Claims aware security. Do I get it right? - authentication

I'm trying to investigate possibility of using claims aware security in the system I'm developing. The more I read about all this stuff the more confused i get.
So i decided to describe what I know already and I would ask that You correct my statements. I got lost with all those protocols and technologies used.
Below is a simple diagram of my system. There are two services - a REST service implemented using WCF and an ASP MVC web application.
I know I need to get an STS which will be a trusted identity issuer for both of my services. I'll be using roles to differentiate certain levels of access.
The STS functionality might be accomplished by using ADFS (or is there anything more needed in addition to it) or WSO2 Identity Server.
By saying STS I mean a service which will get credentials from a client wanting to authenticate and will return a set of claims (which will beside other information contain the role assigned to the user). This set of claims will be in the form of a token.
On the diagram I marked different client types with different colors. No I'll try to describe what protocols/formats i think will be used. I am pretty confused on what is a format and what is a protocol. But let me try:
Red scenario: rich WCF client authenticates agains REST service
Request to STS will be sent using WS-trust (is there any other possibility in ADFS or WSO2?). The credentials might be in one of several forms such as X.509 certificate, password digest, kerberos, windows authentication, SAML token (this is used in federation scenarios, right?), and few other.
The answer to the client will be in a form of SWT token sent over OAuth protocol since this is the way we do it when trying to authenticate against REST services.
Does ADFS support SWT and OAuth? I couldn't find the information.
The client then send the token received from STS to the REST service. Once again this is SWT token on OAuth.
I guess as for the client code all can be easily implemented using Windows Identity Framework.
Green scenario: rich android client authenticates against REST service
All protocols/formats are the same as in previous scenario. Is there any framework which can let me easily implement this?
Blue scenario: user of web browser authenticates against ASP MVC web application
User goes to the web app's main page. The webapp detects that he isn't authenticated yet so redirects him to the sign on page on STS (the sign on page is on STS, right?).
and 3. STS authenticates the user and sends HTTP response containing SAML token and redirection to webapp. So here is HTTP used, not WS-Trusts.
Another question. In this web browser scenario there will be a cookie written on a client's machine. So whenever client will try to authenticate once again, he'll just send the cookie to sts to obtain the token. There will be no need to send the credentials. STS will issue a token basing on the cookie without any real authentication logic involved. Is that statement correct?

ADFS / WIF out the box only supports SAML tokens - no OAuth support.
ADFS / WCF uses WS-Trust.
The sign-on page is part of ADFS.
The answer is "Yes" to your last question but (at some point) it will expire and the user will have to authenticate again.
Update:
Have a look at Claims Based Identity & Access Control Guide

Related

API server access to third party mobile applications along with User identification

