Currently I’m trying to implement activity-based authorization in my webform application. In my application you have different roles: Admin, manager, employee, and trainee.
The application communicates with my database through my BLL (business logic layer) and what I’m trying to do, is have authorization on method level in the BLL for all the reader and manager files for all my entities, like so:
[Authorize(Activity = "CreateUser")]
public static void InsertUser( ... )
[Authorize(Activity = "UpdateEmployee")]
public static void UpdateEmployee( ... )
For every method I want a CRUD activity and in the database I want to tell which roles gets to do what activity, or something that´s a lookalike like this.
Role-based security is not an option, besides for logging in, because a trainee for example is not allowed to insert or delete any data, except for one entity. So I need a permission/activity based authorization in my webforms.
Currently all I can find are solutions for MVC and .NET Core, but not any for the webforms, or the posts are from 2011 ish which don't really offer a solution, and I wonder if anyone has any new ideas or solutions as of this time.
In my project I make use of FormsAuthentication, and in my webconfig file I autorize specific roles and paths for specific roles. But this won’t cut it. I also make use of the Application_OnPostAuthenticateRequest in the global file with the FormsIdentity with my custom principal class which makes use of the IIDentity and IPrincipal.
Also, my AddEdit pages are the same page, and based on the querystring passed in the URL, like a userId, or employeeId, the save button decides whether it's an insert or update. So this is the reason why I need auth on methods.
So my question, does anyone know a pattern that I can actually implement in asp.net 4.5 webforms that gets permission or activity based authorization without having to hardcode everything so it's more future proof?
I'm looking to understand the nitty gritty mechanics of authorization so I can devise a strategy for my situation.
My situation is that I am part of a distributed application. My part is an MVC5 application that basically just consists of a couple of controllers that return single page app views. So hit controller A and get back single page app A. Hit controller B and get single page app B. Etc. This application contains no database or user data. Some other application on a completely different website/server does. I want to ask that other application if a user is valid or have users ask the other application directly themselves and only allow access to my app views if the answer is yes. So, in essence, I want to protect my controllers based on the word of a remote application that contains an exposed api for login/user validation.
It has been suggested to me that token authentication is the way to go. It's a bit daunting with my lack of experience with it, but I've buried myself in some reading and video presentations. Here is my current, weak attempt at summarizing the task based on limited understanding. Please correct as needed:
An access token needs to be generated
Getting an access token is not part of the Account controller, it's part of OWIN middleware
The access token will be sent along with the requests for my contoller actions
My controller actions, decorated with the [Authorize] attribute, will parse the token and do the right thing
Questions:
Q1: Should I generate the token or should the other app - the one with the db and user data?
Q2: My controllers don't know anything about users. That data is in the other app. What specifically are the controllers parsing for under the hood in order to do the right thing? In essence, what specifically tells them, "yes, this request is OK. Return the view."
Q3: I started my project awhile back using a standard MVC5 project template that comes with VS2015 because I figured I'd be handling users/login etc. That turned out not to be the case. Am I going to have to go back and redo this project from scratch because that template doesn't fit this requirement or can I do some surgery on it and continue? For instance, I don't know if that template has all the OWIN stuff I need or maybe has too much extra junk (bloated Account controller, Entity Framework, etc.) to be easily transformed/maintained.
Q4: Is token authorization overkill here? Is there an easier way to keep unauthorized users from accessing my controller actions that makes more sense given the nature of the project?
Any insight would be appreciated.
Update: What I meant in Q2 was, at it's simplest, how does [Authorize] work? Details? I'm guessing I have to tell it how to work. For instance, a silly example to illustrate. If I wanted to tell a controller decorated with [Authorize] to let anyone in who has the username "fred", how and where would I do that? I'm not so much looking for code. I'm thinking conceptually. My app must know something about the tokens the other app (authenticating app) is genenerating. In general terms, what would I add to my MVC app to tell it how to decode those tokens? Where do I add it? Is there one standard place?
I think you are on the right track and are right about the steps you have mentioned. I will answer your questions based on what I understand:
Q1. The other application is the one that needs to authorize and generate a token (whatever be the authorization mechanism they use) and you should receive this token before showing your views. Since the data is coming from the other application , they have to give your controllers access to their data. This is why you need to ask the other application for the token/authorization. With a valid token got from the other application your application can send valid and authorized requests to their data.
