I used Spring and Apache CXF to create a REST webservices application. I'm using x.509 certificates to authenticate the users, and then a custom authorization service to get all of the user groups and details. I've implemented a custom UserDetailsService that extracts the user information and populates a UserDetails object. Part of the process of populating this object involves a request to the corporate authorization service. The authorization service is unfortunately a proprietary system, but at least they provide a Java API. The authorization service, among other things, returns a list of groups that the user belongs to.
I'm still in the development stage, but my observations so far seem to indicate that the UserDetailsService is called once upon initial connection. Then each request uses a cached authorization object.
So my question and potential problem are this... Corporate policy states that applications are only allowed to cache the users authorization details for a set period of time. So, how long does Spring keep these UserDetails objects cached before refreshing them? And, how can I control this cache time to make sure I comply with policy?
There was a ticket submitted for something similar to this request:
https://jira.springsource.org/browse/SEC-898
The advice in the ticket is to create your own filter than periodically sets the Authentication.setAuthenticated property to false, forcing a look up of the user. You might be able to achieve the same by setting a smaller session timeout
Related
I have an endpoint, which I want to protect using Oauth2 and spring boot. The users register on the website and after the successful payment, a token with specific expiry should be issued automatically and delivered to the user. The User can revoke the token in their panel and get a new token manually.
I don't want to use password grant type as it requires sending the username and password for each request. the authorization code grant type, requires the user to enter their credentials which doesn't fit my need for automatic generation of tokens after successful payment. I'm not sure if using client credentials grant type is a good idea for my need. I could use a new client for each new user. But this seems not right to me. But correct me if I'm wrong. any idea which oauth flow I should use?
You want to authenticate end-users with OAuth2? Use authorization-code (with PKCE).
In your statements, there seem to be a confusion between authorization-server (issues tokens) and resource-server (subscriptions are resources too in my opinion). Have a look at this article for OAuth2 refresher and spring resource-server security conf.
Also, it seems to be a one-to-one relation between access-token and payed subscription. This is probably a mistake: access-token should be short lived (like a few minutes). Are your subscriptions that short?
I see two options here:
have your authorization-server add a private claim with subscription status to JWT access-token (or introspection details) and check this claim value in spring-security expressions (#PreAuthorize("..."))
configure a custom authentication converter in spring security which calls a #Repository to read subscription status in database, based on identity contained in access-token
First solution is way more efficient (persisted subscription status is retrieved from DB only when a new access-token is issued) but requires your authorization-server to be flexible enough for you to add private claim with values from a web-service or a DB. I have a tutorial to do so in Keycloak. read it AFTER the article above.
I'm looking to implement a plugin using OpenSAML for a 3rd party application that will enable the application to be treated as a SAML Service Provider, so that I can integrate it into AWS SSO.
The following image describes the SAML authentication process when the Service Provider (SP) and Identity Provider (IdP) use HTTP Artifact binding (taken from here):
After the initial authentication, the SP returns the protected resource to the user. My question relates to how subsequent requests for protected resources are processed.
With OIDC, the browser would receive a token and this would be sent to the SP for subsequent requests. The SP can inspect the token and confirm its integrity (assuming it is signed) and validity, without needing to make further calls to the IdP to re-authenticate the end-user.
With SAML, how do I achieve the same effect? How do I not have to make repeated calls to the IdP to check identity?
I suppose I could use a session, but I don't understand how I might ensure that such information is not tampered with within the client (i.e. how does the SP not have to rely on information provided by the client?). Does SAML have some sort of concept of a token that is safe for the user to store (the HTTP Artifact binding explicitly restricts the user from seeing the response from the IdP)?
What happens after the last step is not defined in the spec. You could say it's formally outside of SAML protocol. Even the last protocol-formalized step of SP supplying the resource is essentially a "do it yourself":
Section 3.4.5 (HTTP-Redirect binding):
Upon receiving the SAML response, the SAML requester returns an
arbitrary HTTP response to the user agent
Section 3.5 (HTTP-POST binding):
Upon receiving the SAML response, the SAML requester returns an
arbitrary HTTP response to the user agent
Section 3.6 (HTTP-Artifact binding):
[you can probably guess by now]
Most SPs will drop one or more cookies on the client during that last step. One of those cookies will contain a session ID or a more generic pointer that can be used to locate a session when sent back to SP. Subsequent resource "authorization" requests to SP will proceed by having the SP consult this server-side session. The session will usually hold the (authenticated) security context for this user/client.
For example, Shibboleth (built on top of OpenSAML) does so. The content of the cookie is up to the SP. It's arguable that token-based auth via e.g. local storage is more secure vs a cookie. There are pros/cons to both options and many factors specific to use case/context/technology stack impact the evaluation of risk and associated threat model.
