Introduction/Background
I'm looking to enable token authentication for multiple microservices and users. Both applications and users are $user objects.
I need to be able to authenticate once (hence token) using an auth server on a subdomain. I then need to be able to pass around a token that can be managed (revoked/refreshed whatever) by the Auth server.
The microservices are Laravel based, so using Airlock makes sense. Airlock generates tokens easily using:
$token = $user->createToken(now())
However, I see no method to manually check the validity of these tokens... So I assumed they are available in the database.
Airlock suggests that the token be returned as follows:
$token->plainTextToken
This produces a token, as expected. To my understanding, this is a public facing token. It does not match the token in the personal_access_tokens table.
Lets call these PublicToken and PrivateToken.
The private token is actually located in:
$token->accessToken->token
I want to be able to manually switch between a PublicToken. I assume Airlock is doing some security here.. and I want to invoke these secure methods required to check a PublicToken against the PrivateToken.
Please do not say "it's in middleware" ... The point is that I have multiple microservices and usertypes sharing a database. I have an auth server that will end up on secure architecture, and some of the other microservices wont be.... fundamentally I need to do a manual authentication because normal plug and play wont work. Using Airlock as the foundation is great. But I need to be able to know how to convert between public and private tokens.
Essentially I'm looking for the real version of the following psuedocode:
if( someTranslationFunction($public_token) == $private_token ) ...
TLDR: The problem
How do I validate a $token->plainText value against a $token manually?
Related
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.
I'm creating an API server which will be consumed by a mobile app that I will work on later. I have yet to see any reference of API best practices related to user flow and returned data even after searching for several hours.
My question is whether the login response of an API should return the a personal access token with the refresh token along with the user info? Or should I just return the token and make another API call for getting the user info.
I could just do what I have in mind but I'm trying to learn the best practices so that I don't have to adjust a lot of things later.
I need suggestions as well as good references related to my question.
Thank you.
It depends on what you are using for your authentication. If you are using libraries like Laravel Passport or JWT, you can have the token endpoint which returns the access token, refresh token, validity period and the token type (Bearer). You can then have an authenticated endpoint which will be used to get a user's profile based of the token passed in the request header.
However, if you go through the documentation for those libraries, in most there is an allowance to manually generate a token. You can use this in a custom endpoint that will return the token as well as the user profile Passport Manually Generate Token.
If you are using JWT, you can also embed a few user properties in the token itself. The client can the get the profile info from the JWT itself without having to make a round trip to the server. Passport ADD Profile to JWT
If you have a custom way in which you are handling authentication, you can pass the token as well as the user profile in the same response.
In the end, it's up to you to decide what suits you best.
Have you looked at OpenID Connect? It's another layer on top of OAuth 2.0 and provides user authentication (OAuth 2.0 does not cover authentication, it just assumes it happens) and ways to find information about the current user.
It has the concept of an ID_token, in addition to the OAuth access token, and also provides a /userinfo endpoint to retrieve information about the user.
You could put user information in your access token, but security best practice is to NOT allow your access token to be accessible from JavaScript (i.e. use HTTP_ONLY cookies to store your access token).
I would like to set up an IT solution based on the Front / Back principle.
Front side I would use a technology like React, Angular and Back side I would use a technology like java spring boot to implement controller Rest.
The front will make Rest requests on the back to retrieve data.
I would like to add a security concept to the solution by implementing the JWT standard on the back. Thus the client, knowing the secret, could request a token back and could make requests by specifying the token via the header of the request.
I found several tutorials explaining how to set up this type of solutions. In particular: https://medium.com/#nydiarra/secure-...n-e57a25806c50
In this tutorial, we assume that we define somewhere (here in a H2 database) the different users of the app and their role (admin or standard).
So the front could ask a token but it would have to indicate the user and his password and the secret defined. The back looks in the database and gives a token relative to the role defined for this user.
My question is simple. Do we have to define users and roles if we want to use JWT?
What I would have liked to do is not to inform and not to store potential users and their roles.
Simply the front requests a token with the secret without giving user and the back gives a token. Which will be used later in the header of the requests.
I implement authentication for my API service and consider Laravel 5.2 token-based authentication for this. Is there any reasons to use Json Web Tokens instead? Is it actually comparable? I found tymondesigns/jwt-auth
package and some tutorials about it. But since Laravel 5.2 supports token authentication natively what is the purpose of this package?
Laravel 5.2 ships with token-based authentication that checks all requests made, look for the token, and validates them against a custom token column in the users table. That's all there is to it.
The JWT-auth package has more to it:
You can specify a secret key that signs your client tokens with a hashing algorithm, in the similiar way that Laravel hashes passwords so they are not readable if someone might access your database.
You may set a TTL (time to live) and refresh TTL value for how long a token should be valid.
You get Providers and Facades to help you manage the authentication logic when implementing your service.
Also: A JWT token consists of 3 parts, (header, body, signature). These parts can hold information about eg. user claims/permissions/whatever. The laravel token is just a random string and it self holds no further information at all.
I have been reading about JWT.
But from what I read it is not an authentication mechanism but more like a crucial component in a Authentication mechanism.