I have to design an IAM solution for a NodeJS microservice using Auth0. Objective is to allow third party mobile application users to access this microservice.
I understand OAuth and OpenID connect solution and one simple solution is third party application accesses APIs as a client using client credentials workflow.
Solution I have to design is allowing users to login and authenticate using their Enterprise IdP connected to our Auth0 Server. So that we can implement authorization and access control at user level.
At the same time customer application needs to be kept agnostic of Auth0 service.
What I mean by it is client should not be required to add any logic in their application for accommodating our Auth0 domain like we have in first party React application. user once logged in to customer application should get access to our API also by using SSO capability. I have read some documents about configuring customer IdP with our Auth0 server acting as a SAML SP. Still I could not understand hows of it and will Auth0 create an OAuth access token in this scenario.
I realise this requires an app to intermediate between customer's mobile app and our API service. Still, I am not able to understand data flow and communication between various components.
Also, I am not sure it is a common situation or requirement? If it is is there any technical term for it? This not seem like a standard B2B scenario.
have to design an IAM solution .. , I am not able to understand data flow and communication between various components ..
Before answering, the answer will points the asked specific questions, may not fit al your needs. SO is not really intended for writing tutorials or searching the documentation. Implementing an IdP (effecively a security module), one needs to do his homework and learn the details.
Maybe using an ready / out of box solution could be interesting. Using an open source IAM such as KeyCloak, WSO2IS could be a quick start. Or cloud services such as AWS Cognito, IBM AppId, Azure AD, .. could be a feasible solution too
a client using client credentials workflow .. access toked received by our API should be for user logged in
The client credentials grant is intended to authenticate only applications. That's it.
To authenticate users, other grant type is needed. For the user authentication the most common option is the authorization code or the implicit grant. The implicit grant is has its weaknesses and is being replaced by the code grant with PKCE (just search it).
End requirement is users of 3rd-party application not required to login again while 3rd-party application fetches data from our API .. Configuring their IdP (most probably Active directory) and our Auth0 servers for the same is all I need to understand
I see most common two options in use:
1. federated SSO authentication
This is the most commonly used option. The external (3rd party) IdP is configured as a "trusted" federated IdP. You often see the scenario when you have a service provider allowing to login with other IdP, often social networks (FB, Google, ...)
The login flow is as follows:
The client authorizes with the provider's (yours) IdP (let's call it IdP1).
IdP1 now acts as as Service Provider with IdP2 (IdP of the partner) and asks for the authorization (redirects the user to the IdP2).
User is authenticated and authorized with IdP2. If the user is already authenticated, the IdP2 doesn't need to ask the user's credentials again, this is how SSO works on this level
IdP2 returns to IdP1 (acting as a service provider).
IdP1 reads the user information (using the id_token, userinfo service - assuming using the OAuth2/OIDC protocol all the time there are other protocols too) and builds its own the user-level token. It may or may not create a local user (it is called user provisioning).
IdP1 returns to the client and the client can request a user-level token.
Then the client can call the API services with the token trusted by the API provider.
2. Assertion Framework for OAuth Authorization Grants
This option is built on top of the Assertion Framework for OAuth 2.0 Client Authentication and Authorization Grants, it is an optional extension of the OAuth2 protocol. I call this a token swap service
Basically the token service could validate the access or ID token of a trusted (partner) IdP and issue its own token based on the provided user information.
As you see there are a lot of information and to build a secure solution you ned to make sure that all steps are properly secured (signature, expiration, issuer, validity, audience, subject domain, .. are validated). Disclaimer - as my job we implement IAM/IDM solutions and a lot can get wrong if shortcuts are taken. So you may really consider using an out of box and proven solution.

Can AD provide my Win desktop application with credentials for my web services?

