How do I implement a single sign-on for different ColdFusion applications running on the same server? - authentication

I have multiple CF applications running on the same server under the same domain name. One of them, let's call it Portal, is intended to be the single sign-on for the other applications, which let's call Atlas and P-Body. Normally you would set some variables in the session scope to handle login info:
function Login()
{
session.auth = structNew();
session.auth.isLoggedIn = true;
session.auth.id = GetCurrentUserId();
}
But the session scope is only shared within one application, not the entire server. This means that any user who logs into Portal will stay logged in, but if they try to navigate to Atlas or P-Body, they will have to sign in again.
In this case, how would I 'share' the session scope so that all the applications on a server can get access to it? The only way I've been able to come up with is to use client variables and set a data store so that it's shared between applications. Then the code becomes:
function Login()
{
client.auth = structNew();
client.auth.isLoggedIn = true;
client.auth.id = GetCurrentUserId();
}
function Logout()
{
structDelete(client, "auth");
}
The thing to watch out for here is that, because the client variable is not cleared on session end, we have to manually clear it in the OnSessionEnd handler.
Is this the best way of handling single sign-on in ColdFusion? If so, are there any drawbacks to using the client variable, or pitfalls to watch out for?
Update: I just tested the client variable method and it looks like only the hitcount, timecreated, lastvisit, and urltoken are shared between applications, so I'm back to square 1.

Posting this as the answer given new information.
Caveat
Ensure that all of the applications have either a) unique application scope names for persistent variables, or b) all application scope variables for the same purpose are named the same.
Alright, with that out of the way, if all of your applications are on a single domain in subfolders, then change this.name or the name attribute of cfapplication the same, and all of the applications will share the same session and application scope variables. This will ensure that if you use session.loggedin in one app, that same session.loggedin variable will be available to all applications with the same name under that domain.
You just have to test carefully to make sure that you don't end up using Application.LoginService in Portal for your LoginService.cfc, and Application.LoginService in Atlas for either a different LoginService.cfc, or a completely different purpose altogether.

Single Sign On (SSO) is not an easy thing to do and there are several very expensive products out there that help to prove that.
Fortunately, there are some free OSS projects out there are well.
There are also many other considerations with SSO that make its implementation difficult, like how do you handle it when a user clicks "Log off" on one of the sites? Do you log them out of all of them? If so, how?
If you want to do SSO right, you need to look at using an SSO solution, like Shibboleth (FOSS), or Atlassian Crowd (Reasonably priced commercial solution).
If you do not have the resources to use an SSO product like those above, then you will end up hacking around the current security restrictions that make SSO so difficult.

You're very close with the client variable solution.
Set up a remote database that all applications can speak to, either through the DSN, or through another single point of entry (ie. a WebService)
Decide on a common way to identify users across all your applications (ie. come up with your own unique sessionid, perhaps based off of CFID/CFTOKEN, CreateUUID(), or anything else you can guarantee is unique).
Build your authentication process so that when someone authenticates somewhere in your application farm...anywhere...that unique sessionid is stored to the remote database.
Pass that unique sessionid from app to app. Perhaps append it to your hyperlinks, or store it in client variables (cookies) that you mentioned earlier.
Finally, in your application logic that checks to see if someone is authenticated, before forcing them to login again...use their client variables (or the passed unique sessionid) to check back with the remote datasource, and auth them if you have found/verified it.
This is an oversimplification, but is the foundation for SSO, and should get you thinking in the right direction.
PS: Keep all your applications on the same domain, if possible (xx.mysite.com, yy.mysite.com) so that your client vars (cookies) can be set to be domain-specific, allowing them to traverse the application farm as you need them to.

