I have a "chicken egg" problem.
In application I use UserDetailsService to get User (we don't store user information in our DB, we use third party service to actually get all information).
Recently we've added account activation feature. After registration, we send an activation email to a user and if he clicks on it, we mark the User as ACTIVE and redirects him to log in page. User can login only if he has ACTIVE status. The problem is: we'll start charging user from the date he activates his account even if he never logs in. How can I (maybe using spring security) make those processes (activation and login) almost simultaneous? We don't want to charge user if he just activates his account, we want to charge him only if he has logged in (after activation). So can I actually do it somehow "user clicks activation link, login and then his status is changed to ACTIVE (but he can login only if he is ACTIVE)".
Sorry if my problem description isn't clear enough
I'll appreciate any feedback.
Thanks!
If I understood your requirements correctly, you'll need two different entry points (login pages) to your application:
One for activation (first login) for users not yet activated.
Another "normal" one for active users.
The problem is that the authentication logic would need to be context sensitive and be aware of which of the above pages initated the authentication. However the framework was not designed for such uncommon use-cases, so the authentication provider has no knowledge about the URL from which the login-form were actually sent.
What you need to solve is to somehow relay contextual information to an authentication provider that processes the auth request according to that information (i.e. authenticate only non-active users logging in from url1, and authenticate only active users logging in from url2). There could be hundreds of different ways to achieve this, one possible solution is to put two different authenentication filters in place that intercept auth requests sent to the two different urls. Details outlined below:
Create your own custom versions of the existing WebAuthenticationDetailsSource and WebAuthenticationDetails (preferably by subclassing the latter) that stores and exposes the URI of the authentication request. (That will be the contextual information based on which the auth provider can implement its conditional logic.)
Configure and insert two different instances of the UsernamePasswordAuthenticationFilter in the filter chain. Set their filterProcessesUrl attribute to /j_spring_security_check_active_user and /j_spring_security_check_nonactive_user respectively, plus inject the above created custom AuthenticationDetailsSource in both of them.
Override DaoAuthenticationProvider.additionalAuthenticationChecks() in a subclass in the following way:
Retrieve the URI stored in the above created WebAuthenticationDetails object (it's accessible via authentication.getDetails())
Assert that the user is active/non-active according to the URI, and throw an AccountStatusException if the asserion fails.
Don't forget to delegate to the superclass if the assertion succeeds.
Create the two different login pages mentioned at the beginning of the post, making sure that the login forms post credentials to their respective URL (/j_spring_security_check_nonactive_user vs. /j_spring_security_check_active_user).
Related
I'm developing a Grails 3 web-app powered with Spring Security plugin, which already makes large use of #Secured annotations to protect controllers and actions according to the privileges of single logged-in users.
The login is currently managed via the usual username/password pair.
Now a new requirement came up, involving a custom request header, having as value a sort of 'authorization token':
this token identifies a group of users (let's call it team)
if this token is recognized as valid, matching against DB, then the whole application should behave as a predefined user (let's call it John, part of the team) was logged-in. In this sense it should act as a pre-authentication. This user will have his own roles, so the application will respond accordingly, as if John would had logged in with his own username/password.
if the token is not recognized, 401 status must be returned.
if the token is not passed, the application must have its current behavior, to the token management should be considered optional must not impact the current implementation at all.
I considered defining a custom filter (I also took a look at this post, which however has different requirements), but I cannot even determine:
the feasibility of this task
whether or not filters are the best approach (but I guess so as Interceptors are triggered too late, and I need some additional logic to be evaluated before Spring Security comes into play)
possibly, the best filter to extend
So any suggestion is welcome! Thanks in advance
Not an expert on this, but I would implement a custom UserDetailsService and set the authorities based on the token condition. You might also be able to do it in an AuthenticationSuccessListener.
I'm working on an internal website for the company I work for. The website will be only available to company staff. We use Google Apps for Business, so we would like authentication to be done using our google accounts.
I've gone through 'google sign in' samples from here: https://developers.google.com/+/
It works, but the problem we run into is that it requires the user to sign up to Google+. This is a speed bump we would prefer not to have.
Are there any ways around this? Thanks.
It shouldn't be too hard to roll your own sign in using the lower levels of Oauth, eg 'email' scope. It's hard to give a more specific answer because it depends on your architecture (eg. are you predominantly server-side or client-side) and what kind of session do you want to create by the sign in process. For example, if you are client/REST based, you probably don't want any session at all as REST encourages statelessness. On the other hand, if you are more web based, serving static pages, you will want a session.
In simple terms, you will be doing something that generates an access token, and then processing that access token to determine the email address (or Google ID) of the person who created it. You will then establish some sort of session (eg. using session cookies) that identifies future requests from that user.
Feel free to add some more detail to your architecture and I'll try to finesse the answer.
For simple http servlet sessions, it will be something like.
