Search Results

Search found 1104 results on 45 pages for 'authorization'.

Page 13/45 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

  • Consuming the Amazon S3 service from a Win8 Metro Application

    - by cibrax
    As many of the existing Http APIs for Cloud Services, AWS also provides a set of different platform SDKs for hiding many of complexities present in the APIs. While there is a platform SDK for .NET, which is open source and available in C#, that SDK does not work in Win8 Metro Applications for the changes introduced in WinRT. WinRT offers a complete different set of APIs for doing I/O operations such as doing http calls or using cryptography for signing or encrypting data, two aspects that are absolutely necessary for consuming AWS. All the I/O APIs available as part of WinRT are asynchronous, and uses the TPL model for .NET applications (HTML and JavaScript Metro applications use a model based in promises, which is similar concept).  In the case of S3, the http Authorization header is used for two purposes, authenticating clients and make sure the messages were not altered while they were in transit. For doing that, it uses a signature or hash of the message content and some of the headers using a symmetric key (That's just one of the available mechanisms). Windows Azure for example also uses the same mechanism in many of its APIs. There are three challenges that any developer working for first time in Metro will have to face to consume S3, the new WinRT APIs, the asynchronous nature of them and the complexity introduced for generating the Authorization header. Having said that, I decided to write this post with some of the gotchas I found myself trying to consume this Amazon service. 1. Generating the signature for the Authorization header All the cryptography APIs in WinRT are available under Windows.Security.Cryptography namespace. Many of operations available in these APIs uses the concept of buffers (IBuffer) for representing a chunk of binary data. As you will see in the example below, these buffers are mainly generated with the use of static methods in a WinRT class CryptographicBuffer available as part of the namespace previously mentioned. private string DeriveAuthToken(string resource, string httpMethod, string timestamp) { var stringToSign = string.Format("{0}\n" + "\n" + "\n" + "\n" + "x-amz-date:{1}\n" + "/{2}/", httpMethod, timestamp, resource); var algorithm = MacAlgorithmProvider.OpenAlgorithm("HMAC_SHA1"); var keyMaterial = CryptographicBuffer.CreateFromByteArray(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(this.secret)); var hmacKey = algorithm.CreateKey(keyMaterial); var signature = CryptographicEngine.Sign( hmacKey, CryptographicBuffer.CreateFromByteArray(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(stringToSign)) ); return CryptographicBuffer.EncodeToBase64String(signature); } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } The algorithm that determines the information or content you need to use for generating the signature is very well described as part of the AWS documentation. In this case, this method is generating a signature required for creating a new bucket. A HmacSha1 hash is computed using a secret or symetric key provided by AWS in the management console. 2. Sending an Http Request to the S3 service WinRT also ships with the System.Net.Http.HttpClient that was first introduced some months ago with ASP.NET Web API. This client provides a rich interface on top the traditional WebHttpRequest class, and also solves some of limitations found in this last one. There are a few things that don't work with a raw WebHttpRequest such as setting the Host header, which is something absolutely required for consuming S3. Also, HttpClient is more friendly for doing unit tests, as it receives a HttpMessageHandler as part of the constructor that can fake to emulate a real http call. This is how the code for consuming the service with HttpClient looks like, public async Task<S3Response> CreateBucket(string name, string region = null, params string[] acl) { var timestamp = string.Format("{0:r}", DateTime.UtcNow); var auth = DeriveAuthToken(name, "PUT", timestamp); var request = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Put, "http://s3.amazonaws.com/"); request.Headers.Host = string.Format("{0}.s3.amazonaws.com", name); request.Headers.TryAddWithoutValidation("Authorization", "AWS " + this.key + ":" + auth); request.Headers.Add("x-amz-date", timestamp); var client = new HttpClient(); var response = await client.SendAsync(request); return new S3Response { Succeed = response.StatusCode == HttpStatusCode.OK, Message = (response.Content != null) ? await response.Content.ReadAsStringAsync() : null }; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } You will notice a few additional things in this code. By default, HttpClient validates the values for some well-know headers, and Authorization is one of them. It won't allow you to set a value with ":" on it, which is something that S3 expects. However, that's not a problem at all, as you can skip the validation by using the TryAddWithoutValidation method. Also, the code is heavily relying on the new async and await keywords to transform all the asynchronous calls into synchronous ones. In case you would want to unit test this code and faking the call to the real S3 service, you should have to modify it to inject a custom HttpMessageHandler into the HttpClient. The following implementation illustrates this concept, In case you would want to unit test this code and faking the call to the real S3 service, you should have to modify it to inject a custom HttpMessageHandler into the HttpClient. The following implementation illustrates this concept, public class FakeHttpMessageHandler : HttpMessageHandler { HttpResponseMessage response; public FakeHttpMessageHandler(HttpResponseMessage response) { this.response = response; } protected override Task<HttpResponseMessage> SendAsync(HttpRequestMessage request, System.Threading.CancellationToken cancellationToken) { var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<HttpResponseMessage>(); tcs.SetResult(response); return tcs.Task; } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } You can use this handler for injecting any response while you are unit testing the code.

