I have a model say TestModel as follows:
class TestModel(models.Model):
name = models.CharField()
description = models.TextField()
Now I can use a ModelForm to save data to this model. However, say I want to use Ajax and send a url as follows savethis?name=ABC&desc=SomeRandomDescription to a view that handles it as follows:
def savethis(request):
if request.GET['name'] and request.GET['desc']:
name = request.GET['name']
desc = request.GET['desc']
test = TestModel(name=name, description=desc)
test.save
return HttpResponse('Ok')
else:
return HttpResponse('Fail')
What's to stop someone from running a script that can easily hit this url with valid data and thus save data to my model? How do I ensure that incoming data is sent only from the right source?
One option is sending the data as JSON in a Post request but even that's not too hard to emualte.
Seems that you have stumbled upon the great security flaw that is Cross-site Scripting attacks. They are several ways you can get around it, but going into all of them in one answer would be fruitless. I suggest you Google the term and do some poking around, and you will find several different methods on how to protect your site better.
Django has a security page dedicated to talking about how to protect your site.
Related
I have the following model:
class LibraryBook(models.Model):
_name = 'library.book'
name = fields.Char('Title', required=True)
date_release = fields.Date("Release Date")
author_ids = fields.Many2many("res.partner", string="Authors")
I'm new to Odoo and trying to understand the basics of how to save data to my model from a POST request like the following
curl -i -X POST --data "name=Odoo%20-%20Much%20Mystery,%20Wow&author_id=Doge" http://0.0.0.0:8069/test
I found a way doing this by setting the csrf parameter in my controller to false like so:
[...]
#http.route('/test', type='http', auth='public',methods=['POST'], website=True, csrf=False)
def test(self, **kwargs):
record = request.env['library.book'].sudo()
record.create(kwargs)
I'm wondering now if there is a way to avoid setting csrf=false since I've read that it's a bad idea to do so in general. Also, what would I need to get rid of that .sudo()? Not setting csrf=false leads to a 400 BAD REQUEST with Invalid CSRF token. Removing sudo() leads to a 500 INTERNAL SERVER ERROR. In Odoo Development Cookbook it says in one example with auth='none'
Lack of a user is also why we have to sudo() all our calls to model methods in the example code
Assuming I would expect a POST request from an API, is it possible to associate it with a user so I don't have to sudo()?
I would very much appreciate any clarification on this.
UPDATE
So I just found this (line 817):
if the form is accessed by an external third party (e.g. REST API endpoint, payment gateway callback) you will need to disable CSRF
protection (and implement your own protection if necessary) by
passing the csrf=False parameter to the route decorator.
which I guess leaves only one question open, regarding sudo.
SUDO()
creates a new environment with the provided user set, uses the administrator if none is provided (to bypass access rights/rules in safe contexts), returns a copy of the recordset it is called on using the new environment:
Odoo does not allow public users to create, update, delete a record.
If we want to create a record from the public users then we need to create a record with the sudo().
Create record object as administrator
request.env['library.book'].sudo().create(vals)
I hope this may help you.
for more information you can navigate to following links :
https://www.odoo.com/documentation/9.0/reference/orm.html
Thanks
I have read a lot of answers relating to how to dynamically add forms to an model formset in Django and can successfully implement that. However, I would now like to submit the formset with AJAX. This is mostly working now but I have an issue that I can't find a solution to in any other answer:
If you dynamically add a form to the formset, you give it a new form id number that is one larger than the maximum the form currently has and you also increment the management TOTAL_FORMS count by one. The newly added form then saves successfully as a new object.
I am trying to submit by AJAX so the user can continue editing without having the page refresh. The formset saves fine but any dynamically added forms are now existing objects. To account for this I need to increment the INITIAL_FORMS count on the management form when the save is successful. Easy enough. However, I've also realised I need to give the newly created objects an ID since they now exist in the database.
How can I get my view to tell me the ID of the new objects in its response to the AJAX call? Or is there a better way of looking at this?
Django forms and formsets are intended for classic browser-based posting of data. Though they can definitely be made to work with Javascript, the more you want to part from the normal behavior, the more complex it gets.
Depending on your requirements, you might start thinking about dropping it and switch to Javascript + REST endpoint. Of course, if you need progressive enhancements and you are required to have it work without javascript, that's not an option.
In any case, you want to have a customized view for posting from JS, so that you can get the result back and parse it easily in your AJAX handler. Probably some JSON.
There are several approaches you could take.
Have your AJAX send data to a different URL. This is pertinent if you have an API or are planning to build one at some point. So your form, when submitted normally, will do its old-style processing but your AJAX will talk to the API endpoint instead.
For instance, your form send to https://example.com/myform, but your Javascript code talks to REST api at https://example.com/api/v1/mymodel/ (sending PUT, POST and DELETE requests as appropriate).
Or if you don't have an API and building one seems overkill, you may just alter your view so it formats its output differently depending on whether the data is being submitted in the regular way or using AJAX.
