I have been viewing several Spring MVC Controller examples, and the ones I've found show one controller handling multiple views. Which this approach seems fine, but which I could see becoming clumsy in a large web-sites.
Given something like:
Accounts
/AcctsRec
/AcctsPay
I can see where one Account controller would work for that setup.
Now Add:
Security
/Login
/Rights
Again I can see one Security Controller.
But now add in something like. If Security/Rights allows access to Accounts/AcctsPay. Would that be a third controller? Or would Security/Rights pass an object to Accounts/AcctsPay? Or Accounts Controller?
How would that work?
A pseudo code example, a pointer to a web-site example, or anything helpful would be appreciated.
Only please don't direct me to the Spring's documentation. I've read that a couple to times and just can't seem to gleam much from it.
But now add in something like. If Security/Rights allows access to Accounts/AcctsPay. Would that be a third controller? Or would Security/Rights pass an object to Accounts/AcctsPay? Or Accounts Controller
I think there is some confusion as to what is going on because the above doesn't make any sense. The paths you have above are URLs. Each one typically maps an HTTP request to a #Controller handler method that produces an HTTP response.
Perhaps /Accounts/AcctsPay is not accessible without authentication and authorization. And maybe /Security/Login authenticates you and /Security/Rights gives you some permissions. In this scenario, you would need to send a request to /Security/Login to get authenticated, then another request to /Security/Rights to get some permissions, and finally a request to /Accounts/AcctsPay to perform some action.
A #Controller method is meant for handling requests. Handling it by responding with a 401 Unauthorized or 403 Forbidden is still a valid response.
Related
I am curious if anyone has a solution to this unique situation as I have a solution currently, though I feel it is not the most optimal.
The Situation.
I have built an MVC style web application that talks to a web API through http (authenticating via JWT). My web application is secured by appending authorization to its view controllers and redirecting to a Microsoft login endpoint - then directing back to the view where whichever given controller/function handles the request, connects to the API, appends data to the view, etc.
Preferably I would like to use JQuery/Ajax to submit http requests client-side and update a given view with whatever data the user may wish to see relative to the webpage they're on. This way I could control exactly what the user should see landing on the page any which way and submitting requests from web app to API. Also would enable better continuity between requests as there isn't actually a full refresh of the view. All in all it is my line of thought that this execution would lead to a nice user experience.
The Problem.
So the big issue that I have had to circumvent is CORS Policy. I initially attempted to use JS just as I said above but requests would be redirected to the login endpoint and blocked due to there being no CORS header appended to the request.
'So include a policy in your application and append an authorized header to your Ajax outgoing request' you might say, well... you cannot override CORS security around Microsoft's login endpoint.
My Solution.
What I have done simply instead is create HTML Forms around fields the user would pick and chose to specify what data they wanted from the API. Then carry over input data to the returned view via 'ViewData'
and using razor pages of course I can actually initialize JS variables via C# input.
Side Note
I use JS to transform the API data into graphs for the user to see. I am doing this with a JavaScript Library.
My Question to you.
This all leads me to ask then, is there a way to dynamically update a view without using JS? I require a method that can hit the login redirect without being blocked because the request initiated client-side.
Every solution I am aware in some way, shape, or form utilizes JS to make the request. So I am at a loss for how to truly get the functionality I am after without having my requests get blocked due to CORS Policy.
Thanks in advance y'all.
I have a public website running from an eXist app. I am now developing an interface for logged in users to edit certain documents through HTML forms and AJAX. I've set up a module in eXist to receive AJAX POST requests through the eXist REST interface (ie. http://www.example.com/exist/rest/db/myapp/api/myxquery.xql). However this module does not seem to be aware of the fact that the user is already logged in!
How do I get the REST module to use the session/authentication of the logged in user?
Am I required to store the user/password in the browser to pass with each REST API request?
If this is not the preferred model for passing data from the browser under user/password, what is eXist's recommended solution?
Many thanks in advance.
(A variation on this question was asked two years ago but received no solutions.)
In order to use the REST-API from existdb you can only authenticate each request using HTTP Basic Authentication. Also mentioned in the question you referenced.
If you decide to handle AJAX request in your app's controller.xql you will need to:
Add routes for your AJAX requests to the controller
Make sure you call login:set-user for the user session to be picked up
Make sure the AJAX request sends the cookie:
For instance, the fetch function will send the authorisation cookie
only if send-authorization is true.
Look at the output-method and serialization settings, since you will likely want to respond in JSON-format. useful blog post about this
I have been playing with Thinktecture IdentityServer3 and am keen to use it as the product looks great. However, I don't fully understand how to accomplish my flow which is probably fairly common:
Create Identity Server using Implicit flow
Setup an MVC web site
Setup a separate Web API
So far so good, as demonstrated in the examples on the site. I now wish to call the API using AJAX calls directly but for this i need an access token. It seems like a large overhead to have to route these through the MVC site itself (again, in the examples).