    Read the article

  • Consuming the Amazon S3 service from a Win8 Metro Application

    - by cibrax
    As many of the existing Http APIs for Cloud Services, AWS also provides a set of different platform SDKs for hiding many of complexities present in the APIs. While there is a platform SDK for .NET, which is open source and available in C#, that SDK does not work in Win8 Metro Applications for the changes introduced in WinRT. WinRT offers a complete different set of APIs for doing I/O operations such as doing http calls or using cryptography for signing or encrypting data, two aspects that are absolutely necessary for consuming AWS. All the I/O APIs available as part of WinRT are asynchronous, and uses the TPL model for .NET applications (HTML and JavaScript Metro applications use a model based in promises, which is similar concept).  In the case of S3, the http Authorization header is used for two purposes, authenticating clients and make sure the messages were not altered while they were in transit. For doing that, it uses a signature or hash of the message content and some of the headers using a symmetric key (That's just one of the available mechanisms). Windows Azure for example also uses the same mechanism in many of its APIs. There are three challenges that any developer working for first time in Metro will have to face to consume S3, the new WinRT APIs, the asynchronous nature of them and the complexity introduced for generating the Authorization header. Having said that, I decided to write this post with some of the gotchas I found myself trying to consume this Amazon service. 1. Generating the signature for the Authorization header All the cryptography APIs in WinRT are available under Windows.Security.Cryptography namespace. Many of operations available in these APIs uses the concept of buffers (IBuffer) for representing a chunk of binary data. As you will see in the example below, these buffers are mainly generated with the use of static methods in a WinRT class CryptographicBuffer available as part of the namespace previously mentioned. private string DeriveAuthToken(string resource, string httpMethod, string timestamp) { var stringToSign = string.Format("{0}\n" + "\n" + "\n" + "\n" + "x-amz-date:{1}\n" + "/{2}/", httpMethod, timestamp, resource); var algorithm = MacAlgorithmProvider.OpenAlgorithm("HMAC_SHA1"); var keyMaterial = CryptographicBuffer.CreateFromByteArray(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(this.secret)); var hmacKey = algorithm.CreateKey(keyMaterial); var signature = CryptographicEngine.Sign( hmacKey, CryptographicBuffer.CreateFromByteArray(Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(stringToSign)) ); return CryptographicBuffer.EncodeToBase64String(signature); } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } The algorithm that determines the information or content you need to use for generating the signature is very well described as part of the AWS documentation. In this case, this method is generating a signature required for creating a new bucket. A HmacSha1 hash is computed using a secret or symetric key provided by AWS in the management console. 2. Sending an Http Request to the S3 service WinRT also ships with the System.Net.Http.HttpClient that was first introduced some months ago with ASP.NET Web API. This client provides a rich interface on top the traditional WebHttpRequest class, and also solves some of limitations found in this last one. There are a few things that don't work with a raw WebHttpRequest such as setting the Host header, which is something absolutely required for consuming S3. Also, HttpClient is more friendly for doing unit tests, as it receives a HttpMessageHandler as part of the constructor that can fake to emulate a real http call. This is how the code for consuming the service with HttpClient looks like, public async Task<S3Response> CreateBucket(string name, string region = null, params string[] acl) { var timestamp = string.Format("{0:r}", DateTime.UtcNow); var auth = DeriveAuthToken(name, "PUT", timestamp); var request = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Put, "http://s3.amazonaws.com/"); request.Headers.Host = string.Format("{0}.s3.amazonaws.com", name); request.Headers.TryAddWithoutValidation("Authorization", "AWS " + this.key + ":" + auth); request.Headers.Add("x-amz-date", timestamp); var client = new HttpClient(); var response = await client.SendAsync(request); return new S3Response { Succeed = response.StatusCode == HttpStatusCode.OK, Message = (response.Content != null) ? await response.Content.ReadAsStringAsync() : null }; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } You will notice a few additional things in this code. By default, HttpClient validates the values for some well-know headers, and Authorization is one of them. It won't allow you to set a value with ":" on it, which is something that S3 expects. However, that's not a problem at all, as you can skip the validation by using the TryAddWithoutValidation method. Also, the code is heavily relying on the new async and await keywords to transform all the asynchronous calls into synchronous ones. In case you would want to unit test this code and faking the call to the real S3 service, you should have to modify it to inject a custom HttpMessageHandler into the HttpClient. The following implementation illustrates this concept, In case you would want to unit test this code and faking the call to the real S3 service, you should have to modify it to inject a custom HttpMessageHandler into the HttpClient. The following implementation illustrates this concept, public class FakeHttpMessageHandler : HttpMessageHandler { HttpResponseMessage response; public FakeHttpMessageHandler(HttpResponseMessage response) { this.response = response; } protected override Task<HttpResponseMessage> SendAsync(HttpRequestMessage request, System.Threading.CancellationToken cancellationToken) { var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<HttpResponseMessage>(); tcs.SetResult(response); return tcs.Task; } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } You can use this handler for injecting any response while you are unit testing the code.

    Read the article

  • Integration Patterns with Azure Service Bus Relay, Part 3: Anonymous partial-trust consumer

    - by Elton Stoneman
    This is the third in the IPASBR series, see also: Integration Patterns with Azure Service Bus Relay, Part 1: Exposing the on-premise service Integration Patterns with Azure Service Bus Relay, Part 2: Anonymous full-trust .NET consumer As the patterns get further from the simple .NET full-trust consumer, all that changes is the communication protocol and the authentication mechanism. In Part 3 the scenario is that we still have a secure .NET environment consuming our service, so we can store shared keys securely, but the runtime environment is locked down so we can't use Microsoft.ServiceBus to get the nice WCF relay bindings. To support this we will expose a RESTful endpoint through the Azure Service Bus, and require the consumer to send a security token with each HTTP service request. Pattern applicability This is a good fit for scenarios where: the runtime environment is secure enough to keep shared secrets the consumer can execute custom code, including building HTTP requests with custom headers the consumer cannot use the Azure SDK assemblies the service may need to know who is consuming it the service does not need to know who the end-user is Note there isn't actually a .NET requirement here. By exposing the service in a REST endpoint, anything that can talk HTTP can be a consumer. We'll authenticate through ACS which also gives us REST endpoints, so the service is still accessed securely. Our real-world example would be a hosted cloud app, where we we have enough room in the app's customisation to keep the shared secret somewhere safe and to hook in some HTTP calls. We will be flowing an identity through to the on-premise service now, but it will be the service identity given to the consuming app - the end user's identity isn't flown through yet. In this post, we’ll consume the service from Part 1 in ASP.NET using the WebHttpRelayBinding. The code for Part 3 (+ Part 1) is on GitHub here: IPASBR Part 3. Authenticating and authorizing with ACS We'll follow the previous examples and add a new service identity for the namespace in ACS, so we can separate permissions for different consumers (see walkthrough in Part 1). I've named the identity partialTrustConsumer. We’ll be authenticating against ACS with an explicit HTTP call, so we need a password credential rather than a symmetric key – for a nice secure option, generate a symmetric key, copy to the clipboard, then change type to password and paste in the key: We then need to do the same as in Part 2 , add a rule to map the incoming identity claim to an outgoing authorization claim that allows the identity to send messages to Service Bus: Issuer: Access Control Service Input claim type: http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity/claims/nameidentifier Input claim value: partialTrustConsumer Output claim type: net.windows.servicebus.action Output claim value: Send As with Part 2, this sets up a service identity which can send messages into Service Bus, but cannot register itself as a listener, or manage the namespace. RESTfully exposing the on-premise service through Azure Service Bus Relay The part 3 sample code is ready to go, just put your Azure details into Solution Items\AzureConnectionDetails.xml and “Run Custom Tool” on the .tt files.  But to do it yourself is very simple. We already have a WebGet attribute in the service for locally making REST calls, so we are just going to add a new endpoint which uses the WebHttpRelayBinding to relay that service through Azure. It's as easy as adding this endpoint to Web.config for the service:         <endpoint address="https://sixeyed-ipasbr.servicebus.windows.net/rest"                   binding="webHttpRelayBinding"                    contract="Sixeyed.Ipasbr.Services.IFormatService"                   behaviorConfiguration="SharedSecret">         </endpoint> - and adding the webHttp attribute in your endpoint behavior:           <behavior name="SharedSecret">             <webHttp/>             <transportClientEndpointBehavior credentialType="SharedSecret">               <clientCredentials>                 <sharedSecret issuerName="serviceProvider"                               issuerSecret="gl0xaVmlebKKJUAnpripKhr8YnLf9Neaf6LR53N8uGs="/>               </clientCredentials>             </transportClientEndpointBehavior>           </behavior> Where's my WSDL? The metadata story for REST is a bit less automated. In our local webHttp endpoint we've enabled WCF's built-in help, so if you navigate to: http://localhost/Sixeyed.Ipasbr.Services/FormatService.svc/rest/help - you'll see the uri format for making a GET request to the service. The format is the same over Azure, so this is where you'll be connecting: https://[your-namespace].servicebus.windows.net/rest/reverse?string=abc123 Build the service with the new endpoint, open that in a browser and you'll get an XML version of an HTTP status code - a 401 with an error message stating that you haven’t provided an authorization header: <?xml version="1.0"?><Error><Code>401</Code><Detail>MissingToken: The request contains no authorization header..TrackingId:4cb53408-646b-4163-87b9-bc2b20cdfb75_5,TimeStamp:10/3/2012 8:34:07 PM</Detail></Error> By default, the setup of your Service Bus endpoint as a relying party in ACS expects a Simple Web Token to be presented with each service request, and in the browser we're not passing one, so we can't access the service. Note that this request doesn't get anywhere near your on-premise service, Service Bus only relays requests once they've got the necessary approval from ACS. Why didn't the consumer need to get ACS authorization in Part 2? It did, but it was all done behind the scenes in the NetTcpRelayBinding. By specifying our Shared Secret credentials in the consumer, the service call is preceded by a check on ACS to see that the identity provided is a) valid, and b) allowed access to our Service Bus endpoint. By making manual HTTP requests, we need to take care of that ACS check ourselves now. We do that with a simple WebClient call to the ACS endpoint of our service; passing the shared secret credentials, we will get back an SWT: var values = new System.Collections.Specialized.NameValueCollection(); values.Add("wrap_name", "partialTrustConsumer"); //service identity name values.Add("wrap_password", "suCei7AzdXY9toVH+S47C4TVyXO/UUFzu0zZiSCp64Y="); //service identity password values.Add("wrap_scope", "http://sixeyed-ipasbr.servicebus.windows.net/"); //this is the realm of the RP in ACS var acsClient = new WebClient(); var responseBytes = acsClient.UploadValues("https://sixeyed-ipasbr-sb.accesscontrol.windows.net/WRAPv0.9/", "POST", values); rawToken = System.Text.Encoding.UTF8.GetString(responseBytes); With a little manipulation, we then attach the SWT to subsequent REST calls in the authorization header; the token contains the Send claim returned from ACS, so we will be authorized to send messages into Service Bus. Running the sample Navigate to http://localhost:2028/Sixeyed.Ipasbr.WebHttpClient/Default.cshtml, enter a string and hit Go! - your string will be reversed by your on-premise service, routed through Azure: Using shared secret client credentials in this way means ACS is the identity provider for your service, and the claim which allows Send access to Service Bus is consumed by Service Bus. None of the authentication details make it through to your service, so your service is not aware who the consumer is (MSDN calls this "anonymous authentication").