User requests a protected page
servlet detects that there is no session and/or session has no authenticated user
servlet redirects to an Oauth page to request an access code. something like
https://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/auth?redirect_uri=xxx&response_type=code&client_id=zz&approval_prompt=auto&scope=email
NB research the exact URL, don't rely on this to be exact
If the user isn't logged on, he'll be prompted; if he has multiple logins, he'll be prompted; if he hasn't yet granted email access, he'll be prompted. If none of these conditions are met (the normal case) he won't see anything.
Browser will redirect to the redirect_uri, carrying an access token (or an auth code if this is the first time the user has used the app)
Post the token to the Google userinfo endpoint, and you will receive a decode containing the email address
Store the email into a session object (or retrieve your own user object and store that)
redirect back to the originally requested page. You can use the OAuth state parameter to pass that around
et voila. all future page requests from that user will be within a session containing some user identification.
NB This is just an outline and I may even have missed a step. You will still need to do your own OAuth research.
Apparently not:
(..) if a Google user who has not upgraded to a Google+ account clicks
on the Sign in with Google+ button, the same consent dialog that opens
will take the user into an account upgrade flow.
Weirdly the docs for OAuth2 states:
Google+ Sign-In works for all users with a Google account, whether or
not they have upgraded to Google+.
Has anyone successfully implemented the Google Identity Toolkit, an implementation of an Account Chooser. I followed the initial steps here, but I still have a few questions, as I don't quite know how to handle the entire data flow. I'm using Clojure / Compojure in the back-end:
http://havethunk.wordpress.com/2011/08/10/google-identity-toolkit-asp-net-mvc3/
http://code.google.com/apis/identitytoolkit/v1/acguide.html
A) don't quite understand how ID Provider authentication, fits into my data model
when implementing the callbackURL, what data should I expect, and
how's that session state managed by GITkit (and all Account Choosers)
B) Is there a way to set this up the 'callbackURL' for development.
the identity provider would need a URL that it can redirect back to
C) How can the GITkit / Account Chooser workflow let my users register an account that's native to my app?
Thanks in advance
The questions aren't entirely clear, but I've done an implementation of GITkit in ruby and can give you some pointers.
A) The callback URL is what handles the assertion from the identity providers. Rightnow GITKit only does OpenID, so the URL will contain an OpenID response either in the query parameters or as the POST body. You'll need to do a few things:
1) Call verifyAssertion in the gitkit API and pass the params/post body. This will return a JSON response that contains the user details (assuming assertion is valid). There are some other checks you should do as well
2) Decide what to do with the assertion. If it is an existing user, most likely you'll just establish a session and save the user ID. If it's a new user, you can either create a new account and start a session immediately, or defer that and redirect them to a signup page.
3) Render HTML/JS to notify the widget. There are different status codes and data you can return that changes the flow.
GITKit itself doesn't really manage session state, that's up to your app. Some of the reference implementations have code to help, but it's not part of the API. The widget does have some state that you can control with JS (add account, show as logged in, etc) and uses local storage in the browser.
The docs give some details and example code for how this should be implemented.
B) Of course. The URL is just configured in the javascript widget when you call setConfig() It can be set to localhost or any staging server for development. So long as your browser can reach it you're OK.
C) By "native", I assume you mean where they're signing up with just a username/password instead of using an IDP. If so, the user just has to enter their email address when logging in. If that email address matches a known IDP it'll attempt to authenticate with OpenID, otherwise if it's a new user it'll redirect to whatever signup page you configured in the widget. That signup page would just ask the user to create a password like you normally would. You should also return whether or not accounts are 'legacy' (password) accounts in the userStatus checks.
Hope that helps.
For anyone's future reference. I was able to resolve the issue. You can follow this thread of how's it's done in Clojure.
I got it working with Ring/Compojure, and another fellow showed me his solution in Webnoir.
HTH
My application has some features that are accessible to all users, and some other features to which access should be restricted to authenticated users only. All these restricted features exists within some set of GWT Places, thus, all Places available in application can be divided into two groups: "accessible for all", and "restricted". In my opinion, places with restricted access, could implement some interface (let's say it would be RestrictedAccess), and if user proceeds to one of them, and it has not been authenticated yet, it will be redirected to the login screen - it's more OO-approach than applying filters basis on URL.
What I'm trying to achieve is:
Information about if user has been
authenticated or not should be
stored on server (it's not something
that could be stored in a cookie...)
Login page is a standard GWT place+view+activity (!)
User name & password validation is done on the server side.
So far, I've introduced RestrictedAccess interface, which is implemented by some set of places. My FilteredActivityMapper.Filter implementation, which is passed to the FilteredActivityMapper wrapping application activity mapper has the following logic:
Place filter(Place place) {
if (place instanceof RestrictedAccess && !userHasBeenAuthenticated()) {
return new LoginPlace();
}
// return the original place - user has been already authenticated or
// place is accesible for all users
return place;
}
private boolean userHasBeenAuthenticated() {
// remote call - how to do ???