I have a working c#/dotnet Windows desktop application that does its work by hitting various web services in my web application. When the desktop application starts up, it prompts the user for username / password and then hits my login web service, which returns a session token.
I have a large-org customer with many users. That customer wants to provide authentication / authorization for my combined desktop / web application directly from their domain controller. They want single signon, so my desktop app doesn't prompt their users for usernames and passwords.
How can my desktop application retrieve a usable authentication / authorization token from Windows (maybe from the user's Security Principal object)? How can my web application validate that token so it can trust the desktop application and send it a session token?
(My web application runs in my environment, not in the customer's domain.)
With pure-web-app customers I do this successfully with SAML2 and Active Directory / Federation Services. The SAML2 dance gets my user's browser to POST a request to the customer's AD/FS server, which then POSTs a signed response back to my web app.
But I can't figure out how to do it cleanly from a desktop application. Any wisdom?
You can check this samples in github (by jelledruyts): Modern claims-based identity scenarios for .NET developers
It has samples of authentication and authorization using Azure Active Directory and/or Windows Server Active Directory Federation Services.
I suggest read this article Digital Identity for .NET Applications. It's a little old but is a good overview/review.
Tokens come in many different formats. For today’s .NET applications,
however, three kinds of tokens are most important. They are the
following:
User name/password token—This very simple token contains only two
claims: the name of some subject and that subject’s password.
Kerberos ticket—More complex than a user name/password token, a
ticket includes a subject’s name, the name of the subject’s Windows
domain, and other information. Kerberos tickets that are issued by
Active Directory also include an extension that contains security
identifiers (SIDs) that identify the subject and the groups to which
this subject belongs.
SAML token—The Security Assertion Markup
Language (SAML) is an XML-based language that is owned by the OASIS
multivendor standards group. Unlike the other token types that are
described here, a SAML token doesn’t have a fixed set of claims
defined for it. Instead, this kind of token can contain any claims
that its creator chooses.
As soon as the claims are available, they can be used by Windows, the
application, or both. The most common uses of claims include the
following:
Authenticating the user(...)
Making an authorization decision(...)
Learning about this user(...)
Kind of Authentication:
Domain Based Authentication (eg Kerberos tickets):
A domain-based application accepts only a single token format with a
fixed set of claims. One common example is a Windows application that
accepts only Kerberos tickets. This kind of application is easy to
create, and it works well inside a single Windows domain. The problem
is that this simplistic approach to digital identity is no longer
sufficient for many applications
Claim Based Authentication (eg. SAML tokens):
Unlike a domain-based application, a claims-based application can
potentially accept multiple token formats with varying sets of claims.
The token formats and claim sets that this application accepts are
determined by the application itself.
Identity Technologies
Active Directory (AD) Domain Services (full-featured directory service, token source for Kerbero tickets, etc)
Active Directory Federation Services (ADFS) (support for claims-based applications, token source for SAML tokens
Windows CardSpace
Active Directory Lightweight Directory Services (subset of AD services)
Identity Life-Cycle Manager (ILM) (synchronization between different identity stores)
Windows Authorization Manager (tools for RBAC - role-based access control)
Active Directory Rights-Management Services (RMS)
Because AD Domain Services implements Kerberos, the default token in a
Windows environment is a Kerberos ticket. To use this default, an
ASP.NET application specifies Windows Integrated Authentication, while
a WCF application uses an appropriate binding, such as NetTcpBinding.
In either case, the following figure illustrates how a Windows
application with clients in the same domain might use a Kerberos
ticket and AD Domain Services
First versions of AD FS only support SAML with web clients.
ADFS 1.0, supports only browser clients—a restriction that’s scheduled
to change in the technology’s next release.
Hope it helps.
I should preface this with the fact that I've never done this, so I can't give you exact code, but I can point you in the right direction.
You should be able to do this with ADFS and Windows Integrated Authorization (WIA). In a "pure web app", the browser sends the credentials of the currently-logged-on user during the authorization step. In your case, your desktop app needs to do everything that the browser would normally do. Either way, the setup on the web service side should be exactly the same.
In C# with HttpClient, this is the important part:
var httpClient = new HttpClient(new HttpClientHandler()
{
UseDefaultCredentials = true
});
Then, whenever your httpClient sends a request that is challenged with a 401 response, it will automatically resend the request with the user's Windows credentials. This is exactly what a web browser would do. So use that when you get the token.
You may have to send a user agent string in the request, since ADFS seems to limit WIA to certain agents.
Once you have a token, then use the token in your requests to the web service.
The key is that you're replicating what a browser would do. So if you have trouble setting up what the HTTP requests should look like, then access a GET request in your API from a browser and use the browser's dev tools to inspect exactly what the traffic looks like, and use that information to replicate the same request in your code.

ASP.NET Core Authentication via Google Sign In with REST API in between

I have a requirement to authenticate ASP.NET Core App via Google Sign In, but a Web API between client app (i.e. ASP.NET Core app) and Google sign in... I know it sounds confusing, so let me explain it with diagrams.
Here is the typical way to include google sign-in button and get user authenticated via their google credentials, It works perfectly fine
Step 1: First, create a new app on google identity developer portal, generate ClientId, ClientSecret and specify redirect_url like : https://yoursite.com/signin-google.
Step 2: In the Startup.cs class of ASP.NET Core project, Use AddGoogle as authentication middleware and it works perfectly fine.
Including diagram below for your understanding:
And here is the proposed flow. With a REST API in between client and google sign in. Question is, how do I authenticate client ?
From what I understand, you want your Client Application to invoke the REST Service on behalf of the user. The REST service needs assurance that both the Client and the User are authenticated.
We have achieved this using the OpenID Connect Hybrid flow. The bad news is that we had to add another service to the solution to achieve this.
How this differs from your proposed solution is this:
You must have your own identity service, and this must know of the existence of the REST service, the Client Application, and the User Identity.
The Client Application redirects the user to authenticate with the Identity Service (which further on redirects the user to authenticate with Google)
Identity Server provides the client application with an ID token for the user, and also a code which can be exchange for an Access Token
The client application requests the Access Token. This Access Token will authenticate both the client and the user
The client application then authenticates using this access token when invoking the REST Service
The REST Service issues a one-off request to Identity Server for the signature keys, and uses these keys to validate the access token.
We happened to use IdentityServer4 when implementing the Identity Server, but the protocol exists independently of any one implementation.