    Read the article

  • ASPNET WebAPI REST Guidance

    - by JoshReuben
    ASP.NET Web API is an ideal platform for building RESTful applications on the .NET Framework. While I may be more partial to NodeJS these days, there is no denying that WebAPI is a well engineered framework. What follows is my investigation of how to leverage WebAPI to construct a RESTful frontend API.   The Advantages of REST Methodology over SOAP Simpler API for CRUD ops Standardize Development methodology - consistent and intuitive Standards based à client interop Wide industry adoption, Ease of use à easy to add new devs Avoid service method signature blowout Smaller payloads than SOAP Stateless à no session data means multi-tenant scalability Cache-ability Testability   General RESTful API Design Overview · utilize HTTP Protocol - Usage of HTTP methods for CRUD, standard HTTP response codes, common HTTP headers and Mime Types · Resources are mapped to URLs, actions are mapped to verbs and the rest goes in the headers. · keep the API semantic, resource-centric – A RESTful, resource-oriented service exposes a URI for every piece of data the client might want to operate on. A REST-RPC Hybrid exposes a URI for every operation the client might perform: one URI to fetch a piece of data, a different URI to delete that same data. utilize Uri to specify CRUD op, version, language, output format: http://api.MyApp.com/{ver}/{lang}/{resource_type}/{resource_id}.{output_format}?{key&filters} · entity CRUD operations are matched to HTTP methods: · Create - POST / PUT · Read – GET - cacheable · Update – PUT · Delete - DELETE · Use Uris to represent a hierarchies - Resources in RESTful URLs are often chained · Statelessness allows for idempotency – apply an op multiple times without changing the result. POST is non-idempotent, the rest are idempotent (if DELETE flags records instead of deleting them). · Cache indication - Leverage HTTP headers to label cacheable content and indicate the permitted duration of cache · PUT vs POST - The client uses PUT when it determines which URI (Id key) the new resource should have. The client uses POST when the server determines they key. PUT takes a second param – the id. POST creates a new resource. The server assigns the URI for the new object and returns this URI as part of the response message. Note: The PUT method replaces the entire entity. That is, the client is expected to send a complete representation of the updated product. If you want to support partial updates, the PATCH method is preferred DELETE deletes a resource at a specified URI – typically takes an id param · Leverage Common HTTP Response Codes in response headers 200 OK: Success 201 Created - Used on POST request when creating a new resource. 304 Not Modified: no new data to return. 400 Bad Request: Invalid Request. 401 Unauthorized: Authentication. 403 Forbidden: Authorization 404 Not Found – entity does not exist. 406 Not Acceptable – bad params. 409 Conflict - For POST / PUT requests if the resource already exists. 500 Internal Server Error 503 Service Unavailable · Leverage uncommon HTTP Verbs to reduce payload sizes HEAD - retrieves just the resource meta-information. OPTIONS returns the actions supported for the specified resource. PATCH - partial modification of a resource. · When using PUT, POST or PATCH, send the data as a document in the body of the request. Don't use query parameters to alter state. · Utilize Headers for content negotiation, caching, authorization, throttling o Content Negotiation – choose representation (e.g. JSON or XML and version), language & compression. Signal via RequestHeader.Accept & ResponseHeader.Content-Type Accept: application/json;version=1.0 Accept-Language: en-US Accept-Charset: UTF-8 Accept-Encoding: gzip o Caching - ResponseHeader: Expires (absolute expiry time) or Cache-Control (relative expiry time) o Authorization - basic HTTP authentication uses the RequestHeader.Authorization to specify a base64 encoded string "username:password". can be used in combination with SSL/TLS (HTTPS) and leverage OAuth2 3rd party token-claims authorization. Authorization: Basic sQJlaTp5ZWFslylnaNZ= o Rate Limiting - Not currently part of HTTP so specify non-standard headers prefixed with X- in the ResponseHeader. X-RateLimit-Limit: 10000 X-RateLimit-Remaining: 9990 · HATEOAS Methodology - Hypermedia As The Engine Of Application State – leverage API as a state machine where resources are states and the transitions between states are links between resources and are included in their representation (hypermedia) – get API metadata signatures from the response Link header - in a truly REST based architecture any URL, except the initial URL, can be changed, even to other servers, without worrying about the client. · error responses - Do not just send back a 200 OK with every response. Response should consist of HTTP error status code (JQuery has automated support for this), A human readable message , A Link to a meaningful state transition , & the original data payload that was problematic. · the URIs will typically map to a server-side controller and a method name specified by the type of request method. Stuff all your calls into just four methods is not as crazy as it sounds. · Scoping - Path variables look like you’re traversing a hierarchy, and query variables look like you’re passing arguments into an algorithm · Mapping URIs to Controllers - have one controller for each resource is not a rule – can consolidate - route requests to the appropriate controller and action method · Keep URls Consistent - Sometimes it’s tempting to just shorten our URIs. not recommend this as this can cause confusion · Join Naming – for m-m entity relations there may be multiple hierarchy traversal paths · Routing – useful level of indirection for versioning, server backend mocking in development ASPNET WebAPI Considerations ASPNET WebAPI implements a lot (but not all) RESTful API design considerations as part of its infrastructure and via its coding convention. Overview When developing an API there are basically three main steps: 1. Plan out your URIs 2. Setup return values and response codes for your URIs 3. Implement a framework for your API.   Design · Leverage Models MVC folder · Repositories – support IoC for tests, abstraction · Create DTO classes – a level of indirection decouples & allows swap out · Self links can be generated using the UrlHelper · Use IQueryable to support projections across the wire · Models can support restful navigation properties – ICollection<T> · async mechanism for long running ops - return a response with a ticket – the client can then poll or be pushed the final result later. · Design for testability - Test using HttpClient , JQuery ( $.getJSON , $.each) , fiddler, browser debug. Leverage IDependencyResolver – IoC wrapper for mocking · Easy debugging - IE F12 developer tools: Network tab, Request Headers tab     Routing · HTTP request method is matched to the method name. (This rule applies only to GET, POST, PUT, and DELETE requests.) · {id}, if present, is matched to a method parameter named id. · Query parameters are matched to parameter names when possible · Done in config via Routes.MapHttpRoute – similar to MVC routing · Can alternatively: o decorate controller action methods with HttpDelete, HttpGet, HttpHead,HttpOptions, HttpPatch, HttpPost, or HttpPut., + the ActionAttribute o use AcceptVerbsAttribute to support other HTTP verbs: e.g. PATCH, HEAD o use NonActionAttribute to prevent a method from getting invoked as an action · route table Uris can support placeholders (via curly braces{}) – these can support default values and constraints, and optional values · The framework selects the first route in the route table that matches the URI. Response customization · Response code: By default, the Web API framework sets the response status code to 200 (OK). But according to the HTTP/1.1 protocol, when a POST request results in the creation of a resource, the server should reply with status 201 (Created). Non Get methods should return HttpResponseMessage · Location: When the server creates a resource, it should include the URI of the new resource in the Location header of the response. public HttpResponseMessage PostProduct(Product item) {     item = repository.Add(item);     var response = Request.CreateResponse<Product>(HttpStatusCode.Created, item);     string uri = Url.Link("DefaultApi", new { id = item.Id });     response.Headers.Location = new Uri(uri);     return response; } Validation · Decorate Models / DTOs with System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations properties RequiredAttribute, RangeAttribute. · Check payloads using ModelState.IsValid · Under posting – leave out values in JSON payload à JSON formatter assigns a default value. Use with RequiredAttribute · Over-posting - if model has RO properties à use DTO instead of model · Can hook into pipeline by deriving from ActionFilterAttribute & overriding OnActionExecuting Config · Done in App_Start folder > WebApiConfig.cs – static Register method: HttpConfiguration param: The HttpConfiguration object contains the following members. Member Description DependencyResolver Enables dependency injection for controllers. Filters Action filters – e.g. exception filters. Formatters Media-type formatters. by default contains JsonFormatter, XmlFormatter IncludeErrorDetailPolicy Specifies whether the server should include error details, such as exception messages and stack traces, in HTTP response messages. Initializer A function that performs final initialization of the HttpConfiguration. MessageHandlers HTTP message handlers - plug into pipeline ParameterBindingRules A collection of rules for binding parameters on controller actions. Properties A generic property bag. Routes The collection of routes. Services The collection of services. · Configure JsonFormatter for circular references to support links: PreserveReferencesHandling.Objects Documentation generation · create a help page for a web API, by using the ApiExplorer class. · The ApiExplorer class provides descriptive information about the APIs exposed by a web API as an ApiDescription collection · create the help page as an MVC view public ILookup<string, ApiDescription> GetApis()         {             return _explorer.ApiDescriptions.ToLookup(                 api => api.ActionDescriptor.ControllerDescriptor.ControllerName); · provide documentation for your APIs by implementing the IDocumentationProvider interface. Documentation strings can come from any source that you like – e.g. extract XML comments or define custom attributes to apply to the controller [ApiDoc("Gets a product by ID.")] [ApiParameterDoc("id", "The ID of the product.")] public HttpResponseMessage Get(int id) · GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Services – add the documentation Provider · To hide an API from the ApiExplorer, add the ApiExplorerSettingsAttribute Plugging into the Message Handler pipeline · Plug into request / response pipeline – derive from DelegatingHandler and override theSendAsync method – e.g. for logging error codes, adding a custom response header · Can be applied globally or to a specific route Exception Handling · Throw HttpResponseException on method failures – specify HttpStatusCode enum value – examine this enum, as its values map well to typical op problems · Exception filters – derive from ExceptionFilterAttribute & override OnException. Apply on Controller or action methods, or add to global HttpConfiguration.Filters collection · HttpError object provides a consistent way to return error information in the HttpResponseException response body. · For model validation, you can pass the model state to CreateErrorResponse, to include the validation errors in the response public HttpResponseMessage PostProduct(Product item) {     if (!ModelState.IsValid)     {         return Request.CreateErrorResponse(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest, ModelState); Cookie Management · Cookie header in request and Set-Cookie headers in a response - Collection of CookieState objects · Specify Expiry, max-age resp.Headers.AddCookies(new CookieHeaderValue[] { cookie }); Internet Media Types, formatters and serialization · Defaults to application/json · Request Accept header and response Content-Type header · determines how Web API serializes and deserializes the HTTP message body. There is built-in support for XML, JSON, and form-urlencoded data · customizable formatters can be inserted into the pipeline · POCO serialization is opt out via JsonIgnoreAttribute, or use DataMemberAttribute for optin · JSON serializer leverages NewtonSoft Json.NET · loosely structured JSON objects are serialzed as JObject which derives from Dynamic · to handle circular references in json: json.SerializerSettings.PreserveReferencesHandling =    PreserveReferencesHandling.All à {"$ref":"1"}. · To preserve object references in XML [DataContract(IsReference=true)] · Content negotiation Accept: Which media types are acceptable for the response, such as “application/json,” “application/xml,” or a custom media type such as "application/vnd.example+xml" Accept-Charset: Which character sets are acceptable, such as UTF-8 or ISO 8859-1. Accept-Encoding: Which content encodings are acceptable, such as gzip. Accept-Language: The preferred natural language, such as “en-us”. o Web API uses the Accept and Accept-Charset headers. (At this time, there is no built-in support for Accept-Encoding or Accept-Language.) · Controller methods can take JSON representations of DTOs as params – auto-deserialization · Typical JQuery GET request: function find() {     var id = $('#prodId').val();     $.getJSON("api/products/" + id,         function (data) {             var str = data.Name + ': $' + data.Price;             $('#product').text(str);         })     .fail(         function (jqXHR, textStatus, err) {             $('#product').text('Error: ' + err);         }); }            · Typical GET response: HTTP/1.1 200 OK Server: ASP.NET Development Server/10.0.0.0 Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 04:30:33 GMT X-AspNet-Version: 4.0.30319 Cache-Control: no-cache Pragma: no-cache Expires: -1 Content-Type: application/json; charset=utf-8 Content-Length: 175 Connection: Close [{"Id":1,"Name":"TomatoSoup","Price":1.39,"ActualCost":0.99},{"Id":2,"Name":"Hammer", "Price":16.99,"ActualCost":10.00},{"Id":3,"Name":"Yo yo","Price":6.99,"ActualCost": 2.05}] True OData support · Leverage Query Options $filter, $orderby, $top and $skip to shape the results of controller actions annotated with the [Queryable]attribute. [Queryable]  public IQueryable<Supplier> GetSuppliers()  · Query: ~/Suppliers?$filter=Name eq ‘Microsoft’ · Applies the following selection filter on the server: GetSuppliers().Where(s => s.Name == “Microsoft”)  · Will pass the result to the formatter. · true support for the OData format is still limited - no support for creates, updates, deletes, $metadata and code generation etc · vnext: ability to configure how EditLinks, SelfLinks and Ids are generated Self Hosting no dependency on ASPNET or IIS: using (var server = new HttpSelfHostServer(config)) {     server.OpenAsync().Wait(); Tracing · tracability tools, metrics – e.g. send to nagios · use your choice of tracing/logging library, whether that is ETW,NLog, log4net, or simply System.Diagnostics.Trace. · To collect traces, implement the ITraceWriter interface public class SimpleTracer : ITraceWriter {     public void Trace(HttpRequestMessage request, string category, TraceLevel level,         Action<TraceRecord> traceAction)     {         TraceRecord rec = new TraceRecord(request, category, level);         traceAction(rec);         WriteTrace(rec); · register the service with config · programmatically trace – has helper extension methods: Configuration.Services.GetTraceWriter().Info( · Performance tracing - pipeline writes traces at the beginning and end of an operation - TraceRecord class includes aTimeStamp property, Kind property set to TraceKind.Begin / End Security · Roles class methods: RoleExists, AddUserToRole · WebSecurity class methods: UserExists, .CreateUserAndAccount · Request.IsAuthenticated · Leverage HTTP 401 (Unauthorized) response · [AuthorizeAttribute(Roles="Administrator")] – can be applied to Controller or its action methods · See section in WebApi document on "Claim-based-security for ASP.NET Web APIs using DotNetOpenAuth" – adapt this to STS.--> Web API Host exposes secured Web APIs which can only be accessed by presenting a valid token issued by the trusted issuer. http://zamd.net/2012/05/04/claim-based-security-for-asp-net-web-apis-using-dotnetopenauth/ · Use MVC membership provider infrastructure and add a DelegatingHandler child class to the WebAPI pipeline - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11535075/asp-net-mvc-4-web-api-authentication-with-membership-provider - this will perform the login actions · Then use AuthorizeAttribute on controllers and methods for role mapping- http://sixgun.wordpress.com/2012/02/29/asp-net-web-api-basic-authentication/ · Alternate option here is to rely on MVC App : http://forums.asp.net/t/1831767.aspx/1