Q2. What you can do from your side is to add a check as to whether the request for your action/view is coming from an authorized user. For this, you need to check if this request has a valid token.
Q3. I don't know what you mean by "template" here. But if you need to integrate your controllers to the other solution, you do need to know what the other solution does and what it offers in terns of authorization and of course the data. They should provide your application access to a public api for this purpose.
q4. THis is something the other application needs to do. From what I understand, I think you are only adding a web API to an existing system so I think you need to really know how you can integrate with the other application. They should have clear APIs that are public for you to do this to access their features and data.
Since you have not mentioned if this other application is something like a secure enterprise solution or a Google API (has public API ) it would be difficult to tell exactly what you can expect from the other application.
I think you would need to try JSON web tokens (JWT )
I have not used it myself though . stormpath.com/blog/token-auth-spa –
It is useful for authenticating if a request to your controller. Here is a similar question as you have (I think) and how JWT could solve it How to use JWT in MVC application for authentication and authorization? and https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/876870/Implement-OAuth-JSON-Web-Tokens-Authentication-in
You can override the AuthorizeAttribute like this : https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee707357(v=vs.91).aspx . Your authorization logic of checking for whichever tokens/auth mechanism you decide to can be added to this new action filter. Then add that new attribute to your actions. So if your custom authorization attribute when overriding looks like this:
public class RestrictAccessToAssignedManagers : AuthorizationAttribute
Then your action would have the attribute decoration like this:
[RestrictAccessToAssignedManagers]
public ActionResult ShowallAssignees(int id)
Found a good article which could also be of help - https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/martinkearn/2015/03/25/securing-and-securely-calling-web-api-and-authorize/
My answer to your question will be based on:
I want to ask that other application if a user is valid or have users
ask the other application directly themselves and only allow access to
my app views if the answer is yes. So, in essence, I want to protect
my controllers based on the word of a remote application that contains
an exposed api for login/user validation.
Yes, to my humble opinion, oauth token-based approach is overkill for your need. Sometimes, keeping things simple (and stupid?) is best.
Since you are part of a distributed application, I suppose you can (literally) talk to the team in charge of the "other application/website" where requests that hit your controllers will be coming from.
So, I will skip your questions 1, 2, 3 and 4, which are oriented towards the token-based oauth approach, and suggest a rather different, "simplistic" and faster approach, which is the following:
For clarity purpose, let's call the other application "RemoteApp", and your application "MyApp", or "The other team" and "You", respectively.
-Step 1: You (MyApp) exchange a symmetric secret key with the other team (RemoteApp);
-Step 2: MyApp and RemoteApp agree on the algorithm that will be used to hash data that will be posted to MyApp when a user from RemoteApp requests a page on MyApp. Here, you can, for instance, use MD5 or SHA256 algorithms, which are well documented in MSDN and pretty easy to implement in C#;
Step 3: MyApp tells RemoteApp what its needs to be part of the posted data to validate/authenticate the request.
Here is an example:
Step 1: BSRabEhs54H12Czrq5Mn= (just a random secret key. You can choose/create your own);
Step 2: MD5 (this is the algorithm chosen by the 2 parties)
Step 3: The posted request data could include (at least 3 - 4 parameters or form fields, plus the checksum):
- UserName+RemoteApp fully-qualified domain name + someOther blabla data1 + someOther blabla data2 + checksum
The above information will be concatenated, without space. For instance, let's assume:
UserName = fanthom
RemoteApp fully-qualified domain name = www.remote.com
someOther blabla data1 = myControllerName
someOther blabla data2 = myActionName
The checksum will be generated as follows (function prototype):
generateMD5(string input, string secretKey)
which will be called with the following arguments:
string checkSum = generateMD5("fanthomwww.remote.commyControllerNamemyActionName", "BSRabEhs54H12Czrq5Mn=")
Notice that in the first argument the above 4 parameters have been concatenated, without space, and the second argument is the secret symmetric key.
the above will yield (actual md5 checksum):
checkSum = "ab84234a75430176cd6252d8e5d58137"
Then, RemoteApp will simply have to include the checkSum as an additional parameter or form field.