How to implement active federation provider with WIF

I have several Silverlight, WP7 and ASP.NET MVC client applications Most allow anonymous access to the application but secure various features based on a user's credentials when logged in. All of the clients use a common back-end service application for data access and business processing which require the user's credentials for authentication and authorization.
We currently use Forms Authentication in all client applications and I'd like to migrate our architecture to use federated identity and a claims-based model. Passive federation is not an option.
I am looking for the following flow:
The user triggers the login dialog, enters their username and
password then clicks "OK".
Behind-the-scenes, the application calls an active STS service in
our existing service application for authentication.
The service is actually a federated STS and passes the call through
to the (active) IP_STS which may or may not be ADFS.
When the IP returns the token to the FP, the FP modifies the token
with additional claims from the server data store before returning
the token to the client application.
The client application maintains the token in memory for
authorization checks (in Thread.CurrentPrincipal, for example).
The client also passes the token when making requests to other
service operations in our service application.
These service operations will use the token to
authenticate/authorize the request.
This is a very different use-case from any of the articles and samples I've been able to locate. Can anyone provide some guidance and/or point me in the right direction?
It is my understanding from Dominic Baier that WIF doesn't currently support the approach we are taking. We've taken his suggestion and created our own custom STS that moderates authentication using the Provider model.
Unfortunately, the farther we got into this, the more we realized that WIF isn't flexible enough to satisfy our needs at this point. We stuck with the custom STS approach but are using our own transport and credentialling rather than the WIF tooling. Hopefully a future release will give us what we want.

OpenID authentication and API access

OpenID authentication is inherently browser based. If I wanted to allow an OpenID user to authenticate against an API for use in alternative clients, is there an accepted best practice for that?
So if a user tried to log in with their OpenID into an iPhone app, for instance, how would that work? The only thing I can think of generating an API token of some sort for them and get the user to manually enter it somewhere. This approach is not user friendly.
This is the way sites like Basecamp work, but it still seems clunky to me.
The problem you're seeing is not unique to OpenID. Any password-less authentication scheme can have this problem. OAuth (http://oauth.net/) is a solution that is an open standard that is quickly gaining traction on a lot of web sites. It is totally independent of how the user authenticates, so their OpenID Provider does not need to support or even be aware that your site (the "service provider" in OAuth terms) is using OAuth. Your API client can be web based or even a local application!
The process would be something like this:
Roles:
the user: someone who has an account with your web site.
service provider: your web site, which has a programmatic API that requires some credential to access.
consumer: the client, whether web or local application, that needs access to the service provider's API.
Flow:
The user is at the consumer. He indicates he wants to access data at the service provider.
The user is either redirected (if the consumer is a web site) or a browser is popped up (if the consumer is a local app) and the user sees the service provider web site.
The user is either already logged into the Service Provider via a persistent cookie, or the user must first log into the Service Provider however that is done (OpenID in your case).
The Service Provider then asks the user: "Consumer (some consumer) wants access to your data (or our API, or whatever). Do you want to authorize this? (yes/no)
User confirms, and the browser window closes or is redirected back to the Consumer site.
Via some OAuth protocol magic, the consumer now has a secret credential that it can use to access your API and access whatever user-private information you just authorized.
Obviously I can't include the whole OAuth spec here, but you can see hopefully from the above that this should solve your problem. OAuth libraries exist to make adding support for it easy.
If you happen to be using ASP.NET, I suggest http://dotnetopenid.googlecode.com/ as it recently added OAuth support (v3.0 beta 1).
Neither OpenID nor OAuth define how a user authenticates. They define how the consumer directs the user agent to the authentication provider, how the user agent is directed back, and how the consumer can verify the identity that the user authenticated as.
The actual method used to authenticate is out of band for both schemes.
There are differences between OpenID and OAuth, but both require that the consumer use HTTP redirects and callback URLs. They're both browser based. If your app speaks HTTP, it can do either. However, a main point is that the user is only entering credentials into a trusted app.
What you want is not possible with OpenID. OpenID is based on the premise that you (the iPhone app) only want to know about your users that their OpenID-provider trusts them. They never authenticate themselves to you.
Good OpenID-providers in fact even prevent that you mediate the authentication process (as this would expose users to a possible attack - by you!): they demand that users login with them directly and refuse login-by-referral.
See: this related question
The problem is that the openid spec has no standard provision for authentication with the provider, so the provider can elect that authentication happens via a phone call or whatever.
Hopefully more providers embrace OAuth. Alternatively you could hand code the authentication for a few of the bigger sites.