of this question.
When the user calls ShowInformation() I show a lot of data. On that page I have Save button that calls SaveInformation(). Authorization middleware checks for the right policy and it all works fine.
The problem is that by the time the user presses Save, she entered a lot of data, only to find out that she doesn't have the permissions to save. Obviously, leading to bad experience. I want to check for permissions on SaveInformation in the middleware that gets invoked when the user calls ShowInformation. I would prefer not to check for the hardcoded policy because it is on the server and it can change (we have pretty sophisticated permission management system that manipulates permissions at runtime). Invocation of SaveInformation is in the same Angular service as ShowInformation, and it is very easy to check...
I would like to invoke something like /api/SaveInformation?dryrun that will short-circuit the pipeline after authorization middleware with success or failure.
You can inject an IAuthorizationService and ask to evaluate a policy by name:
public class ImportantController: Controller
{
private readonly IAuthorizationService authorization;
public ImportantController(IAuthorizationService authorization)
{
this.authorization = authorization;
}
public async Task<IActionResult> ShowInformation()
{
// ...
var result = await authorizationService.AuthorizeAsync(User, "IsLucky");
return OK(VipData);
}
}
My pratice is to include all permission claims in the id token, when the user first login to the system, the id token will return to the client side. The client side then render the page according to the permission claims.
I'm ready to use Asp.Net core, but here's what I am doing. In MVC 5, I have an Http module that is handling the PostAuthenticate event in order to create the claim where I am doing some stuff to determine roles for the user. I see no way to do this same thing in Core. Note that this is using Windows Authentication so there is no login method to handle.
From the current httpModule that hooks up to the PostAuthenticate because I want to initialize some things for the user.
context.PostAuthenticateRequest += Context_PostAuthenticateRequest;
Note that httpModules no longer exist with Core and that is being moved to middleware.. I don't see how to tap into that event from there though.
I just did this for the first time today. Two basic steps here.
First:
Create a class that implements the IClaimsTransformer interface.
public class MyTransformer : IClaimsTransformer
{
public Task<ClaimsPrincipal> TransformAsync(ClaimsTransformationContext context )
{
//don't run if user isn't logged in
if(context.Principal.Identity.IsAuthenticated)
{
((ClaimsIdentity)context.Principal.Identity)?.AddClaims(...);
}
}
return Task.FromResult(context.Principal);
}
Second:
Add this line to Startup.cs in
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder app, ..., ...)
{
//app.Use...Authentication stuff above, for example
app.UseOpenIdConnectAuthentication( new OpenIdOptions
{
//or however you like to do this.
});
app.UseClaimsTransformation(o => new MyTransformer().TransformAsync(o));
//UseMvc below
app.UseMvc(...);
}
Keep in mind that TransformAsync is going to run on every request, so you might want to look into using sessions or caching if you're hitting a database with it.
Windows Authentication is performed by the hosts (IIS or HttpSys/WebListener) at the start of your application pipeline. The first middleware in your pipeline is the equivalent of PostAuthenticateRequest in this case. Operate on HttpContext.User as you see fit.
Is there any way this. I want to invoke an action with parameter (or parameterless at least) like below.
My situation is;
Interceptor not contains any reference from MVC, Interceptor is located at ApplicationService layer.
This is a service Interceptor.
public class ControllerInterceptor : IInterceptor
{
public void Intercept(IInvocation invocation)
{
var retVal = (ResponseDTOBase) invocation.ReturnValue;
if (retVal.ResponseCode == UsrNotAuth)
{
//Invoke Controller Action With passsing parameter (retVal)
}
invocation.Proceed();
}
}
Any ideas ? Thanks.
May I offer you another approach for request authorization. MVC is a state machine in its core principle. State machines have actions, triggers and guards. There is already such a 'guard' in MVC for the very purpose of intercepting controller actions and checking for the user privileges. This is the AuthorizeAttribute. This class implements IAuthorizationFilter. Another aspect is that authorization and authentication should happen before they reach your services. What I mean exactly is that there are two types of authorization :
Action Authorization and
Data Authorization.
The first type of authorization you can implement with AuthorizeAttribute or your custom attribute implementation of IAuthorizationFilter + FilterAttribute. Here is an example implementation of such an attribute for a SPA (Single Page Application) that works with ajax requests :
The attribute :
[AttributeUsage( AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = false)]
public class LoggedOrAuthorizedAttribute : AuthorizeAttribute
{
public override void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext)
{
base.OnAuthorization(filterContext);
CheckIfUserIsAuthenticated(filterContext);
}
private void CheckIfUserIsAuthenticated(AuthorizationContext filterContext)
{
// If Result is null, we’re OK: the user is authenticated and authorized.
if (filterContext.Result == null)
return;
// If here, you’re getting an HTTP 401 status code. In particular,
// filterContext.Result is of HttpUnauthorizedResult type. Check Ajax here.
// User is logged in but this operation is not allowed
if (filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated && filterContext.HttpContext.Request.IsAjaxRequest())
{
//filterContext.HttpContext.Response.StatusCode = 401;
JsonNetResult jsonNetResult = new JsonNetResult();
jsonNetResult.Data = JsonUtils.CreateJsonResponse(ResponseMessageType.info, "msgOperationForbiddenYouAreNotInRole");
filterContext.Result = jsonNetResult;
//filterContext.HttpContext.Response.End();
}
}
}
If you use pure MVC there is an example implementation here.