    Read the article

  • Basic Auth on DirectoryIndex Only

    - by Brad
    I am trying to configure basic auth for my index file, and only my index file. I have configured it like so: <Files index.htm> Order allow,deny Allow from all AuthType Basic AuthName "Some Auth" AuthUserFile "C:/path/to/my/.htpasswd" Require valid-user </Files> When I visit the page, 401 Authorization Required is returned as expected, but the browser doesn't prompt for the username/password. Some further inspection has revealed that Apache is not sending the WWW-Authenticate header. GET http://myhost/ HTTP/1.1 Host: myhost Connection: keep-alive User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.100 Safari/534.30 Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-Encoding: gzip,deflate,sdch Accept-Language: en-US,en;q=0.8 Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.3 HTTP/1.1 401 Authorization Required Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 21:36:48 GMT Server: Apache/2.2.16 (Win32) Content-Length: 401 Keep-Alive: timeout=5, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>401 Authorization Required</title> </head><body> <h1>Authorization Required</h1> <p>This server could not verify that you are authorized to access the document requested. Either you supplied the wrong credentials (e.g., bad password), or your browser doesn't understand how to supply the credentials required.</p> </body></html> Why is Apache doing this? How can I configure it to send that header appropriately? It is worth noting that this exact same set of directives work fine if I set them for a whole directory. It is only when I configure them to a directory index that they do not work. This is how I know my .htpasswd and such are fine. I am using Apache 2.2 on Windows. On another note, I found this listed as a bug in Apache 1.3. This leads me to believe that this is actually a configuration problem on my end.

    Read the article

  • Why there are three rounds of message exchanges for integrated windows authentication for IE

    - by user197658
    According to the result monitored by fiddler, there are totally 3 handshakes for integrated windows authentication for IE. GET /home - 401 Unauthorized WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate, NTLM GET /home Authorization: Negotiate UYTYGHGYKHKJPPP-=== - 401 Unauthorized WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate UYUGKJKJKJ+++766== Get /home Authorization: Negotiate HJGKJLJLJ+++=== - 200 OK WWW-Authenticate: Negotiate UHLKJKJKJJLK=== Who knows what concrete things are done for the three, especially the 2nd one. P.S. The network environment is work group mode, other than domain mode, and the server is a website hosted on my local PC. In other words, the client (IE) & the server are both in the same machine.

    Read the article

  • Facility setting for syslog 'client'

    - by Carl Summers
    What are the things one should consider when setting the facility for a syslog client? In particular is there a difference between "4 security/authorization messages" and "10 security/authorization messages"? I'm configuring a DataPower XS40 appliance.

    Read the article

  • How to void authorized transaction in authorize.net gateway using ActiveMerchant

    - by m7d
    Goal: Only have successful purchases show up on a customer's billing statement. I don't want declined authorizations showing up on their billing statement (as seen in an online banking system) as pending. A customer often will accidentally input an incorrect billing address, for example, followed by a correct one. Together, the two attempts, one successful and one not both show up on their billing statement as pending prior to settlement. This can scare the customer as it looks potentially like they will be charged twice. Details: When I do an AUTH_CAPTURE (via ActiveMerchant's purchase) or an AUTH (via ActiveMerchant's authorize) which is declined and subsequently want to void that authorization (via ActiveMerchant's void) so as not to have it appear on a customer's billing statement as pending (even though it will settle out after a few days), the gateway can't find the transaction to void using the authorization code returned from the authorization or capture method calls on the gateway. This is specific to the authorize.net AIM gateway. Please advise. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Reading out all actions in a Grails-Controller

    - by kenan
    Hi, i need to read out all available actions from any controller in my web-app. The reason for this is an authorization system where i need to give users a list of allowed actions. E.g.: User xyz has the authorization for executing the actions show, list, search. User admin has the authorization for executing the actions edit, delete etc. I need to read out all actions from a controller. Does anyone has an idea? Thx for any help! kenan