Note: AWS SSO does not support the Artifact binding.
I was getting started with Spring Boot and Angular 7 and I came across user authentication.
Let's assume the following: I have a frontend with Angular 7 and a Backend with Spring Boot that offers API's that can be accessed via HTTP.
So I know that usually the frontend authenticates the user with e.g. JWT that stores all necessary information about the user that might be needed. But I came across the SecurityContextHoler of Spring Boot Security:
Authentication authentication = SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication();
This allows me to simply access granted Authorities and so on. So I thought about the following:
Using JWT for the frontend grants the following advantages (as far as I know):
* Users can identify when using API's
* Users may be prevented from certain UI-Elements (based on roles stored in JWT)
* Modification prevention due to checksum (invalid token afterwards)
Now I could also add a check in my Controller in the Backend that checks the SecurityContextHolder for user permission (something like a Service that checks the current context permissions vs the needed permission and returns true/false). Wouldn't that be even more save, since it is in the backend (so in my inmagination everything that runs server-sided is always a little more save than what runs client-sided)?
I can store information in the frontend (like roles and a username) to use them for the UI-based-access prevention to still have the same advantages as JWT provides, but I do not have the "effort" of implementing the JWT creation.
But obviously it is not common to do it that way (at least I never saw it), so what is the advantage of the Tokenization?
They are not mutually exclusive. You would use what you call "Tokenized Authentication", like an oAuth2 Bearer token most likely in a JWT when the Authentication is performed by a separate system from your Spring Boot backend. For example, you may be using Okta, Keycloak, Google or Facebook to authenticate the user.
At a minimum, your Spring Boot backend stores the username extracted from the JWT in the Authentication. You can get Spring Boot to extract any roles in the token and add those to Authentication::grantedAuthorites. If your backend system, has it's own set of roles in addition to what's in the token, then the backend could implement a PrincipalExtractor to load a UserDetails object for this user from the database as the Principal and merge the roles in the token with those store in the local database.
You'll probably want to security certain methods in your backend with method security annotations like #PreAuthorize(), since you shouldn't trust the front end. The method security will check permissions, like hasRole("ADMIN") or hasPermission(object, 'READ') using the Principal object in SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication();
In the end, the token assures the backend the user accessing it is who they say they are, i.e. Authentication, but does not necessarily tell the backend what they are Authorized to do. Yes, if you control the Authentication server you can include roles in the JWT, but roles don't usually provide as fine a grained control as is required.
Independent of what level of security you implement, the token is translated into an Authorization so you can use the Spring Security framework to manage access within your backend code.
There are 3 type of token in spring security OAuth2:
1. InMemory token Store
2.JWT token store
3.JDBC token store
So now you’re talking the JWT token store. The most powerful of JWT token store is prevent the authorization server load against to the database for checking such as role,token expired so it is related database load performance. Since all the information such as: role,username, token expire ,etc include in token itself. So the authorization server or other resource sever may using the public key to verify this token itself without invoke to data store.
Hope helpful! ☺️
I'm implementing Spring SAML in an app which is configured with multiple identity providers. My IdP metadata configuration has multiple ExtendedMetadataDelegate with an HTTPMetadataProvider and alias for each IdP. The app chooses which provider to use by extending SAMLContextProvider in a similar way to this.
When an IdP sends authorisation my app needs to know which IdP it came from (different providers have different security authorisations). I'm doing this as the docs suggest and using a custom SAMLUserDetailsService and the SAMLCredential.getRemoteEntityID() to determine which IdP made the request.
My question is, can I rely on the remoteEntityID to identify the provider? What if one IdP provider updates their metadata to include a different entityID or even "forged" entityID which was identical to another provider? Wouldn't it be better to use the peer alias as defined by us?
I'm new to SAML so it's very likely my understanding of some basic concept is incorrect, I just want to make sure I'm not opening a security hole with this configuration.
This is a good question. I didn't know the answer so I tried it out.
I have in my test environment an instance of MS ADFS and and SpringSAML project with a Service Provider and Identity Provider configured (for ADFS). In my custom SAMLUserDetailsService I use SAMLCredential.getRemoteEntityID() to determine which IDP the request came from.
I performed a successful login, then changed the name of the ADFS EntityID, then tried to login again. This resulted in a AuthNResponse;SUCCESS;127.0.0.1 message in the logs, but an error in the browser. I ran through it again with debug enabled in the UserDetailService and found that the request is failing somewhere before it gets to the UserDetailService, however, I'm not seeing any error messages in the logs.
To answer your question, (and perhaps someone else can answer more definitively), SpringSAML handles this scenario appropriately in that it errors out. It does not in that there is no error message in the logs. I assume this is because it's a somewhat unusual scenario to happen, or just a bug.