Finally, upon receiving a request, MyApp will simply have to do the same operation and verify the checkSum. That is, concatenate Request.Form["UserName"]+Request.Form["RemoteApp fully-qualified domain name"]+["someOther blabla data1"]+["someOther blabla data2"],
then use the md5 function with the secret key to verify if the obtained checksum matches the one sent in the request coming from RemoteApp.
If the two match, then the request is authentic. Otherwise, reject the request!
That'all Folks!
I seems you need to implement an OpenID/OAuth2 process.
This way, your apps will be able to utilise single-sign-on (SSO) for all your apps, and all you would have to do is set up your MVC5 app as an OpenID/OAuth2 client.
Take a look into Azure AD B2C which is perfectfor this (I am currently implementing this right now for 3 projects I am working on).
https://www.asp.net/mvc/overview/security/create-an-aspnet-mvc-5-app-with-facebook-and-google-oauth2-and-openid-sign-on
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/active-directory-b2c/
https://identityserver.io/
So your app is publicly addressable? I can't tell for sure from your description.
Well you only have these issues if a public client is requesting certain page views from you...
Now here's where i'm confused. If it's an external client accessing different parts of your distributed app, ALL the parts have this problem.
Generally the client authenticates itself at one place (say written by Team A), any other subsequent view requests would need to be checked as well (HTTP being connectionless/stateless), including others done by Team A? So your problem would already be solved (because it would be a problem for everyone, and they would have done something using an auth cookie + checking service, use the same checking service...)?
Which leads me to believe that the view requests are internal and not client facing, in which case... why is auth such a big deal?
If you could clarify your scenario around what requests you need to authenticate...
you are on right track. But instead of you implementing OAUTH and OpenIDConnect user third party which does the heavy lifting. One such tool is IdentityServer
https://identityserver.github.io/Documentation/docsv2/
Now answering your question from IdentityServer point of view
An access token needs to be generated -- true
Getting an access token is not part of the Account controller, it's part of OWIN middleware -- yes, for better design
The access token will be sent along with the requests for my contoller actions
My controller actions, decorated with the [Authorize] attribute, will parse the token and do the right thing -- Yes as a part of response header
Questions:
Q1: Should I generate the token or should the other app - the one with the db and user data? The identity server will generate token that you requested.
Q2: My controllers don't know anything about users. That data is in the other app. What specifically are the controllers parsing for under the hood in order to do the right thing? In essence, what specifically tells them, "yes, this request is OK. Return the view. - usually the token is sent back to the identtyServer to check for validity and to get access_token which will check if the user has access rights. if not [Authorize] attribute will throw error message and return
Q3: I started my project awhile back using a standard MVC5 project template that comes with VS2015 because I figured I'd be handling users/login etc. That turned out not to be the case. Am I going to have to go back and redo this project from scratch because that template doesn't fit this requirement or can I do some surgery on it and continue? For instance, I don't know if that template has all the OWIN stuff I need or maybe has too much extra junk (bloated Account controller, Entity Framework, etc.) to be easily transformed/maintained. - Yes u can delete the extra stuffs
Q4: Is token authorization overkill here? Is there an easier way to keep unauthorized users from accessing my controller actions that makes more sense given the nature of the project? -- It is not an over kill. It is the right thing to do for your scenario
I'm having trouble using authorization/roles in MVC5 (VS2013).
Authentication works pretty much out of the box (that's to say just by using Visual Studio to create the default MVC project). I change the DefaultConnection connection string to a valid (but non-existent) database. I then register a new user and the database is automatically created, with tables such as AspNetUsers and AspNetRoles.
However, I can't seem to do anything with roles. The first thing to do seemed to be to add a role with C# code like:
Roles.CreateRole("Admin");
I get an exception with the message:
'The Role Manager feature has not been enabled.'
I enable it in web.config with:
<roleManager enabled="true"/>
And now get the exception:
'Unable to connect to SQL Server database.'
This used to work very easily with System.Web.Security.SqlRoleProvider, but not with the new provider that comes as default with MVC5. There are lots of very complex articles on this, but it seems to me that it is something so essential and straightforward that there must be a simple way to get it working.
Many thanks for any help.
I've solved this now. It turns out that the Roles class is completely irrelevant to role management in MVC5, at least in terms of the out-of-the-box configuration.
The Roles class and Membership class are still there, with the Provider configured to SqlMembershipProvider.
However, this is NOT the provider used by the AccountController, which does not use the Membership class at all; it uses Microsoft.AspNet.Identity.UserManager.
