been trying to figure this out forever, and I don't think it's supposed to be that complex...
I have an AzureAD setup with an OAuth2 Connection that I want to point to Cognito so that I can authenticate users in the User Pool, get a token back and call AppSync APIs, etc. Important note here, I cannot use Amplify in the current situation.
I have configured my App Client as follows:
The ngrok URLs are because I'm working on a cloud based app that needs tunneling. I have multiple URLs in there in the hope that I'd get one that works, to no avail.
To configure the OAuth2 Connection in Azure, I'm asked for 3 URLs,
authorize, token and refresh.
Here are the values I put into these fields
When I initiate the auth process with this connection, I get the redirect_mismatch error. I have no idea why. When I open the HostedUI, it shows up just fine, but it points to login instead of authorize. The redirect_uri, however, is localhost:3000/ as seen at the end of the address bar.
Clearly, I'm missing something, but I have no idea what. Should there be additional parameters in the config of my URLs on Azure's side? Anyone ever connected the two in this way? The company insists on this flow, and I just can't wrap my head around it.
Any and all help apreciated, thank you.
NOTE: There is a possibility to configure a custom OAuth2 connection on the side of Azure with more parameters, should this be the way? I do not, however, know what to put in these extra fields.
In the case of a Bot authentication, as it is the case in my situation, in Callback URLs, add the following:
https://token.botframework.com/.auth/web/redirect
This allows to open the authentication window when authenticating your bot.
Related
I have stuck in here and couldn't find a solid solution.
I use PHP in server-side and Vanilla JS in the client side.
In server-side, I'm generating a auth token (https://www.pubnub.com/docs/general/basics/manage-access) for current logged in user's channel to make him able to read his channel messsages by the following code:
I'm also generating a new one when the key timeout so all OK with the generation.
But my problem is starts here:
I'm passing the key into the client like this:
And user is getting access to the channel. But the thing is, I'm passing this auth key to the client-side. Which is someone that get this user's auth token; can setup their own client and can read messages that sent to this user.
How can I deal with that?
And another one:
I'm publishing to a channel in PHP like this. But I'm able do to that without setting auth token. I'm sure auth token system is working because when I pass wrong auth key to the client it's giving 403 forbidden. But however, I'm able to publish to channel without auth key in here. Is this because it's server-side?
Thanks!
Googled everything...
someone that get this user's auth token; can setup their own client and can read messages that sent to this user
This authorization strategy is the same as JWT. How will someone get this auth token? If you are using a secure connection to your server (TSL, aka https), and your PHP server is secured, then that is all you can do. This is the internet :)
Now how secure is the end user's machine? Are they susceptible to phishing or other schemes that might allow a hacker to gain access to their machine? Humans are the easiest thing to hack and you can't really do anything to secure them ;)
So as far as PubNub is concerned with security, you are doing exactly what very large companies have been doing for over 10 years with PubNub. The question is how secure is your server that a hacker can't get access to your code and data and get your PubNub secret key. In my 9+ years at PubNub, I've never known this to happen.
granting permissions on your channel
You are granting too many permissions but it doesn't have any negative side effects.
read - subscribe (receive messages), fetch (messages from history), and some presence stuff (get/set state, here now)
write - publish (send messages)
get and set - this is for PubNub Objects only which is different than pub/sub.
Again, no harm comes from granting permissions that have no effect on the resources you are granting to but it adds to the size of the auth token (just a little bit in this case).
able do to that without setting auth token
When you do setToken you are setting that on the pubnub object that you use to invoke PubNub operations. The PubNUb SDK automatically adds the auth token as a query parameter in the request. So it is being passed automatically for you.
Open your browser console, select the Network tab, and look at any PubNub request/url. You will see the query parameter names auth and the value is your auth token.
PubNub Secret Key give you all access
The secret key gives your server the ability to grant permissions (generate an auth token) AND it gives your server all access to all things in your PubNub key set. Don't let that secret key get compromised.
Hello I manage 2 Liberty servers that serve UI and BFF content respectively and I want to secure them both with corporate oidc OP. Having heard about inbound propagation, I was thinking in propagating the access token from UI to BFF.
However I didnt find documentation on how should I configure it to outbound propagate the access token after successful authentication. The documentation only refers to inbound propagation. Only thing I see is a WASOidcClient_*** cookie being set, which I know nothing about it.
I also heard about jwtSso-1.0 feature and tried to create my own JWT with the necessary user information, but can't make this feature get the desired claims from the ID Token (already opened this other question).
So I'm unclear of:
Am I designing this correctly?
How can I get the UI Liberty propagate access token after successful authentication, preferably without coding anything?
