Time based authentification and actions in asp.net mvc - asp.net-mvc-3

Is there an integrated way in asp.net mvc 3, to permit authentification and actions based on the time of the day ?
For example, if it's 18:00 o'clock, users that belong to a specific role are not allowed to log in or if they are already authenticated, they will be automatically logged out or not being able to do actions.
I guess in the log in method I could check for user role and time of day and then on each action, I will also check for role and time of day and permit but is there and easier way to accomplish this ?
UPDATE:
I guess there is no easier way to just set the time and user/roles so I ended up implementing the answer(solution).

You could write a custom Authorize attribute and override the AuthorizeCore method in which you would perform the necessary check:
public class MyAuthorizeAttribute : AuthorizeAttribute
{
protected override bool AuthorizeCore(HttpContextBase httpContext)
{
var authorized = base.AuthorizeCore(httpContext);
if (!authorized)
{
return false;
}
// At this stage standard authorization passed =>
// you could now check the user roles in the database
// and the time of the day and return true or false from here
...
}
}
and now all that's left is decorate your controllers/actions with this custom attribute.

Related

Identify the function name from policy middleware in .net core

I want to develop dynamic roles authorization using .net core webAPI, my structure is that user have one role and the role have some function or features to access
my question is there is any way yo get the function name where authorization policies applied
as example I have the following code
[Authorize(Roles = "Admin", Policy = "isHasPermission")]
public async Task<IActionResult> GetAllAsync()
{
var users = await _userService.GetAllAsync();
var userDtos = _mapper.Map<IList<UserDto>>(users);
return Ok(DataMessage.Data(new { users = userDtos }));
//return Ok(userDtos);
}
and my policy is something like that
protected override async Task HandleRequirementAsync(
AuthorizationHandlerContext context,
isHasPermissionRequirement requirement)
{
/*
CAN I GET THE FUNCTION NAME "GetAllAsync" HERE!
TO VALIDATE IF IT IS ONE OF USER'S FEATURE
*/
return await Task.CompletedTask;
}
So that I need to get the function name in the policy to validate user's permissions, if it is possible or not?
You are doing it backwards: The way policies work is that you say that a certain action has requirements. It is not a valid requirement to then circle back to where the policy is used. Policies should be completely separate from what you are trying to access. If a certain thing specifies a policy, then just the presense of the policy should be all that’s necessary.
If you want to have your logic actually check what you are trying to access, then you could look into authorization filters instead. When they are called, they pass an AuthorizationFilterContext which also contains information about the route and action the user is trying to access. With that, you can get the action name for example using (context.ActionDescriptor as ControllerActionDescriptor).ActionName.

ASP.NET Core 2.2 - Action Filter db Query Question

I have users in our app, who are mapped to companies. When a user logs in and starts to make requests I want a way to validate if that user is currently mapped to the company for access to company resources.
The idea I had was to create a whole controller just to manage all of this, but someone mentioned ActionFilters as a much better and cleaner option, I have to agree after looking at it.
The idea is to have the controller setup as:
controller - action - CompanyId - ReportId
So any request to root the system would just look up if there are any companies mapped to that logged in user.
But if the request included CompanyId then they'd go to that company's “portal” account page. It's really any request that includes CompanyId where I want the actionFilter to make a determination on if that user is allowed access.
Request comes in...
There is a CompanyId in the request!
ActionFilter:
Look up in db for all users assigned to that CompanyId. Is current user within that list? No? = kick'em out.
I tried to type in a code example, but the system told me to manually indent each line by 4 spaces, I was doing it from memory anyways so no idea how helpful it would have been anyways.
You could get your action parameters in your action filter and then get your database via HttpContext.RequestServices.GetRequiredService<ApplicationDbContext>().Refer to here.
public class TestActionFilter:Attribute,IActionFilter
{
public void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext context)
{
//If companyId is action parameter
var companyId= context.ActionArguments["companyId"].ToString();
//If companyId1 is query string
var companyId1= context.HttpContext.Request.Query["companyId1"].ToString();
//If companyId2 is in request header
var companyId2= context.HttpContext.Request.Headers["companyId2"].ToString();
//get your dbcontext
var db = context.HttpContext.RequestServices.GetRequiredService<ApplicationDbContext>();
//EF core logic
//...
}
public void OnActionExecuted(ActionExecutedContext context)
{
}
}
You could use it on action directly using [TestActionFilter] attribute or set as global filter
services.AddMvc(options =>
{
options.Filters.Add(new TestActionFilter()); // an instance
});

