I want to determine a simple and useful pattern for user authentication in a web app being written in golang.
I have come up with two patterns. First one is enabling the programmer to have his functions separate form the authentication logic, and has cleaner HandleFunc parts in main() that one can see only by loking main() to see what parts are under authentication control.
Second one is making programmer include a decision in every function deal with authentication required urls. An if statement checks by a authp() function defined else where.
Which one is better pattern for such necessity?
What are the better patterns for this job?
Is it even possible to pass a function to http.HandleFunc that has signature other than func urlFunc (ResponseWriter, *Request) bu like func urlFunc (successFunc, failFunc) or func urlFunc (ResponseWriter, *Request, successFunc, failFunc) as in authenticationGateKeeper function of First Way below, if not a suitable workaround for that?
//First Way
package main
func authGateKeeper(successFunc, failFunc) {
if (authp()) {
successFunc
} else {
failFunc
}
}
func authp() boolean {
//authentication logic, db query, or session check etc.
}
//usage in main
http.HandleFunc("/", authGateKeeper)
//Second Way; other alternative, in each function check pattern
func f(w, r) {
if (authp()) {
//function's processes
} else {
//the fail case function or processes
}
}
func authp() boolean {
//authentication logic, db query, or session check etc.
}
//usage in main
http.HandleFunc("/", f)
There are many ways to spin this, and it's arguable whether one is outright "better". I'd strongly suggest writing some middleware that wraps your routes and enforces the check, calling the wrapped handler only on success.
Note that I'm going to make a few assumptions here as you haven't told us how you're managing sessions (cookies? server-side?) and/or what kind of authorization you might need on top of authentication.
// Middleware - a function that sits in the 'middle' of your request processing.
func RequireAuth(h http.Handler) http.Handler) {
fn := func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
// Assuming gorilla/sessions
session, err := store.Get("name", r)
if err != nil {
// Raise HTTP 500
return
}
// We'll assume you're storing the userID in the cookie|server session
// upon login elsewhere.
id := session.Values["userID"]
// Probably returns a *yourapp.User
user, err := db.GetUser(id)
if err != nil {
// Raise HTTP 500
return
}
if user == nil {
http.Error(w, http.StatusText(http.StatusUnauthorized), http.StatusUnauthorized)
// Don't forget these 'naked' returns - if you miss one, your
// handler will keep processing beyond the error and result in
// unintended side effects
return
}
// Further checks here - i.e. checking user.Active == true, etc.
// The userID matches one in the DB, so let's proceed
h.ServeHTTP(w, r)
}
return http.HandlerFunc(fn)
}
// And in your router - assuming just vanilla net/http
http.Handle("/", RequireAuth(yourHandlerFunc))
http.Handle("/", RequireAuth(someOtherHandler))
// Note that using gorilla/mux or goji can help give you "subrouters" so you
// don't have to wrap every single route with your middleware (messy, error prone)
I'd also suggest some reading on Go middleware1 composition2 which will help you in the future.
If you want to call a custom error page, just write a handler - e.g. UnauthorizedHandler that satisfies http.Handler and just call UnauthorizedHandler.ServeHTTP(w, r) instead of http.Error along the way.
Related
I am using echo to build a web server in go. What is the best way to pass objects around middlewares and a handler apart from using context.Set method?
For example, let's consider the following case:
func mw(next echo.HandlerFunc) echo.HandlerFunc {
return func(c echo.Conext) error {
var value TypeX = // load value of type TypeX based on query parameters
c.Set("key", value)
return next(c)
}
}
func h1(c echo.context) error {
value := c.Get("key").(TypeX)
return c.JSON(http.StatusOk, value.H1())
}
func h2(c echo.context) error {
value := c.Get("key").(TypeX)
return c.JSON(http.StatusOk, value.H2())
}
func registerRoute(e *echo.Echo) {
e.Get("/test", h)
}
Is there any way to get rid of get/set methods? It seems like an unclean way of doing this operation. I am open to complete refactoring, creating new structures/interfaces to make this happen.