}
The problem is with userHasBeenAuthenticated() method (user should not be redirected to the LoginPlace, if it has been already authenticated). If I want to store this information on the server-side, I have to do GWT RPC/request factory call here, but both are asynchronous, so I cannot work on its result in the filter method.
I know that I can use web.xml filters or some external framework (e.g. spring security), but none of this approach allows me to have login page as a standard GWT - based form, or indicating in the more OO way that access to some place should be restricted.
Thanks in advance for any hints
EDIT: I've started to wondering if places filtering (restricted/not restricted) should take place on the client side at all. If, as it was suggested, there is a possibility to hack code indicating if user has been authenticated or not, there is also possibility to hack places filtering code, so that it will be possible to access restricted places without signing in.
Piotrek,
I think there is a security issue with calling userHasBeenAuthenticated() - it would be possible to hack the client side code to return true every time this function is called.
The solution I've implemented is to simply return SC_UNAUTHORIZED if an unauthenticated user attempts to access any remote service. I've overridden the RequestFactory onResponseReceived function which redirects to a login page if the response is SC_UNAUTHORIZED. Idea taken from:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/browse/trunk/samples/expenses/src/main/java/com/google/gwt/sample/gaerequest/client/GaeAuthRequestTransport.java
This works for our situation where the Activities and Places are all data-centric - each place change retrieves data from the server. If a user isn't authenticated they simply don't get the data and get redirected to a login page.
I realize your situation is slightly different in that some places are accessible to everyone, in which case you could configure only the restricted services to return SC_UNAUTHORIZED.
I have a similar application with the same requirements. As yet I have not got round to to the implementation but I was thinking along the same lines.
What I was planning on doing is storing the authentication state client side in an AuthenticationManager class. When the app starts I was going to request the login info from the server (I was thinking of running on app engine so I would get the authentication state and also get the open id login/logout URLs) and store this in the AuthenticationManager. Acegi/Spring Security works in a simlar way so this info is available server side if you use those too.
When the user logs in/out they will be redirected by the server and the new state will be retrieved. This should keep the client authentication state in line with the server. Each RPC request on the server has to be checked for authentication too. I was using the gwt-dispacth library and this has some rudimentary authentication checking and cross site script protection in in too (although I think latest GWT has this for generic RPC).
One issue is session timeouts. Again the gwt-dispath library has some code that detects this and returns session expired exceptions to the client which can be intercepted and the auth manager updated.
Hope that makes some sense.
I'm reading about Federated Login for Google Account Users to figure out how I can have a user log in to a web application using their Google Account.
So towards the end of the process, Google returns a Google supplied identifier which is appended as openid.claimed_id. This means the web application uses this identifier to recognize the user and allow access to application features and data. My question is, is this identifier static? Can I use this identifier to repeatedly id the same user?
Yes. Consider the openid.claimed_id value to be the username. Especially with Google, but this is true for any OpenID Provider that truly implements 'directed identity', don't consider this username to be correlatible with other web sites. Any other relying party besides your own web site will get a different claimed_id value for the same Google user, by design.
Also, be sure to treat this claimed_id as case sensitive.
The specific answer to your question is found in Googles OpenID API documentation:
The Google-supplied identifier, which has no connection to the user's actual Google account name or password, is a persistent value; it remains constant even if the user changes their Google user name and/or email address. This identifier is also a "directed identity", that is, Google returns a different value to each relying party. Google uses the request parameter openid.realm to recognize the relying party, so if the third-party application decides to change this value, all user identifiers will change.
In fact, I just ran into an instance where the google claimed_id had changed for my test user. I was coming to the end of implementing OpenID into my app, and for no apparently reason the claimed_id in the response data is had changed.
I've been testing with this account for the past couple weeks, and the claimed_id was the same this entire time, as expected. Then wham, changed! I looked at the response data many times to verify, and the underlying code to retrieve the data had not changed.
I'm not sure how to handle this at the moment, but I think this is going to throw me for a loop. After initial authentication, users register to the site (as you might expect) and setup a screen name. How are we to verify it is the same user if the claimed_id had changed? We certainly can't use email address, per best practices.
EDIT
Now I have pie in my face! I missed one little detail, that turned out to be a major detail. I change my development environment and was hosting on a different v-host. This effectively change the realm, and this will change the claimed_id response according to the docs.
This was a good lesson for me, as I was about to implement OID on a subdomain in which realm was being set automatically in my code. Now I saved myself a headache down the road, because I would not have been able to use the same user database across all other sub-domains without breaking identity.
updating realm
MORE INFO
Just as a side note - even if you are developing your OpenID solution for one of your subdomains, it might be prudent for you to specify realm to your top-level domain.
e.g., openid.realm = http://*.yourdomain.com
It will allow you to expand your sign-in page across all your subdomains and keep user identity across them.
(optional) Authenticated realm. Identifies the domain that the end
user is being asked to trust. (Example: "http://*.myexamplesite.com")
This value must be consistent with the domain defined in
openid.return_to. If this parameter is not defined, Google will use
the URL referenced in openid.return_to.