    Read the article

  • Framework 4 Features: Summary of Security enhancements

    - by Anthony Shorten
    In the last log entry I mentioned one of the new security features in Oracle Utilities Application Framework 4.0.1. Security is one of the major "tent poles" (to borrow a phrase from Steve Jobs) in this release of the framework. There are a number of security related enhancements requested by customers and as a result of internal reviews that we have introduced. Here is a summary of some of the security enchancements we have added in this release: Security Cache Changes - Security authorization information is automatically cached on the server for performance reasons (security is checked for every single call the product makes for all modes of access). Prior to this release the cache auto-refreshed every 30 minutes (or so). This has beem made more nimble by supporting a cache refresh every minute (or so). This means authorization changes are reflected quicker than before. Business Level security - Business Services are configurable services that are based upon Application Services. Typically, the business service inherited its security profile from its parent service. Whilst this is sufficient for most needs, it is now required to further specify security on the Business Service definition itself. This will allow granular security and allow the same application service to be exposed as different Business Services with their own security. This is particularly useful when you base a Business Service on a query zone. User Propogation - As with other client server applications, the database connections are pooled and shared as needed. This means that a common database user is used to access the database from the pool to allow sharing. Unfortunently, this means that tracability at the database level is that much harder. In Oracle Utilities Application Framework V4 the end userid is now propogated to the database using the CLIENT_IDENTIFIER as part of the Oracle JDBC connection API. This not only means that the common database userid is still used but the end user is indentifiable for the duration of the database call. This can be used for monitoring or to hook into Oracle's database security products. This enhancement is only available to Oracle Database customers. Enhanced Security Definitions - Security Administrators use the product browser front end to control access rights of defined users. While this is sufficient for most sites, a new security portal has been introduced to speed up the maintenance of security information. Oracle Identity Manager Integration - With the popularity of Oracle's Identity Management Suite, the Framework now provides an integration adapter and Identity Manager Generic Transport Connector (GTC) to allow users and group membership to be provisioned to any Oracle Utilities Application Framework based product from Oracle's Identity Manager. This is also available for Oracle Utilties Application Framework V2.2 customers. Refer to My Oracle Support KBid 970785.1 - Oracle Identity Manager Integration Overview. Audit On Inquiry - Typically the configurable audit facility in the Oracle Utilities Application Framework is used to audit changes to records. In Oracle Utilities Application Framework the Business Services and Service Scripts could be configured to audit inquiries as well. Now it is possible to attach auditing capabilities to zones on the product (including base package ones). Time Zone Support - In some of the Oracle Utilities Application Framework based products, the timezone of the end user is a factor in the processing. The user object has been extended to allow the recording of time zone information for use in product functionality. JAAS Suport - Internally the Oracle Utilities Application Framework uses a number of techniques to validate and transmit security information across the architecture. These various methods have been reconciled into using Java Authentication and Authorization Services for standardized security. This is strictly an internal change with no direct on how security operates externally. JMX Based Cache Management - In the last bullet point, I mentioned extra security applied to cache management from the browser. Alternatively a JMX based interface is now provided to allow IT operations to control the cache without the browser interface. This JMX capability can be initiated from a JSR120 compliant JMX console or JMX browser. I will be writing another more detailed blog entry on the JMX enhancements as it is quite a change and an exciting direction for the product line. Data Patch Permissions - The database installer provided with the product required lower levels of security for some operations. At some sites they wanted the ability for non-DBA's to execute the utilities in a controlled fashion. The framework now allows feature configuration to allow delegation for patch execution. User Enable Support - At some sites, the use of temporary staff such as contractors is commonplace. In this scenario, temporary security setups were required and used. A potential issue has arisen when the contractor left the company. Typically the IT group would remove the contractor from the security repository to prevent login using that contractors userid but the userid could NOT be removed from the authorization model becuase of audit requirements (if any user in the product updates financials or key data their userid is recorded for audit purposes). It is now possible to effectively diable the user from the security model to prevent any use of the useridwhilst retaining audit information. These are a subset of the security changes in Oracle Utilities Application Framework. More details about the security capabilities of the product is contained in My Oracle Support KB Id 773473.1 - Oracle Utilities Application Framework Security Overview.

    Read the article

  • Token based Authentication for WCF HTTP/REST Services: The Client

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    If you wondered how a client would have to look like to work with the authentication framework, it is pretty straightfoward: Request a token Put that token on the authorization header (along with a registered scheme) and make the service call e.g.: var oauth2 = new OAuth2Client(_oauth2Address); var swt = oauth2.RequestAccessToken( "username", "password", _baseAddress.AbsoluteUri);   var client = new HttpClient { BaseAddress = _baseAddress }; client.DefaultRequestHeaders.Authorization = new AuthenticationHeaderValue("Bearer", swt); var response = client.Get("identity"); response.EnsureSuccessStatusCode(); HTH

    Read the article

  • TDE Tablespace Encryption 11.2.0.1 Certified with EBS 11i

    - by Steven Chan
    Oracle Advanced Security is an optional licenced Oracle 11g Database add-on.  Oracle Advanced Security Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) offers two different features:  column encryption and tablespace encryption.  TDE Tablespace Encryption 11.2.0.1 is now certified with Oracle E-Business Suite Release 11i. What is Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) ? Oracle Advanced Security Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) allows you to protect data at rest. TDE helps address privacy and PCI requirements by encrypting personally identifiable information (PII) such as Social Security numbers and credit card numbers. TDE is completely transparent to existing applications with no triggers, views or other application changes required. Data is transparently encrypted when written to disk and transparently decrypted after an application user has successfully authenticated and passed all authorization checks. Authorization checks include verifying the user has the necessary select and update privileges on the application table and checking Database Vault, Label Security and Virtual Private Database enforcement policies.

    Read the article

  • Using the OAM Mobile & Social SDK to secure native mobile apps - Part 2 : OAM Mobile & Social Server configuration