To take this example further, lets say my apis can fall into bucket1, bucket2, bucket3. Value would call the method b1, b2, b3 based on which bucked it falls in. These buckets can be identified by adding them as middleware mwB1, mwB2, mwB3 each of which calls the respective method. Hence, all my apis would first call the middleware mw; then one of mwB1, mwB2, mwB3 and finally the actual handler, something like, e.Get("/test", h, mw, mwB2). I don't want to load value everywhere and get/set seems unclean to me (unless that is the standard way of doing this).
I reuse the http client connection to make external calls to a single endpoint. An excerpt of the program is shown below:
var AppCon MyApp
func New(user, pass string, platformURL *url.URL, restContext string) (*MyApp, error) {
if AppCon == (MyApp{}) {
AppCon = MyApp{
user: user,
password: pass,
URL: platformURL,
Client: &http.Client{Timeout: 30 * time.Second},
RESTContext: restContext,
}
cj, err := cookiejar.New(nil)
if err != nil {
return &AppCon, err
}
AppCon.cookie = cj
}
return &AppCon, nil
}
// This is an example only. There are many more functions which accept *MyApp as a pointer.
func(ma *MyApp) GetUser(name string) (string, error){
// Return user
}
func main(){
for {
// Get messages from a queue
// The message returned from the queue provide info on which methods to call
// 'm' is a struct with message metadata
c, err := New(m.un, m.pass, m.url)
go func(){
// Do something i.e c.GetUser("123456")
}()
}
}
I now have the requirement to set up a client connections with different endpoints/credentials received via queue messages.
The problem I foresee is I can't just simply modify AppCon with the new endpoint details since a pointer to MyApp is returned, resulting in resetting c. This can impact a goroutine making a HTTP call to an unintended endpoint. To make matters non trivial, the program is not meant to have awareness of the endpoints (I was considering using a switch statement) but rather receive what it needs via queue messages.
Given the issues I've called out are correct, are there any recommendations on how to solve it?
EDIT 1
Based on the feedback provided, I am inclined to believe this will solve my problem:
Remove the use of a Singleton of MyApp
Decouple the http client from MyApp which will enable it for reuse
var httpClient *http.Client
func New(user, pass string, platformURL *url.URL, restContext string) (*MyApp, error) {
AppCon = MyApp{
user: user,
password: pass,
URL: platformURL,
Client: func() *http.Client {
if httpClient == nil {
httpClient = &http.Client{Timeout: 30 * time.Second}
}
return httpClient
}()
RESTContext: restContext,
}
return &AppCon, nil
}
// This is an example only. There are many more functions which accept *MyApp as a pointer.
func(ma *MyApp) GetUser(name string) (string, error){
// Return user
}
func main(){
for {
// Get messages from a queue
// The message returned from the queue provide info on which methods to call
// 'm' is a struct with message metadata
c, err := New(m.un, m.pass, m.url)
// Must pass a reference
go func(c *MyApp){
// Do something i.e c.GetUser("123456")
}(c)
}
}
Disclaimer: this is not a direct answer to your question but rather an attempt to direct you to a proper way of solving your problem.
Try to avoid a singleton pattern for you MyApp. In addition, New is misleading, it doesn't actually create a new object every time. Instead you could be creating a new instance every time, while preserving the http client connection.
Don't use constructions like this: AppCon == (MyApp{}), one day you will shoot in your leg doing this. Use instead a pointer and compare it to nil.
Avoid race conditions. In your code you start a goroutine and immediately proceed to the new iteration of the for loop. Considering you re-use the whole MyApp instance, you essentially introduce a race condition.
Using cookies, you make your connection kinda stateful, but your task seems to require stateless connections. There might be something wrong in such an approach.
I'm learning go and ran into some design issues while developing web app. The app has main route "/" where user can submit a simple form. With those form values I am calling external API and unmarshaling response into some struct. Now from here I want to make another call based on retrieved values to another external API and I'm not sure what's the proper way of doing this. Here is a snippet for better understandment:
func main() {
http.HandleFunc("/", mainHandler)
log.Fatal(http.ListenAndServe(":8080", nil))
}
func mainHandler(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
//renders form template
//makes post and retrieves data from api
//here with retrieved data I want to make another call to different API,
// but mainHandler would get too big and complex. I'm not sure how should I pass this data to
// another handler or redirect to another handler with this data.