As far as forging another Identity Provider's Entity ID, the SAML requests are signed and therefore anyone trying to forge and IDPs message would also have to have access to their private key.
Lastly, the alias is not in the request, thus it cannot be used to differentiate between IDPs.
I am starting a new project where we are planing to build a restful back end and an AJAX font end. I am approaching the problem by focusing on Identifying all the resources that I have and what the various HTTP verbs will do them, their URI and the JSON representations of those resources.
I am looking for the best design for securing the backend. Here is the list of designs I have considered. I am looking for alternative designs not listed below, and pros, cons recommendations. The system will be implemented with Spring 3.0 and possibly Spring Security 3.0, SSL will be used for many parts of the system but not for all of them, so some requests may come on SSL and some might not.
Option 1: Use the HTTP session
Show a standard login screen, create a server side session and let tomcat send back a jsessionid cookie and have the ajax client include the JSESSIONID cookie on every XHR request. This options just feels like it's the wrong approach for the following reasons.
The connection becomes statefull which is against the rules of REST
I want to be able to split the bakcend into multiple seperate WAR files which means i could have multiple HTTP sessions on the backend, if that is the case then this approach does not work. While I don't need the ability to split the backend into multiple apps today, I would prefer a design that allows for that possibility.
Option 2: Find an open source Java based security library that does this
Other than Spring security I have not found any other Java libraries, any recommendations are highly appreciated.
Option 3: Try to use an existing protocol like OAuth
In my very brief look at OAuth it seems that it is designed for authentication across sites where each site has it's own user database. In this system i want a global user database shared across all the backend ajax services.
Option 4: Use SAML and Shiboleth
This options seems over kill and hugely complex to setup and maintain.
Option 5: Send the username and password with every request
This requires that user sends their username and password with every request, which means that the front end AJAX app must store the username and password as a JavaScript object and if the user navigates away from the page then back the username/password combo will be gone and the user might be forced to log in again. I don't want the front end to try and put the username and password into cookie as that would comprise security.
Option 6: Implement my own authentication / Authorization protocol
Create a REST service that users can present their username/password combination to and then get back and security token, which they must send back to the service with every request. The security token would be digitally signed by the service and would have an expiry time. The token would be only good for most operations high security operations would require a new login screen as port of confirming the operation.
Problem with this approach is I have to invent yet another security protocol which seems like a total waste of time.
I am sure I am not the only person up against this problem, I hope the stack overflow community can point to some options and tools that I have not found yet.
Take a look at Apache Shiro. It is an authentication system that has a session management feature that can be used to share sessions across applications. This may be the easiest thing to do.
Or you could use Spring Security (or Shiro) with a Remember Me cookie that is shared across the webapps (as long as they are in the same HTTP domain). The remember me cookie would be analogous to your token in option 6. You can set the expiration on the cookie that so it is short lived like a session cookie or long lived like a regular remember me.
You might also want to take a look at Jasig CAS - Single Sign-On for the Web. It has a REST API and a protocol (Proxy Tickets) that allows services to proxy user AuthN to backend services like you described in option 6. http://www.jasig.org/cas
Briefly...the application that serves up the AJAX client is protected with Spring Security (supports CAS out of the box) and gets a Proxy Granting Ticket that you embed in the AJAX client. The AJAX client uses the PGT to get Proxy Tickets for your REST services...protected with Spring Security too. The REST services get an authenticated userId without every touching primary credentials.
Alternative, you could keep the PGT on the server and use AJAX calls to retrieve Proxy Tickets that are then used by the AJAX client to call you REST services.
As I understood you are going to secure a rest application, to preface you must know that a security provider consisd of three concepts (3A):
-Authentication
-Authorization
-Auditing
to implement these three together you must provide bunch of tools such as :
-SSO provider
-Session Store
-Open Id pattern
-user credentials integration
....
I have used ACL(Spring ACL) to provide authorization services and oauth2 for authentication.
there is one channel to connect these two together and its scopes(oauth2 scopes) but the problem is scopes are not flexible(pure strings) enough to implement authorization modules such as role_voter, cache_strategy, black_list or,Role_base strategy, exceptional permissions, white_list... (but you can use #EnableGlobalMethodSecurity)
In my case I used authorization server as a resource for oauth2 authentication server(take a look at http://projects.spring.io/spring-security-oauth/docs/oauth2.html), then I considered two spots to check authorization, the first I issued ACL to front-end and forced programmer to design her page dynamically up to ACL concept, the second is in back-end on service layer(BLL) using Aspect when one rest is going to be called. I sent the service key as an actee to check if current user has enough access control to do that. and for auditing you must monitor all requests I mean you must use an listener in your gateway or broker...