Use the server scope. It is shared across applications.
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/ColdFusion/9.0/Developing/WSc3ff6d0ea77859461172e0811cbec0c35c-7fdb.html

Related

Restrict access of a connected app (Salesforce)

What is the best way to restrict the scope of a connected app to a set of objects? My current solution is to use the Manage user data via APIs scope but that still grants more access than required.
A solution I see frequently is to create a user with a restricted profile and connect with that user but then you lose context of actions made by users in the connected app so this solution doesn't work
Tricky, you typically don't. (consider posting on https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/, there might be a clever way I didn't think of).
You can flip the connected app from "all users can self authorise" to "admin-approved users are preauthorised" and then allow only certain profiles / permission sets to use the app. But the bulk of it is "just" enabling the connection via API and cutting it to say Chatter only or OpenId identifiers. And that's already an improvement compared to SOAP APIs where you don't have scopes and the app can completely impersonate the user, do everything they can do in UI.
Profiles/permission sets/sharing rules are "the" way even in not immediately obvious situations like Lighting Connect Salesforce to Salesforce or Named Credentials access to another org.
If you can't restrict the visibility with profiles and access to all tables user can see is not acceptable...
you could create series of Apex classes exposing certain queries, updates etc and grant profile access to these classes - but without full api access? You could even let them pass any SOQL (evil) but use with sharing, WITH SECURITY_ENFORCED, stripInaccessible + custom restriction on tables before returning results
you could look into https://developer.salesforce.com/docs/atlas.en-us.238.0.apexref.meta/apexref/apex_class_Auth_ConnectedAppPlugin.htm although I suspect it's run only on connect, not on every request. So at best you could deny access if user has right to see some sensitive data, not great
if there are few objects you need to block updates if done via app - Quiddity might be the way to go. Throw error in a trigger if action started from REST context?
give the Transaction Security trailhead a go. If it looks promising (there's way to check "application" and "queried entities" according to this) - might be a solution. You'll likely have to cough up $ though, last time I checked the cool bits of event monitoring & transaction security were hidden behind an extra paid addon (standalone or bundled with platform encryption and Field Audit Track into Salesforce Shield solution)
2 logins? dedicated user for querying stuff but inserts/updates running as your end user?

Is session a good choice?

We are building ASP.NET MVC app that is supposed to manage sport objects reservations (tennis courts, squash courts etc).
Users are not supposed to act only in scope of one club at the moment of interaction with app.
Navigation to the app should be like:
appname.com/clubName or
clubName.appname.com
Questions:
1. What would be the best way to persist the data about selected club. We have implemented storing in session (injecting information about the club durint app opening), but we read that using session is rather deprecated solution. We are using ApiController so in order to get the session we had to hack the routing (registering custom RouteHandler). Is session mechanism applicable for this problem?
var session = HttpContext.Current.Session;
if (session != null)
{
service.ClubName = session[CustomSessionKeys.ClubName.ToString()].ToString();
}
Is it good idea to use subdomains for our problem?
Many thanks in advance :)
Generally a web api works differently than a normal mvc app.
In an MVC application you would use a session cookie to make the internet act like a state machine. However, this is not what is generally done for web api's. In a web api, you provide some form of authentication (e.g. via the header authentication field).
But within a request you ofcourse want to to keep track of the current user, or in asp.net terms, the current principal.
We set the principle though a Delegation handler
HttpContext.Current.User = user;
If you want some more code on how this whole authentication is done, just let me know.
This was all serverside ofcourse, on the client side, you can keep any information you want in a session store. Although you might want to consider using the local storage in stead (depending on what semantics you want to give it). They both work in the same way.
You can consult W3C webstorage specification for the complete information on both of these.
Well you have many choices I guess!
Go with the route thing as you suggested, where you keep the club Id or name as part of the URL. I would go for this if I need the link to give more meaning to the user.
Cookie! yes, if the information is not sensitive store it in a cookie. In case this cookie is only to be accessed from server side, then don't forget to make it HttpOnly
Session. I agree with you, I wouldn't choose session unless the data was very sensitive and I needed to make it secure.