I have currently implemented a solution which works, but it was just to try out JWT and see how it works. But what I am after now is how one should make use of it. From my experience of it its basically just an encryption mechanism that gives you a unique encrypted key. You are also able to put information inside of this token.
I am wanting to implement it in terms on a ASP.NET web api 2 to be consumed by a mobile application.
So step 1:
app => Server : Login (user, pasword)
Server => app : Login OK, heres your JWT
app => server : Get my profile (sends JWT with request)
Server then decrypts JWT and determines the requests Identity.
Now this is just my understanding of it, Look I could be on the totally wrong path.
Is the Ideal of JWT so that you dont have to authenticate on every request? I just authenticate the users credentials once (on the initial login) and there on after the server can simply use JWT and no have to lookup the users pw and user in the DB?
I just want to use the JWT to Identity who the user is. I will then authorize then after i have authenticated them. As I know there is a big confused with the new MVC and Authentication and Authorization.
So what my question comes down to.
How can I safely and effectively Implement a Authentication Mechanism Using JWT?
I don't want to just cough something up that seems to work and not have any Idea of the security implications. I am sure that there exists a source some where that has possibly designed a secure mechanism that would suit my requirements.
My requirements are:
Must only have to check db for users credentials once off per session? Due to the use of bcrypt using a lot of resources to compare passwords.
Must be able to identify the user from their request. (I.e who they are, userId will be sufficient) and preferably without accessing the DB as well
Should be as low overhead as possible, with regards to resources on the server side processing the request.
If an intruder had to copy a devices previous request, then he should not be able to access the real users data. (obviously)
Thanks
Your understanding of JWTs is good. But here are a couple corrections and some recommendations.
Authentication and Authorization
JWTs have nothing to do with authentication. Hitting your DB and hashing passwords only happens when you authenticate on creation of the JWT. This is orthogonal to JWTs and you can do that in any way you like. I personally like Membership Reboot, which also has a good example of using JWTs.
Theoretically, you could have the user enter a password once a year and have the JWT be valid that entire year. This most likely not the best solution, if the JWT gets stolen at any point the users resources would be compromised.
Encryption
Tokens can, but don't have to be encrypted. Encrypting your tokens will increase the complexity of your system and amount of computation your server needs to read the JWTs. This might be important if you require that no one is able to read the token when it is at rest.
Tokens are always cryptographically signed by the issuer to ensure their integrity. Meaning they cannot be tampered with by the user or a third party.
Claims
Your JWTs can contain any information you want. The users name, birthdate, email, etc. You do this with claims based authorization. You then just tell your provider to make a JWT with these claims from the Claims Principle. The following code is from that Membership Reboot example and it shows you how this is done.
public override Task GrantResourceOwnerCredentials(OAuthGrantResourceOwnerCredentialsContext context)
{
var svc = context.OwinContext.Environment.GetUserAccountService<UserAccount>();
UserAccount user;
if (svc.Authenticate("users", context.UserName, context.Password, out user))
{
var claims = user.GetAllClaims();
var id = new System.Security.Claims.ClaimsIdentity(claims, "MembershipReboot");
context.Validated(id);
}
return base.GrantResourceOwnerCredentials(context);
}
This allows you to control with precision whom is accessing your resources, all without hitting your processor intensive authentication service.
Implementation
A very easy way to implement a Token provider is to use Microsoft's OAuth Authorization Server in your WebAPI project. It give you the bare bones of what you need to make a OAuth server for your API.
You could also look into Thinktecture's Identity Server which would give you much easier control over users. For instance, you can easily implement refresh tokens with identity server where the user is authenticated once and then for a certain amount of time (maybe a month) they can continue getting short lived JWTs from the Identity Server. The refresh tokens are good because they can be revoked, whereas JWTs cannot. The downside of this solution is that you need to set up another server or two to host the Identity service.
To deal with your last point, that an intruder should not be able to copy the last request to get access to a resource, you must use SSL at a bare minimum. This will protect the token in transport.
If you are protecting something extremely sensitive, you should keep the token lifetime to a very short window of time. If you are protecting something less sensitive, you could make the lifetime longer. The longer the token if valid, the larger the window of time a attacker will have to impersonate the authenticated user if the user's machine is compromised.
I've written detailed blog post about configuring the OWIN Authorization server to issue signed JSON Web Tokens instead of default token. So the resource servers (Audience) can register with the Authorization server, and then they can use the JWT tokens issued by Token issuer party without the need to unify machineKey values between all parties. You can read the post JSON Web Token in ASP.NET Web API 2 using Owin
For the formal concept . The Authentication is the process of verifying who a user is, while authorization is the process of verifying what they have access to.
Let’s see the real life example
Imagine that your neighbor has asked you to feed his pets while he is away. In this example, you have the authorization to access the kitchen and open the cupboard storing the pet food. However, you can’t go into your neighbor’s bedroom as he did not explicitly permit you to do so. Even though you had the right to enter the house (authentication), your neighbor only allowed you access to certain areas (authorization).
For more detailed and for users who like more STEP BY STEP implementation on practical use of JSON Web Token in WEB API. This is must read post Secure WebAPI Using JSON WEB TOKEN
Updated to use: System.IdentityModel.Tokens.Jwt -Version 5.1.4