}
The handlers' semantics should be designed to match the desired HTTP behavior, regardless of the code complexity. If you want to handle a single client request by doing a bunch of stuff, that should be a single handler. If the handler becomes too complex, break it up. Handlers are just functions and can be broken up exactly like any other function - by extracting some part of it into another function and calling that new function. To take you pseudocode:
func mainHandler(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
err := renderTemplate(w)
if err != nil { ... }
err, data := postToApi()
if err != nil { ... }
err, data2 := postToApi2(data)
if err != nil { ... }
}
There's no reason for those functions to be handlers themselves or to get the client involved with a redirect. Just break up your logic the way you normally break up logic - it doesn't matter that it's an HTTP handler.
Hi golearner, in the mainHandler just render the form and make another handler kinda "/formaction" to handle the form, in that way you can easily organize your code.
Go has come with a new package called context and with recent versions (Go 1.7 I think) we should be able to use it in the same way as gorilla/context package:
http://www.gorillatoolkit.org/pkg/context
With gorilla context you can very easily set and get variables that are relevant to a request, it's handlers, and middlewares.
To set a value in gorilla context is really easy:
func handleFunc(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
context.Set(r, "foo", "bar")
}
To get the value we can do:
func handleFunc(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
val := context.Get(r, "foo")
}
I understand that we can use this in middlewares so that the next middleware can use variables that were set in previous middleware. I would like to be able to do this with Go context package.
I understand that to get a value is quite simple like this:
func handleFunc(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
fmt.Println(r.Context().Value("foo"))
}
But I have no idea how to set the value. It was not very intuitive for me and I don't really understand how to do it.
See "Exploring the context package", using WithValue and the context associated to the Request:
Middleware
Middleware in Go refers to an http handler which wraps around a multiplexer. There are several 3rd party middleware solutions (such as negroni), but really the standard library supports a very similar pattern. The use of a Context in the request allows us to hold data in the request.
See the example code for invocation and definition.
func putClientIPIntoContext(r *http.Request) context.Context {
ci := r.RemoteAddr
fwd := r.Header.Get("X-Forwarded-For")
if fwd != "" {
ci = fwd
}
ctx := context.WithValue(r.Context(), ClientIPKey, ci)
return ctx
}
The Context can store request-scoped variables.
It’s useful when writing ‘middleware’, but it’s a little bit ‘anti-pattern’ — it’s a bit magical, because it’s not type-safe.
See more at "Pitfalls of context values and how to avoid or mitigate them in Go".
The example below only shows how you might use the authentication logic from above to verify that when a user is logged in when visiting any page with a path prefix of /dashboard/.
A similar approach could be used to verify that a user is an admin before allowing them access to any page with a path prefix of /admin/.
func requireUser(next http.Handler) http.Handler {
return http.HandlerFunc(func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
user := lookupUser(r)
if user == nil {
// No user so redirect to login
http.Redirect(w, r, "/login", http.StatusFound)
return
}
ctx := context.WithValue(r.Context(), "user", user)
next.ServeHTTP(w, r.WithContext(ctx))
})
}
func main() {
dashboard := http.NewServeMux()
dashboard.HandleFunc("/dashboard/hi", printHi)
dashboard.HandleFunc("/dashboard/bye", printBye)
mux := http.NewServeMux()
// ALL routes that start with /dashboard/ require that a
// user is authenticated using the requireUser middleware
mux.Handle("/dashboard/", requireUser(dashboard))
mux.HandleFunc("/", home)
http.ListenAndServe(":3000", addRequestID(mux))
}
As kostix comments, use Context wisely, like Dave Cheney suggest in "Context is for cancelation"
I'm a little bit confused. Much of examples shows usage of both: http.ServeFile(..) and http.FileServer(..), but seems they have very close functionality. Also I have found no information about how to set custom NotFound handler.