Grails + RESTful URL mapping + Filters + Routes

Member have many jobs. A member can add, delete or update Jobs. Currently there are actions (add, delete or update) defined in a controller which are called through jQuery.ajax(). We are sending job id and member id to perform the operation. Member id is necessary because there is a role admin who can modify the job on behalf of members, so we need to identify the member. But sending member id is dangerous as anyone can send the request by modifying the member id.
I know, we can add constraint do restrict that only admin can modify the jobs or a member can modify only his jobs. My question is, Do I need to add these constraints in the action of the controller or Is there any Grails way to do that. I have google, the same thing is handled in Ruby and Rails by using routes. And in grails I have skim through RESTful URL mapping, which is perhaps used for this purpose.
Can anyone points me to right direction, thanks. I am using Grails 2.1.1.
You can implement some realization of AbstractPersistenceEventListenerService to not allow perform actions with entity that constains id of not logged in user. Example:
class MultiTenantPersistenceEventListenerService extends AbstractPersistenceEventListenerService {
def springSecurityService
#Override
protected AbstractPersistenceEventListener createPersistenceEventListener(Datastore datastore) {
return new MultiTenantPersistenceEventListener(datastore)
}
}
class MultiTenantPersistenceEventListener extends AbstractPersistenceEventListener {
MultiTenantPersistenceEventListener(final Datastore datastore) {
super(datastore)
}
#Override
protected void onPersistenceEvent(AbstractPersistenceEvent event) {
def entity = event.getEntityObject() // could be your Job domain entity
def user = springSecurityService.getCurrentUser() //current logged in user
if(entity.hasProperty('userId')){ // every job belongs to User
if(entity.userId != user.id){
throw new AccessDeniedException("Acces Denied !")
}
}
}
}
I'd recomment to use grails spring-security-plugin. There is a lot of information in web about plugin and it's easy configurable. Plugin allows you to perfrom controller's action in secure way. For example:
#Secured(['ROLE_USER'])
def followAjax = { ... }
#Secured(['IS_AUTHENTICATED_REMEMBERED'])
def personal = { ... }
For more information - plugin and spring-security with grails.
You can use Authorize attribute to authorize the user,
e.g
[CustomAuthorize(Roles=SiteRoles.Admin|SiteRoles.HelpDesk)]
public ActionResult Index()
{
return View();
}
This is a nice approach for making website secure.
go through these link, this will help you.
custom authorization with asp.net mvc
asp.net mvc authorization

What is the difference between AuthenticateRequest and AuthorizeRequest

Can you explain the differences between HttpApplication.AuthenticateRequest and HttpApplication.AuthorizeRequest in ASP.NET MVC 3 please? When will they occur? Assume this scenario:
My User has a property called IsBanned and I want to check his/her IsBanned property in each request. If it was true, I redirect the User to an error page. But not for all requests, just requests that their action signed by [Authorize] attribute. OK, atthis type of actions, will HttpApplication.AuthenticateRequest occur or HttpApplication.AuthorizeRequest or anything else?
I know I can check this property in SignIn|LogOn action. But I means this:
A user requests logging in
I check the property IsBanned and it was false
The user logged in
User view some pages of site
The admin banned the user (while he is logged in)
User requests a page (action) that have [Authorize] attribute
User is logged in (before this. remember?)
So I have to show the requested page
But the user give a banned flag by admin
How can I prevent user from viewing requested page?
Thanks in advance.
I dont think you need to deal with either of HttpApplication.AuthenticateRequest or HttpApplication.AuthorizeRequest. I would solve it by using a custom Authorize Attribute.
public class MyAuthorizeAttribute : AuthorizeAttribute {
protected override bool AuthorizeCore(HttpContextBase httpContext) {
bool authorizerPrimarily = base.AuthorizeCore(httpContext);
if(authorizedPrimarily){
return user_not_banned;
}
return authorizerPrimarily;
}
}
You can get user's name from httpContext.User.Identity.Name. Use it to grab data from database.
Update for comment-1
To redirect banned users to a specific page, you may do this:
if(authorizedPrimarily){
if(user_banned){
httpContext.Response.Redirect("url of banned message");
return false;
}
return true;
}

MVC 3 FormsAuthentication and disabled user accounts

I have noticed that if a user is still logged in or has a persistent cookie, even if he gets "banned", or disabled in the database (Users Table flags), the user can still access everything until that cookie goes away or the user logs out of the site. Great security right.
So I am putting together a ActionFilterAttribute that checks for this, the disturbing thing for me is I have to hit the database for every controller that his ActionFilterAttribute is applied to. There has to be a better way of doing this but I have not found one yet.
Any ideas would be awesome..
There has to be a better way of doing this but I have not found one yet.
No there isn't. Sorry. If the notion of disabled/banned user exists only in your database there is no other way but hitting your database. ASP.NET only verifies the validity of the authentication cookie which is sent on each request. It doesn't even know what a disabled user means so you cannot expect it do more than it already does.
There are a few options:
1) You can validate whether the user authentication is valid by hooking session start. This way if the user has a persistent cookie, you can validate the username and expire the cookie if needed.
2) You can use a time based mechanism to check the user auth status every few requests (every 5mins or whatever). You could store the lastChecked timestamp value in the user session or in the auth cookie itself using the UserData field. This allows you recheck if the user auth cookie needs to be expired more frequently, but keeps database calls to a minimum.
MyThis is the solution I came up with:
In the User Account Membership service add a function to return whether the user's account is still active.
public class UserAccountMembershipService : IMembershipService
{
public bool UserIsActive(Guid userId)
{
if (userId == new Guid()) throw new ArgumentException("Value cannot be null or empty.", "userName");
MembershipUser user = _provider.GetUser(userId, true);
return user.IsApproved;
}
}
Override the AuthorizeAttribute as follows:
public class MyAuthorizeAttribute : AuthorizeAttribute
{
protected override bool AuthorizeCore(HttpContextBase httpContext)
{
IMembershipService membershipService = new UserAccountMembershipService();
//Check to see if the user's account is still active
bool isActive = false;
if (httpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated)
{
Guid userId = (Guid)Membership.GetUser(httpContext.User.Identity.Name).ProviderUserKey;
isActive = membershipService.UserIsActive(userId);
}
if (!isActive)
{
//If the user's account is no longer active log him/her out
IFormsAuthenticationService FormsService = new FormsAuthenticationService();
FormsService.SignOut();
}
//Call the base AuthorizationCore method
return base.AuthorizeCore(httpContext) && isActive;
}
}

Resources