Website and Native app user authorization

I wish to create a functionality that is very similar to facebook or pokerstars if you have used them before. Basically the apps require the user to login and their information can be accessed from both browsers and native and web apps.
How can I go about achieving this? Please advice on what services to research on to accomplish this. To my current understanding. I would be creating the website in html and php and creating a webservice using RESTful protocols and hosting them on amazon aws servers. I can then connect to these servers in the native apps? I am not very clear on how the native apps will interact with the servers
If you know of any particular protocol or a better server hosting service please let me know.
If I'm interpreting your question correctly, you are looking for something like this:
The user starts either your browser app or your native app (perhaps a mobile app)
Since the user does not have an account yet, you present them with the appropriate dialog to create said account.
You then ask the "Identity Service" to create a profile for that user
The identity service returns a token for access
This is something we do in the mobile network industry all the time. Technically, we have TAC/ACS or HSS profile services, but in either case, it's the same thing -- a dedicated service and network process that:
Accepts connections from various clients (web, mobile, desktop...)
Has various primitives along the database CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete) model
Answers requests the database
If you want a pre-configured solution, you could just use any networked database with a RESTstyle connector for example (MongoDB maybe?) But you could also just through this in a process that talks to a NoSQL or SQLLite database. The end result is the same.
For commercial solutions, I might like at OpenStack as you can run your code on it and they have identity brokers you might be able to CoOpt.
Personally, I'd just have a datastore running on a cloud somewhere like Amazon's EC2 which answers RESTful requests such as:
Create a user with a given profile set, return a unique token
Delete a user given a token
Update elements of the profile for a given token
I'm leaving out the necessary things like security here, but you get the idea.
This also has the advantage that you can have a single identity service for all of your applications/application services. The specifics for a given application element are just sub-fields in the profile. This gives you, not only a common identity broker for web, desktop and mobile, but a single-sign-on for all your applications. The user signs in once and is authenticated for everything you have. Moving from site to site, now just became seamless.
Lastly, you place your identity management, backup, security token management, etc OUTSIDE of your application. If you later want to add Google Authenticator for second-factor authentication, you don't have to add it to every application you have.
I should also add that you don't want to keep the identity database on the direct internet connection point. Someone could make your life difficult and get ahold it later on. Rather, you want your identity server to have a private link to it. Then do something like this:
When the account is created, don't store passwords, store hashes -- much safer
Have your application (web or otherwise) compute a key as the login
In this case, the user might enter a username and password, but the application or website would convert it into a token. THAT is what you send across.
Next, using that token (and suitable security magic), use THAT as the owner key
Send that key to the datastore and retrieve any needed values
Encrypt them back into a blob with the token
Send the block
THe application decrypts the blob to get at values
Why do we do this?
First, if someone were to try to get at your identity database, there's nothing useful. It contains only opaque tokens for logins, and blobs of encrypted data. Go ahead -- take the database. We don't care.
Second, sniffing the transport gets an attacker nothing -- again, it's all encrypted blobs.
This means later on, when you have five applications using the broker, and someone hacks the network and steals the database, you don't care, because your users never gave out logins and passwords in the first place, and even if they did, the data itself is garbage to anyone without the user key.
Does this help?

ExtJs:How to get Session variable

In my Java web application,when a user gets logged in,i store the user name and other details in session as follows,
session.setAttribute("userName",username);
I am using ExtJs4 for UI.How to get the session variables in extJs?
Thanks
I can second #Geronimo approach. You need to get user Id and/or permissions when you authenticate the user. However...
You can't rely just on the username/permissions that you store somewhere in your JS code because it can't be easily spoofed. If you present user with some information that can be different for different levels of access you still need to do server side validation of the user identity.
You can't get session variables off the server web container using javascript only.
I do the same thing (storing userId as a session variable in java). I use Ext.Request to perform an Ajax request to a java servlet to get it (along with other data about the user like permission settings for the webapp to enable or disable features they wouldn't be able to use).
EDIT:
I second sha's answer also, the only reason I pass the authentication information back to the client is for cosmetic reasons - so that user doesn't think he can use a feature in javascript that would be denied by my server side authentication. If he were to spoof the userId or permissions and try to use the feature, the real authentication on the server side would stop him.
I understand that the question has been asked for a long time ago, but despite the large number of views and the absence of an plain answer, I decided to offer this answer:
Assume that the session variable is registered like /index.php?PHPSESSID=9ebca8bd62c830d3e79272b4f585ff8f
In this case, you can get the variable PHPSESSID through JS object "location" and transform it through Ext.Object.fromQueryString()
So:
console.log( Ext.Object.fromQueryString( location.search ) );
will prepare PHPSESSID variable for your needs.

GWT: Authentication for some part of application using GWT login page

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.