// This works and strip "/static/" fragment from path
fs := http.FileServer(http.Dir("static"))
http.Handle("/static/", http.StripPrefix("/static/", fs))
// This works too, but "/static2/" fragment remains and need to be striped manually
http.HandleFunc("/static2/", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
http.ServeFile(w, r, r.URL.Path[1:])
})
http.ListenAndServe(":8080", nil)
I've tried to read source code and both of them use serveFile(ResponseWriter, *Request, FileSystem, string, bool) underlying function. However http.FileServer return fileHandler with its own ServeHTTP() method and make some preparation work before serving file (eg path.Clean()).
So why need this separation? Which method better to use? And how can I set custom NotFound handler, for example when requested file not found?
The main difference is that http.FileServer does effectively almost 1:1 mapping of an HTTP prefix with a filesystem. In plain english, it serves up an entire directory path. and all its children.
Say you had a directory called /home/bob/static and you had this setup:
fs := http.FileServer(http.Dir("/home/bob/static"))
http.Handle("/static/", http.StripPrefix("/static", fs))
Your server would take requests for e.g. /static/foo/bar and serve whatever is at /home/bob/static/foo/bar (or 404)
In contrast, the ServeFile is a lower level helper that can be used to implement something similar to FileServer, or implement your own path munging potentially, and any number of things. It simply takes the named local file and sends it over the HTTP connection. By itself, it won't serve a whole directory prefix (unless you wrote a handler that did some lookup similar to FileServer)
NOTE Serving up a filesystem naively is a potentially dangerous thing (there are potentially ways to break out of the rooted tree) hence I recommend that unless you really know what you're doing, use http.FileServer and http.Dir as they include checks to make sure people can't break out of the FS, which ServeFile doesn't.
Addendum
Your secondary question, how do you do a custom NotFound handler, unfortunately, is not easily answered. Because this is called from internal function serveFile as you noticed, there's no super easy place to break into that. There are potentially some sneaky things like intercepting the response with your own ResponseWriter which intercepts the 404 response code, but I'll leave that exercise to you.
Here a handler which sends a redirect to "/" if file is not found. This comes in handy when adding a fallback for an Angular application, as suggested here, which is served from within a golang service.
Note: This code is not production ready. Only illustrative (at best :-)
package main
import "net/http"
type (
// FallbackResponseWriter wraps an http.Requesthandler and surpresses
// a 404 status code. In such case a given local file will be served.
FallbackResponseWriter struct {
WrappedResponseWriter http.ResponseWriter
FileNotFound bool
}
)
// Header returns the header of the wrapped response writer
func (frw *FallbackResponseWriter) Header() http.Header {
return frw.WrappedResponseWriter.Header()
}
// Write sends bytes to wrapped response writer, in case of FileNotFound
// It surpresses further writes (concealing the fact though)
func (frw *FallbackResponseWriter) Write(b []byte) (int, error) {
if frw.FileNotFound {
return len(b), nil
}
return frw.WrappedResponseWriter.Write(b)
}
// WriteHeader sends statusCode to wrapped response writer
func (frw *FallbackResponseWriter) WriteHeader(statusCode int) {
Log.Printf("INFO: WriteHeader called with code %d\n", statusCode)
if statusCode == http.StatusNotFound {
Log.Printf("INFO: Setting FileNotFound flag\n")
frw.FileNotFound = true
return
}
frw.WrappedResponseWriter.WriteHeader(statusCode)
}
// AddFallbackHandler wraps the handler func in another handler func covering authentication
func AddFallbackHandler(handler http.HandlerFunc, filename string) http.HandlerFunc {
Log.Printf("INFO: Creating fallback handler")
return func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
Log.Printf("INFO: Wrapping response writer in fallback response writer")
frw := FallbackResponseWriter{
WrappedResponseWriter: w,
FileNotFound: false,
}
handler(&frw, r)
if frw.FileNotFound {
Log.Printf("INFO: Serving fallback")
http.Redirect(w, r, "/", http.StatusSeeOther)
}
}
}
It can be added as in this example (using goji as mux):
mux.Handle(pat.Get("/*"),
AddFallbackHandler(http.FileServer(http.Dir("./html")).ServeHTTP, "/"))