How can I accomplish this flow? Would it essentially blend the MVC and Javascript Client samples or is there a smoother way so the user only has to sign in once? Perhaps send the access token in a hidden field but then how would it renew?
Any help on understanding this would be great.
I've managed to come up with a solution which seems to work, not sure if it's best practice though...
Expose a method on the MVC site at AJAX/AccessToken
Method should be locked down with Authorize attribute to ensure the MVC part of the site is authenticating properly with IdentityServer
Method returns the users Access Token which was generated through the above call via MVC controllers
In JavaScript, simply use this endpoint to get an Access Token and then call the API manually
The call to get the Access Token should be secure as its within the same domain/authentication model as the MVC site itself
I've put up a sample here for anyone interested:
OIDC-Website
Check out the form post client to see the endpoints being called explicitly. You will need to hit the token endpoint to get your access token.
You should be able to use these endpoints in your AJAX calls, store the received claims and tokens in a cookie and take it from there.
Note that to renew the access token, you will also need to store the refresh token. The Implicit flow does not allow for refresh tokens (you'll need to use the Authorization Code Flow or the Hybrid Flow).
I'm new to the whole client-side SPA world. I'm using the above technologies, which seem quite promising. However, one huge snag that I can't get over easily is the lack of built-in security. I had to manually roll out the user authorization, which IMHO should be part of the framework.
Now that I have that sorted, I'm getting major headaches with vertical security: where one user is logged in but can easily access other users' info by changing a few parameters in the browser console. I could pass the userId with every call and then compare it with the one on the server, but I was hoping that there would be an overarching solution that doesn't pollute the breeze data calls with user ids.
For example, let's say there's a call from the data service like this:
function getItems(){
var query = breeze.EntityQuery.from('Items').expand("Person");
return manager.executeQuery(query);
}
this will get all the items, not good. So let's limit by userId:
function getItems(userId){
var query = breeze.EntityQuery.from('Items').where("userId", "==", authentication.userId).expand("Person");
return manager.executeQuery(query);
}
in the second example, we get the userId from the authentication service, which stored the userId when the user was logged in. However, a malicious user can easily go the browser console and change that value.
Of course, I could pass the userId using withParameters(...) and compare it with the current one on the server, but I'd have to do that for every call, which doesn't seem right. Is there a better way to secure calls with the trusted user id?
#Ali - I understand your pain and your concern. You are right to fear any form of so-called security that relies on information passed in the URL. Fortunately there are excellent answers to your concerns and Breeze apps work well with them.
For example, have you studied the ASP.NET Breeze/Knockout Template? It uses Forms Auth for authentication and guards the Web API controller with an [Authorize] attribute. Only logged-in users can access any of the controller methods.
That authentication also sets the IPrincipal which the Web API controller makes available through its User property. You'll see User passed to the constructor of the TodoRepository. In that repository you'll find guard logic to restrict query and saves to just the Todo information belonging to the requesting user.
Look at the network traffic. You won't find any user identifying information in the URL or the request/response bodies. You will see an encrypted authentication cookie in a header.
An obvious flaw in the example is that the client/server traffic takes place in the clear. You must add transport level security (HTTPS) before you go to production. But this is a demo after all.
Why not just do this in the controller?
If the Web Api is secured with [Authorize] then you can get the users ID in the controller and make sure that the data returned is for the currently logged in user.
My question is that suppose, in my web app, I use ajax to call upon methods on the server side, isn't it creating a security hole in the app? Like, say I have an option for the user to deactivate the account, which can be done by clicking a button. This is done via Ajax.
So, can't a hacker send a request to the server to deactivate the account instead of the user?
HELP!!!
My question is that suppose, in my web app, I use ajax to call upon methods on the server side, isn't it creating a security hole in the app?
From a security perspective, there is no difference between an HTTP request that involves JavaScript and one which doesn't (e.g. that uses a regular form, or is handcrafted).
… but you can't call methods from the client, you can only make requests to URIs. The server might cause a method to be called based on receiving a request to a specific URI.
So, can't a hacker send a request to the server to deactivate the account instead of the user?
They could, which is why you need (trustworthy) authentication / authorisation and CSRF protection (just like you would for a request to disable an account that didn't involve Ajax).
This is not a problem with AJAX alone, but with any arbitrary HTTP request that wants to authenticate/maintain a session. The user needs to be authenticated in some way in order to make requests, this is usually done with cookies. Using AJAX does not make the matter any worse though because it is still a HTTP request.
Authentication alone is not enough though, someone could always be listening on the wire and capture the authentication cookie, and thus get hold of the session - "become you". The only solution here is to encrypt the connection on a lower OSI layer level (using SSL/TLS). This is why you should always use SSL when it comes to authentication.
This Ruby on Rails security guide has a great explanation on how to deal with AJAX requests that could be potentially exploited. It's not specific to RoR so the concepts can apply to any platform.
One way to reduce the risk of cross site requests is to use POST for actions that modify or delete data.