You'd go about it like this:
class MyFormView(.....):
def render_to_response(self, context, **kwargs):
if self.request.is_ajax():
return self.render_to_json(context, **kwargs)
return super().render_to_response(context, **kwargs)
def render_to_json(context, **kwargs):
data = {
# see below!
}
return HttpResponse(
content=json.dumps(data).encode('ascii'),
content_type='application/json',
)
This is just an outline. You need to ensure is_ajax will detect it properly (see django doc). And you need to properly build data from context: extract the things you want to send back to your JS code and put them in the dict.
You will find it's manageable if you just do this for one, maybe two views in your project, but very quickly you'll want to have a small API instead, especially given how easy it is to build one with packages such as Django REST framework.
In your view, where you save the object, AFTER the save, the object.id will contain the new id for the object, which you can return via json or however you want in your ajax response, and then yes you will need to fill that into the formset row so that it will be submitted the next time.
One thing you have to watch out for is that django expects all existing rows to be at the top of the formset, and any new rows to be at the bottom. Otherwise, the formset save will complain about missing id's. So if you're doing any kind of sorting in your javascript, you can't do that.. unless you do quite a bit of fixing of all the field names etc in the formset. The formset code uses the numbers in the management form to determine which rows to insert and which rows to update, it does not do it on the basis of whether or not an id is present. Unfortunately...
I am trying to make a RESTful api and have some function which needs credentials. For example say I'm writing a function which finds all nearby places within a certain radius, but only authorised users can use it.
One way to do it is to send it all using GET like so:
http://myapi.heroku.com/getNearbyPlaces?lon=12.343523&lat=56.123533&radius=30&username=john&password=blabla123
but obviously that's the worst possible way to do it.
Is it possible to instead move the username and password fields and embed them as POST variables over SSL, so the URL will only look like so:
https://myapi.heroku.com/getNearbyPlaces?lon=12.343523&lat=56.123533&radius=30
and the credentials will be sent encrypted.
How would I then in Sinatra and Ruby properly get at the GET and POST variables? Is this The Right Way To Do It? If not why not?
If you are really trying to create a restful API instead if some URL endpoints which happen to speak some HTTP dialect, you should stick to GET. It's even again in your path, so you seem to be pretty sure it's a get.
Instead of trying to hide the username and password in GET or POST parameters, you should instead use Basic authentication, which was invented especially for that purpose and is universally available in clients (and is available using convenience methods in Sinatra).
Also, if you are trying to use REST, you should embrace the concept of resources and resoiurce collections (which is implied by the R and E of REST). So you have a single URL like http://myapi.heroku.com/NearbyPlaces. If you GET there, you gather information about that resource, if you POST, you create a new resource, if you PUT yopu update n existing resource and if you DELETE, well, you delete it. What you should do before is th structure your object space into these resources and design your API around it.
Possibly, you could have a resource collection at http://myapi.heroku.com/places. Each place as a resource has a unique URL like http://myapi.heroku.com/places/123. New polaces can be created by POSTing to http://myapi.heroku.com/places. And nearby places could be gathered by GETing http://myapi.heroku.com/places/nearby?lon=12.343523&lat=56.123533&radius=30. hat call could return an Array or URLs to nearby places, e.g.
[
"http://myapi.heroku.com/places/123",
"http://myapi.heroku.com/places/17",
"http://myapi.heroku.com/places/42"
]
If you want to be truly discoverable, you might also embrace HATEOAS which constraints REST smentics in a way to allows API clients to "browse" through the API as a user with a browser would do. To allow this, you use Hyperlink inside your API which point to other resources, kind of like in the example above.
The params that are part of the url (namely lon, lat and radius) are known as query parameters, the user and password information that you want to send in your form are known as form parameters. In Sinatra both of these type of parameters are made available in the params hash of a controller.
So in Sinatra you would be able to access your lon parameter as params[:lon] and the user parameter as params[:user].
I suggest using basic or digest authentication and a plain GET request. In other words, your request should be "GET /places?lat=x&lon=x&radius=x" and you should let HTTP handle the authentication. If I understand your situation correctly, this is the ideal approach and will certainly be the most RESTful solution.
As an aside, your URI could be improved. Having verbs ("get") and query-like adjectives ("nearby") in your resource names is not really appropriate. In general, resources should be nouns (ie. "places", "person", "books"). See the example request I wrote above; "get" is redundant because you are using a GET request and "nearby" is redundant because you are already querying by location.
I have a RESTful URL that requires either the offset or the prefix request parameter (but not both).
GET /users?offset=0&count=20
GET /users?prefix=J&count=20
What's the best way to enforce this rule? Spring has the #RequestParam annotation with the 'required' property for optional parameters, but I want to enforce an "either-or" rule on these two parameters. I know I could do it in the code, but is there another way to do it?