Should I propagate access token, or IDToken? BFF needs basic user information that is present in IDToken
What is the WASOidcClient_*** cookie for? Can it be used by different Liberty instances to authenticate requests? Is the name configurable? Im just curious, because this cookie is probably proprietary and not portable, not much desired.
Appreciate it in advance!!
I'm working on an Absinthe GraphQL API for my app. I'm still learning the procedure(so please go easy on me).
I've a Absinthe/GraphQL MyAppWeb.schema.ex file in which I use for my queries and mutations. My question is how do I use this API for authenticating the user on both Mobile and Web app?
How do set a cookie(httpOnly & secure) in my web app and access/refresh tokens in a single Absinthe API to serve my website and mobile app. Basically what I'm trying to learn is how do I authenticate the user based on specific platform.
If my question sounds bit confusing, I would be happy to provide more information related to my question. I would really be grateful if someone could explain the procedure, I've been very stuck on this for a while.
I would avoid using authentication mechanisms provided by absinthe(if there are any). Depending on what front-end you are using, I would go with JSON API authentication. The flow on server goes the following way:
Create a endpoint for login that will receive a user and password and will return a refresh token.
Create a endpoint for exchanging refresh token for access token.
Use a library like guardian to generate your refresh/access tokens.
Create a phoenix plug for authentication that will check your tokens, guardian has some built-in plugs for this.
Now on device you have to implement:
Ability to save refresh and access token on device.
Have a global handler for injecting access token on authorized requests.
Have a global handler for case when access token is expired. (you usually check if your request returns Unauthorized, then you should request a new access token from the server using your refresh token)
This seems like a crude implementation, however I would advise in implementing your system instead of using a black box library that you have no idea how it works under the hood.
There is a lot of good content on the internet that explains how to secure a Spring API with Keycloak: Create a Client that represents the API Service in Keycloak and use a link like the one below to get the access and refresh token:
<Domain>/auth/realms/<realm>/protocol/openid-connect/auth/{some parameters}
This yields both tokens. So far so good.
Now, however, I am not sure how the flow for the frontend accessing the API should look like.
Should the frontend directly access this endpoint and, therefore, obtain the access and refresh token? That would mean that the API can only have the access-type public because there is no way to store the client (the API) secret securely.
Or should there be a third server that somehow stores the refresh token for each user, that the user can call if his access token is no longer valid. This server would then use the client's refresh token (and the client secret that could be stored securely, since it would be in the backend) to get a new access token from Keycloak and would forward it to the user.
I guess the main question that I am asking is, whether the client/user should get the refresh token.
If one needs to implement a logic according to the second option, I would be interested in a link or description of how something like this can be done in Spring.
I think, in either case you need to use the Authorization Code Flow. The implicit flow, which was recommended for SPAs (frontends without a backend server) in former versions of OAuth2 must not be used anymore.
The best option is to have a backend server, so the user retrieves the auth code via redirection and the backend server exchanges this auth code with the access and refresh tokens (and keep them without forwarding them to the frontend).
If there is no backend in place and your frontend needs to retrieve and hold the tokens directly, I would recommend to use the Authorization Code Flow with a public client and the PKCE extension (which - put simply - ensures that the entity asking for the auth code is the same as the entity asking for the tokens and that the auth code was not stolen and used by a foreign entity). There are several sources with more detailed explanations, which might help you, for example: https://auth0.com/docs/flows/authorization-code-flow-with-proof-key-for-code-exchange-pkce
Hope this helps you with your architectural considerations.
My webapp has means of abuse, users can access things they're not supposed to, such as 127.0.0.1/users/1 & 127.0.0.1/users/2 & 127.0.0.1/users/3 and so on, within these it reveals the user's registration email, ip, etc (via JSON, so the web server can return customized messages, greetings, and allow users to edit account data within profile settings)
This is what my route looks like:
forum.GET("/users/:user_id", routeFunc(UsersGET))
I'm using Gin-Gonic HTTP framework to create a dummy forum, can someone tell me how to stop users from accessing the /users/ route whilst allowing the actual web server to use freely? and maybe link me to the correct direction. Thanks!
(The server uses it to return things like, Welcome Back, USERNAME).
You need to add authentication and authorization to your server.
Authentication is where a user will prove their identity to you by means of a shared secret (like a password hash) and authorization is where you check if that authenticated user is allowed to take the action they are trying to make.
There are many third party services that might help you with this (e.g. Auth0) where they can handle authentication for you and provide you with libraries for authorization.
Usually people bind authentication into their Gin-Gonic server by means of middleware (e.g. gin-jwt) which is run in front of every http request. Once that middleware authenticates the user, you can add some logic to your handle that states only users can only view themselves.
Hope this helps. Good luck.