The usage :
In your controller
[LoggedOrAuthorized(Roles = Model.Security.Roles.MyEntity.Create)]
public ActionResult CreateMyEntity(MyEntityDto myEntityDto)
{
...
}
You can apply this on every controller action and block the user even before the controller is reached.
You can supply Loggers and other 'plumbing' through Castle Windsor inside your filters in order to record the events.
A very good and important links and comments are available in this answer of a similar question. These links provide very good guide for proper implementation too.
The other type of authorization - Data Access Authorization can be handled in the service or in the controller. I personally prefer to handle all kinds of authorization as soon as possible in the pipeline.
General practice is not to show to the user any data or action that he is not authorize to view or to execute commands upon it. Of course you have to double check this because the user can modify the POST and GET requests.
You can make simple interface with implementation IDataAccessService and control data access by passing user id and entity id to it.
Important thing is that you should not throw exception when the user is not authorized because this is no exception at all. Exception means that your program is in an unexpected state which prohibits its normal execution. When a user is not authorized this is not something unexpected - it is very well expected. That is why in the example implementation a message is returned rather then exception.
Another subtlety is that "exceptions" are handled differently by the .NET framework and they cost a lot more resources. This means that your site will be very vulnerable to easy DDOS outages or even they can perform not as they can. General rule is that if you control your expected program flow through exceptions you are not doing it properly - redesign is the cure.
I hope this guides you to the right implementation in your scenario.
Please provide the type of the authorization you want to achieve and parameters you have at hand so I can suggest a more specific implementation.
I am building a ASP.Net MVC application that can work both in Web and JQuery mobile. So i am creating a seperate view for Web and JQuery mobile application. I have placed all my primary business logic services as a Web Api calls which are called by both the clients using the AngularJs which is working fine so far.
Now I was looking to introduce the security in to the application, and realized that Basic authentication is the quickest way to get going and when I looked around I found very nice posts that helped me build the same with minimal effort. Here are 3 links that I primarily used:
For the Client Side
HTTP Auth Interceptor Module : a nice way to look for 401 error and bring up the login page and after that proceed from where you left out.
Implementing basic HTTP authentication for HTTP requests in AngularJS : This is required to ensure that I am able reuse the user credentials with the subsequent requests. which is catched in the $http.
On the Server Side :
Basic Authentication with Asp.Net WebAPI
So far so good, all my WebApi calls are working as expected,
but the issue starts when I have to make calls to the MVC controllers,
if I try to [Authorize] the methods/controllers, it throws up the forms Authentication view again on MVC even though the API has already set the Authentication Header.
So I have 2 Questions:
Can We get the WebApi and MVC to share the same data in the header? in there a way in the AngularJS i can make MVC controller calls that can pass the same header information with authorization block that is set in the $http and decode it in the server side to generate my own Authentication and set the Custom.
In case the above is not possible, I was trying to make a call to a WebApi controller to redirect to a proper view which then loads the data using the bunch of WebApi calls so that user is not asked to enter the details again.
I have decorated it with the following attribute "[ActionName("MyWorkspace")] [HttpGet]"
public HttpResponseMessage GotoMyWorkspace(string data)
{
var redirectUrl = "/";
if (System.Threading.Thread.CurrentPrincipal.IsInRole("shipper"))
{
redirectUrl = "/shipper";
}
else if (System.Threading.Thread.CurrentPrincipal.IsInRole("transporter"))
{
redirectUrl = "/transporter";
}
var response = Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.MovedPermanently);
string fullyQualifiedUrl = redirectUrl;
response.Headers.Location = new Uri(fullyQualifiedUrl, UriKind.Relative);
return response;
}
and on my meny click i invoke a angular JS function
$scope.enterWorkspace = function(){
$http.get('/api/execute/Registration/MyWorkspace?data=""')
.then(
// success callback
function(response) {
console.log('redirect Route Received:', response);
},
// error callback
function(response) {
console.log('Error retrieving the Redirect path:',response);
}
);
}
i see in the chrome developer tool that it gets redirected and gets a 200 OK status but the view is not refreshed.
is there any way we can at least get this redirect to work in case its not possible to share the WebApi and MVC authentications.
EDIT
Followed Kaido's advice and found another blog that explained how to create a custom CustomBasicAuthorizeAttribute.
Now I am able to call the method on the Home controller below: decorated with '[HttpPost][CustomBasicAuthorize]'
public ActionResult MyWorkspace()
{
var redirectUrl = "/";
if (System.Threading.Thread.CurrentPrincipal.IsInRole("shipper"))
{
redirectUrl = "/shipper/";
}
else if(System.Threading.Thread.CurrentPrincipal.IsInRole("transporter"))
{
redirectUrl = "/transporter/";
}
return RedirectToLocal(redirectUrl);
}
Again, it works to an extent, i.e. to say, when the first call is made, it gets in to my method above that redirects, but when the redirected call comes back its missing the header again!
is there anything I can do to ensure the redirected call also gets the correct header set?
BTW now my menu click looks like below:
$scope.enterMyWorkspace = function(){
$http.post('/Home/MyWorkspace')
.then(
// success callback
function(response) {
console.log('redirect Route Received:', response);
},
// error callback
function(response) {
console.log('Error retrieving the Redirect path:',response);
}
);
}
this finally settles down to the following URL: http://127.0.0.1:81/Account/Login?ReturnUrl=%2fshipper%2f
Regards
Kiran
The [Authorize] attribute uses forms authentication, however it is easy to create your own
BasicAuthenticationAttribute as in your third link.
Then put [BasicAuthentication] on the MVC controllers instead of [Authorize].