    - by kanishkmahajan
    Objective  In the second part of this blog post I'll now cover configuration of OAM to secure our sample native apps developed using the iOS SDK. First, here are some key server side concepts: Application Profiles: An application profile is a logical representation of your application within OAM server. It could be a web (html/javascript) or native (iOS or Android) application. Applications may have different requirements for AuthN/AuthZ, and therefore each application that interacts with OAM Mobile & Social REST services must be uniquely defined. Service Providers: Service providers represent the back end services that are accessed by applications. With OAM Mobile & Social these services are in the areas of authentication, authorization and user profile access. A Service Provider then defines a type or class of service for authentication, authorization or user profiles. For example, the JWTAuthentication provider performs authentication and returns JWT (JSON Web Tokens) to the application. In contrast, the OAMAuthentication also provides authentication but uses OAM SSO tokens Service Profiles:  A Service Profile is a logical envelope that defines a service endpoint URL for a service provider for the OAM Mobile & Social Service. You can create multiple service profiles for a service provider to define token capabilities and service endpoints. Each service provider instance requires atleast one corresponding service profile.The  OAM Mobile & Social Service includes a pre-configured service profile for each pre-configured service provider. Service Domains: Service domains bind together application profiles and service profiles with an optional security handler. So now let's configure the OAM server. Additional details are in the OAM Documentation and this post simply provides an outline of configuration tasks required to configure OAM for securing native apps.  Configuration  Create The Application Profile Log on to the Oracle Access Management console and from System Configuration -> Mobile and Social -> Mobile Services, select "Create" under Application Profiles. You would do this  step twice - once for each of the native apps - AvitekInventory and AvitekScheduler. Enter the parameters for the new Application profile: Name:  The application name. In this example we use 'InventoryApp' for the AvitekInventory app and 'SchedulerApp' for the AvitekScheduler app. The application name configured here must match the application name in the settings for the deployed iOS application. BaseSecret: Enter a password here. This does not need to match any existing password. It is used as an encryption key between the client and the OAM server.  Mobile Configuration: Enable this checkbox for any mobile applications. This enables the SDK to collect and send Mobile specific attributes to the OAM server.  Webview: Controls the type of browser that the iOS application will use. The embedded browser (default) will render the browser within the application. External will use the system standalone browser. External can sometimes be preferable for debugging URLScheme: The URL scheme associated with the iOS apps that is also used as a custom URL scheme to register O/S handlers that will take control when OAM transfers control to device. For the AvitekInventory and the AvitekScheduler apps I used osa:// and client:// respectively. You set this scheme in Xcode while developing your iOS Apps under Info->URL Types.  Bundle Identifier : The fully qualified name of your iOS application. You typically set this when you create a new Xcode project or under General->Identity in Xcode. For the AvitekInventory and AvitekScheduler apps these were com.us.oracle.AvitekInventory and com.us.oracle.AvitekScheduler respectively.  Create The Service Domain Select create under Service domains. Create a name for your domain (AvitekDomain is what I've used). The name configured must match the service domain set in the iOS application settings. Under "Application Profile Selection" click the browse button. Choose the application profiles that you created in the previous step one by one. Set the InventoryApp as the SSO agent (with an automatic priority of 1) and the SchedulerApp as the SSO client. This associates these applications with this service domain and configures them in a 'circle of trust'.  Advance to the next page of the wizard to configure the services for this domain. For this example we will use the following services:  Authentication:   This will use the JWT (JSON Web Token) format authentication provider. The iOS application upon successful authentication will receive a signed JWT token from OAM Mobile & Social service. This token will be used in subsequent calls to OAM. Use 'MobileOAMAuthentication' here. Authorization:  The authorization provider. The SDK makes calls to this provider endpoint to obtain authorization decisions on resource requests. Use 'OAMAuthorization' here. User Profile Service:  This is the service that provides user profile services (attribute lookup, attribute modification). It can be any directory configured as a data source in OAM.  And that's it! We're done configuring our native apps. In the next section, let's look at some additional features that were mentioned in the earlier post that are automated by the SDK for the app developer i.e. these are areas that require no additional coding by the app developer when developing with the SDK as they only require server side configuration: Additional Configuration  Offline Authentication Select this option in the service domain configuration to allow users to log in and authenticate to the application locally. Clear the box to block users from authenticating locally. Strong Authentication By simply selecting the OAAMSecurityHandlerPlugin while configuring mobile related Service Domains, the OAM Mobile&Social service allows sophisticated device and client application registration logic as well as the advanced risk and fraud analysis logic found in OAAM to be applied to mobile authentication. Let's look at some scenarios where the OAAMSecurityHandlerPlugin gets used. First, when we configure OAM and OAAM to integrate together using the TAP scheme, then that integration kicks off by selecting the OAAMSecurityHandlerPlugin in the mobile service domain. This is how the mobile device is now prompted for KBA,OTP etc depending on the TAP scheme integration and the OAM users registered in the OAAM database. Second, when we configured the service domain, there were claim attributes there that are already pre-configured in OAM Mobile&Social service and we simply accepted the default values- these are the set of attributes that will be fetched from the device and passed to the server during registration/authentication as device profile attributes. When a mobile application requests a token through the Mobile Client SDK, the SDK logic will send the Device Profile attributes as a part of an HTTP request. This set of Device Profile attributes enhances security by creating an audit trail for devices that assists device identification. When the OAAM Security Plug-in is used, a particular combination of Device Profile attribute values is treated as a device finger print, known as the Digital Finger Print in the OAAM Administration Console. Each finger print is assigned a unique fingerprint number. Each OAAM session is associated with a finger print and the finger print makes it possible to log (and audit) the devices that are performing authentication and token acquisition. Finally, if the jail broken option is selected while configuring an application profile, the SDK detects a device is jail broken based on configured policy and if the OAAM handler is configured the plug-in can allow or block access to client device depending on the OAAM policy as well as detect blacklisted, lost or stolen devices and send a wipeout command that deletes all the mobile &social relevant data and blocks the device from future access. 1024x768 Social Logins Finally, let's complete this post by adding configuration to configure social logins for mobile applications. Although the Avitek sample apps do not demonstrate social logins this would be an ideal exercise for you based on the sample code provided in the earlier post. I'll cover the server side configuration here (with Facebook as an example) and you can retrofit the code to accommodate social logins by following the steps outlined in "Invoking Authentication Services" and add code in LoginViewController and maybe create a new delegate - AvitekRPDelegate based on the description in the previous post. So, here all you will need to do is configure an application profile for social login, configure a new service domain that uses the social login application profile, register the app on Facebook and finally configure the Facebook OAuth provider in OAM with those settings. Navigate to Mobile and Social, click on "Internet Identity Services" and create a new application profile. Here are the relevant parameters for the new application profile (-also we're not registering the social user in OAM with this configuration below, however that is a key feature as well): Name:  The application name. This must match the name of the of mobile application profile created for your application under Mobile Services. We used InventoryApp for this example. SharedSecret: Enter a password here. This does not need to match any existing password. It is used as an encryption key between the client and the OAM Mobile and Social service.  Mobile Application Return URL: After the Relying Party (social) login, the OAM Mobile & Social service will redirect to the iOS application using this URI. This is defined under Info->URL type and we used 'osa', so we define this here as 'osa://' Login Type: Choose to allow only internet identity authentication for this exercise. Authentication Service Endpoint : Make sure that /internetidentityauthentication is selected. Login to http://developers.facebook.com using your Facebook account and click on Apps and register the app as InventoryApp. Note that the consumer key and API secret gets generated automatically by the Facebook OAuth server. Navigate back to OAM and under Mobile and Social, click on "Internet Identity Services" and edit the Facebook OAuth Provider. Add the consumer key and API secret from the Facebook developers site to the Facebook OAuth Provider: Navigate to Mobile Services. Click on New to create a new service domain. In this example we call the domain "AvitekDomainRP". The type should be 'Mobile Application' and the application credential type 'User Token'. Add the application "InventoryApp" to the domain. Advance the next page of the wizard. Select the  default service profiles but ensure that the Authentication Service is set to 'InternetIdentityAuthentication'. Finish the creation of the service domain.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Backup SQL databases to Box or SkyDrive

    - by Pinal Dave
    To ensure your SQL Server or Azure databases remain safe, you should backup your databases periodically. And it is important to store the backups in a reliable location. Microsoft SkyDrive currently offers 7GB free, Box offers 5GB free – both are reliable and it is simple to send your backups there. SQLBackupAndFTP in it’s latest version 9 added the option to backup to SkyDrive and Box ( in addition to local/network folder, NAS drive, FTP, Dropbox, Google Drive and Amazon S3). Just select the databases that you’d like to backup and select to store the backups in SkyDrive or Box. Below I will show you how to do it in details Select databases to backup First connect to your SQL Server or Azure Sql Database. Then select the databases you’d like to backup. Connect to SkyDrive or Box cloud If you have a free version of SQLBackupAndFTP Box destination is included, but SkyDrive destination will be disabled as it is available in the Standard version or above. Click “Try now” to get 30 days trial on all options On the “SkyDrive Settings” form you’ll need to authorize SQLBackupAndFTP to access your SkyDrive. Click “Authorize…” to open SkyDrive authorization page in your browser, sign in your to SkyDrive account and click at “Allow” . On the next page you will see the field with authorization code. Copy it to the clipboard. Box operation is just the same. After that return to SQLBackupAndFTP, paste the authorization code and click “OK” . After you are authorized, you can enter the path to a backup folder. SQLBackupAndFTP will create the folder if it does not exist. That’s all what has to be done to backup to SkyDrive or Box cloud.  You can now click on “Run Now” button to test this job. Conclusion Whatever is your preference for storing SQL backups, it is easy with SQLBackupAndFTP. Note that at the time of this writing they are running a very rare promotion on volume licenses: 5–9 licenses: 20% off 10–19 licenses: 35% off more than 20 licenses: 50% off Please let me know your favorite options for storing the backups. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com)Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL

    Read the article

  • Access Control Service v2: Registering Web Identities in your Applications [concepts]