Also, what's the proper way to handle "impractical" requests? Say I have 100 million users; the following request, although properly RESTful, is not something I want to support:
GET /users <-- Gets all 100 million users, crashes server and browser!
What should I send back?
You can create two methods and choose one of them with #RequestMapping's params attribute:
#RequestMapping(..., params = {"prefix", "!offset"})
public String usersWithPrefix(#RequestParam("prefix") ...) { ... }
#RequestMapping(..., params = {"offset", "!prefix"})
public String usersWithOffset(#RequestParam("offset") ...) { ... }
what's the proper way to handle "impractical" requests?
The lesser-practiced principles of REST include the requirement that resources be "discoverable". If you are asked for a complete list of 800 million users and you don't want to provide it, you might instead consider serving a page that describes in some way how to filter the collection: for example, an XForms document or HTML containing a FORM element with fields for offset/prefix/count, or a URI template with the appropriate parameters
Or you could just send a "413 Entity too large" error - edit: no you can't. Sorry, I misread the description of whath this code is for
If you decide to go down the route of just sending the first page, I think I would send it as an HTTP redirect to /users?offset=0&count=20 so that the client has a better idea they've not got the full collection (and if your response contains a link to access subsequent pages, even better)
We are using the Dynamic Script Tag with JsonP mechanism to achieve cross-domain Ajax calls. The front end widget is very simple. It just calls a search web service, passing search criteria supplied by the user and receiving and dynamically rendering the results.
Note - For those that aren’t familiar with the Dynamic Script Tag with JsonP method of performing Ajax-like requests to a service that return Json formatted data, I can explain how to utilise it if you think it could be relevant to the problem.
The service is WCF hosted on IIS. It is Restful so the first thing we do when the user clicks search is to generate a Url containing the criteria. It looks like this...
https://.../service.svc?criteria=john+smith
We then use a dynamically created Html Script Tag with the source attribute set to the above Url to make the request to our service. The result is returned and we process it to show the results.
This all works fine, but we noticed that when using IE the service receives the request from the client Twice. I used Fiddler to monitor the traffic leaving the browser and sure enough I see two requests with the following urls...
Request 1: https://.../service.svc?criteria=john+smith
Request 2: https://.../service.svc?criteria=john+smith&_=123456789
The second request has been appended with some kind of Id. This Id is different for every request.
My immediate thought is it was something to do with caching. Adding a random number to the end of the url is one of the classic approaches to disabling browser caching. To prove this I adjusted the cache settings in IE.
I set “Check for newer versions of stored pages” to “Never” – This resulted in only one request being made every time. The one with the random number on the end.
I set this setting value back to the default of “Automatic” and the requests immediately began to be sent twice again.
Interestingly I don’t receive both requests on the client. I found this reference where someone is suggesting this could be a bug with IE. The fact that this doesn’t happen for me on Firefox supports this theory.
Can anyone confirm if this is a bug with IE? It could be by design.
Does anyone know of a way I can stop it happening?
Some of the more vague searches that my users will run take up enough processing resource to make doubling up anything a very bad idea. I really want to avoid this if at all possible :-)
I just wrote an article on how to avoid caching of ajax requests :-)
It basically involves adding the no cache headers to any ajax request that comes in
public abstract class MyWebApplication : HttpApplication
{
protected MyWebApplication()
{
this.BeginRequest += new EventHandler(MyWebApplication_BeginRequest);
}
void MyWebApplication_BeginRequest(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
string requestedWith = this.Request.Headers["x-requested-with"];
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(requestedWith) && requestedWith.Equals(”XMLHttpRequest”, StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase))
{
this.Response.Expires = 0;
this.Response.ExpiresAbsolute = DateTime.Now.AddDays(-1);
this.Response.AddHeader(”pragma”, “no-cache”);
this.Response.AddHeader(”cache-control”, “private”);
this.Response.CacheControl = “no-cache”;
}
}
}
I eventually established the reason for the duplicate requests. As I said, the mechanism I chose to use for making Ajax calls was with Dynamic Script Tags. I build the request Url, created a new Script element and assigned the Url to the src property...
var script = document.createElement(“script”);
script.src = https://....”;
Then to execute the script by appending it to the Document Head. Crucially, I was using the JQuery append function...
$(“head”).append(script);
Inside the append function JQuery was anticipating that I was trying to make an Ajax call. If the type of element being appended is a Script, then it executes a special routine that makes an Ajax request using the XmlHttpRequest object. But the script was still being appended to the document head, and being executed there by the browser too. Hence the double request.
The first came direct from the script – the one I intended to happen.
The second came from inside the JQuery append function. This was the request suffixed with the randomly generated query string argument in the form “&_=123456789”.
I simplified things by preventing the JQuery library side effect. I used the native append function...
document.getElementByTagName(“head”).appendChild(script);
One request now happens in the way I intended. I had no idea that the JQuery append function could have such a significant side effect built in.
See www.enhanceie.com/redir/?id=httpperf for further discussion.