While the generated AccountController provides plenty of examples of using UserManager, it does nothing related to roles.
The equivalent class for Roles is Microsoft.AspNet.Identity.RoleManager. There is full documentation for this in MSDN
I suggest referring to this article as it shows how you can create roles. Once you've created whatever roles are required, you can use the UserManager.AddToRole or UserManager.AddToRoleAsync method to add a user to a particular role.
I have a ASP.NET MVC site with a CAS server set up as the authentication type. I also have a separate database with a Users table and a Roles table (with a User being related to one or more roles). A User is only able to log into the system if the Username is both in the User table and on the CAS system. I have this solution working.
My problem is i now need some form of trigger on User.IsAuthenticated so i can track the current User (from my database), without the possibility that i am trying to allow tracking of a User that has logged out. What I've been thinking is i need to add the User to the HttpContext but i am not sure how to trigger the clearing of the User if the CAS session times out or if the User Logs out.
I also wish to have some functionality such as User.IsInRole (again using my database, not ASP.NET) but am not sure how to go about implementing this. I suppose if i can successfully add the User to the HttpContext then a IsInRole method would simply be a User.Roles.Contains(string role) method but how can that then be used if i wish, for example, to use a method with the DataAnnotation [Authorize(role = "ExampleRole")].
I have looked at questions such as How do I create a custom membership provider for ASP.NET MVC 2? but this doesn't work for me (possibly to do with me using the CAS authentication?)
Any guidance or background reading would be appreciated as i'm really not sure where i should even start. I have read up on GenericPrinciple, IPrinciple and IIdentity but I'm struggling to see how i can apply them to my current project.
Ended up with a custom Authorise Attribute that uses the CAS logon to check the user exists in my database. It also checks the roles of that user. I also used a static class to save the current user in the session with a logout method that abandons the session when the user logs out.
I have kind of a two parter for you. This link does a really good job of explaining how to replace the HttpContext User with your own object: http://bradygaster.com/custom-authentication-with-mvc-3.0
His approach uses MVC filters, but you can also catch the Authentication event in the Global.asax file. Using the forms system with your own implementation can be trivial or not depending on what you're doing, but it boils down to calling FormsAuthentication.SetAuthCookie and .SignOut, amidst your own logic.
public static void FormsLogin(this User user, bool persist)
{
FormsAuthentication.SetAuthCookie(user.DisplayName, persist);
user.AddHistory("Login event.", HistoryType.Login, "SYSTEM");
Users.OnUserLogin(user);
SetLastActivity(user);
}
public static void FormsLogout(this User user)
{
FormsAuthentication.SignOut();
}
Lastly, once you've got the login stuff working out, you can use your own more complex permission system by making a custom Auth Attribute. I remember piecing this together from some other answers and articles but I can't seem to find the sources at the moment, I will try and edit with sources for credit where it's due, if I find them. For now, all I can offer is this gist which offers up one of the attributes I use: https://gist.github.com/1959509
Keep in mind the only really relevant part there is the override of OnAuthorization, which does the actual work.
I am trying to figure out a small dillema. I have a piece of functionality that is not supported by the SqlMembership, SqlRole, and SqlProfile providers. The requirements call for using the EF, and also multiple custom features within both the Membership and Role providers.
More over I have the need to add a 4th provider to the mix - One that manages User - to - group membership.
So the question here is:
Add the code for group membership in the Role provider.
-- or --
Add the code for group membership to its own GroupProvider inheriting directly from ProviderBase.
I am leaning more towards #2, however there are a few considerations to iron out:
How to provide configuration settings to the GroupProvider? - I know i can potentially use a custom section in my web.config, however I wanted to add it under the <system.web> section along side the Role, Membership, and Profile providers.
When in the execution life-cycle of the provider do the public override void Initialize(string name, NameValueCollection config) fires? What causes this to be executed?
Thanks,
Martin
Well, i couldn't find any info on this so I decided to stick my custom code into the RoleProvider. Accessing the custom functions of the RoleProvider is as simple as:
string providerName = "MyProvider";
CustomRolesProvider provider = Roles.Providers[providerName] as CustomRolesProvider;
Whenever the provider is accessed it fires the Initialize event if it is not yet initialized - which reads the config settings from the Web.Config under the System.Web section