    - by Your DisplayName here!
    ACS v2 support two fundamental types of client identities– I like to call them “enterprise identities” (WS-*) and “web identities” (Google, LiveID, OpenId in general…). I also see two different “mind sets” when it comes to application design using the above identity types: Enterprise identities – often the fact that a client can present a token from a trusted identity provider means he is a legitimate user of the application. Trust relationships and authorization details have been negotiated out of band (often on paper). Web identities – the fact that a user can authenticate with Google et al does not necessarily mean he is a legitimate (or registered) user of an application. Typically additional steps are necessary (like filling out a form, email confirmation etc). Sometimes also a mixture of both approaches exist, for the sake of this post, I will focus on the web identity case. I got a number of questions how to implement the web identity scenario and after some conversations it turns out it is the old authentication vs. authorization problem that gets in the way. Many people use the IsAuthenticated property on IIdentity to make security decisions in their applications (or deny user=”?” in ASP.NET terms). That’s a very natural thing to do, because authentication was done inside the application and we knew exactly when the IsAuthenticated condition is true. Been there, done that. Guilty ;) The fundamental difference between these “old style” apps and federation is, that authentication is not done by the application anymore. It is done by a third party service, and in the case of web identity providers, in services that are not under our control (nor do we have a formal business relationship with these providers). Now the issue is, when you switch to ACS, and someone with a Google account authenticates, indeed IsAuthenticated is true – because that’s what he is! This does not mean, that he is also authorized to use the application. It just proves he was able to authenticate with Google. Now this obviously leads to confusion. How can we solve that? Easy answer: We have to deal with authentication and authorization separately. Job done ;) For many application types I see this general approach: Application uses ACS for authentication (maybe both enterprise and web identities, we focus on web identities but you could easily have a dual approach here) Application offers to authenticate (or sign in) via web identity accounts like LiveID, Google, Facebook etc. Application also maintains a database of its “own” users. Typically you want to store additional information about the user In such an application type it is important to have a unique identifier for your users (think the primary key of your user database). What would that be? Most web identity provider (and all the standard ACS v2 supported ones) emit a NameIdentifier claim. This is a stable ID for the client (scoped to the relying party – more on that later). Furthermore ACS emits a claims identifying the identity provider (like the original issuer concept in WIF). When you combine these two values together, you can be sure to have a unique identifier for the user, e.g.: Facebook-134952459903700\799880347 You can now check on incoming calls, if the user is already registered and if yes, swap the ACS claims with claims coming from your user database. One claims would maybe be a role like “Registered User” which can then be easily used to do authorization checks in the application. The WIF claims authentication manager is a perfect place to do the claims transformation. If the user is not registered, show a register form. Maybe you can use some claims from the identity provider to pre-fill form fields. (see here where I show how to use the Facebook API to fetch additional user properties). After successful registration (which may include other mechanisms like a confirmation email), flip the bit in your database to make the web identity a registered user. This is all very theoretical. In the next post I will show some code and provide a download link for the complete sample. More on NameIdentifier Identity providers “guarantee” that the name identifier for a given user in your application will always be the same. But different applications (in the case of ACS – different ACS namespaces) will see different name identifiers. This is by design to protect the privacy of users because identical name identifiers could be used to create “profiles” of some sort for that user. In technical terms they create the name identifier approximately like this: name identifier = Hash((Provider Internal User ID) + (Relying Party Address)) Why is this important to know? Well – when you change the name of your ACS namespace, the name identifiers will change as well and you will will lose your “connection” to your existing users. Oh an btw – never use any other claims (like email address or name) to form a unique ID – these can often be changed by users.

    Read the article

  • What should be stored in UserContext?

    - by HonorGod
    From my general understanding I believe UserContext for a web application is supposed to hold user authentication and authorization (user roles) information. As part of user roles, there are definitions on who can access what data and accordingly the corresponding reference data is loaded into the UserContext as well. Is this a good practice to load and use reference data from UserContext? Does this have any impact with the number of sessions vs size of data it is holding inside JVM? I am thinking we use UserContext only for authentication and authorization but load the reference data from cache on demand and use it if required.

    Read the article

  • Problems with cross forest authentication in SQL Reporting

    - by chunkyb2002
    We're currently running an SQL 2008 R2 Cluster with Reporting Services running, all for use with System Center Operations Manager 2007 R2 (RU3). Our users are on a different domains to the SCOM and SQL servers (we have two domains as we are in the process of a domain migration) We have no problems at all with users accessing reports via the SCOM Console or the Web interface if they are on the new domain which runs at 2008 R2 functional level. However users on the old domain (which runs at a 2003 functional level) cannot access reports on SCOM or via the web interface (http://sqlserver/reports) The error we get is: An error occurred when invoking the authorization extension. (rsAuthorizationExtensionError) For more information about this error navigate to the report server on the local server machine, or enable remote errors Taking the errors advise we logged on to the SQL server as a user on the old domain (which works fine!) and then try to authenticate with the reporting via the web interface which produces this most useful of errors: An error occurred when invoking the authorization extension. (rsAuthorizationExtensionError) The creator of this fault did not specify a Reason. Things we've tried: Recreating the trust between domains Ensuring the SQL Reporting service account was a member of Windows Authorization Access Group on the 2003 domain Added users on the 2003 domain explicitly to the Reporting Users group on the SQL Server Has anyone come across this issue before perhaps in a different scenario? If so how was it resolved? Thanks in advance for any help.

    Read the article

  • Routing a single request through multiple nginx backend apps

    - by Jonathan Oliver
    I wanted to get an idea if anything like the following scenario was possible: Nginx handles a request and routes it to some kind of authentication application where cookies and/or other kinds of security identifiers are interpreted and verified. The app perhaps makes a few additions to the request (appending authenticated headers). Failing authentication returns an HTTP 401. Nginx then takes the request and routes it through an authorization application which determines, based upon identity and the HTTP verb (put, delete, get, etc.) and URL in question, whether the actor/agent/user has permission to performed the intended action. Perhaps the authorization application modifies the request somewhat by appending another header, for example. Failing authorization returns 403. (Wash, rinse, repeat the proxy pattern for any number of services that want to participate in the request in some fashion.) Finally, Nginx routes the request into the actual application code where the request is inspected and the requested operations are executed according to the URL in question and where the identity of the user can be captured and understood by the application by looking at the altered HTTP request. Ideally, Nginx could do this natively or with a plugin. Any ideas? The alternative that I've considered is having Nginx hand off the initial request to the authentication application and then have this application proxy the request back through to Nginx (whether on the same box or another box). I know there are a number of applications frameworks (Django, RoR, etc.) that can do a lot of this stuff "in process", but I was trying to make things a little more generic and self contained where different applications could "hook" the HTTP pipeline of Nginx and then participate in, short circuit, and even modify the request accordingly. If Nginx can't do this, is anyone aware of other web servers that will perform in the manner described above?

    Read the article

  • Understanding Authorized Access to your Google Account

    - by firebush
    I'm having trouble understanding what I'm am granting to sites when they have "Authorized Access to my Google Account." This is how I see what has authorized access: Log into gmail. Click on the link that is my name in the upper-right corner, and from the drop-down select Account. From the list of links to the left, select Security. Click on Edit next to Authorized applications and sites. Authenticate again. At the top of the page, I see a set of sites that have authorized access to my account in various ways. I'm having trouble finding out information about what is being told to me here. There's no "help" link anywhere on the page and my Google searches are coming up unproductive. From the looks of what I see there, Google has access to my Google calendar. I feel comfortable about that, I think. But other sites have authorization to "Sign in using your Google account". My question is, what exactly does that authorization mean? What do the sites that have authorization to "Sign in using my Google account" have the power to do? I hope that this simply means that they authorize using the same criterion that gmail does. I assume that this doesn't grant them the ability to access my email. Can someone please calm my paranoia by describing (or simply pointing me to a site that describes) what these terms mean exactly? Also, if you have any thoughts about the safety of this feature, please share. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Configure Web app for external access (IIS7), allowing only certain users via AD group. All users need internal access

    - by White Island
    We have a Web app running in IIS7 (Server 2008 R2). I now need to allow external access with an SSL certificate, so certain users (e.g. the owner of the company) can use it remotely without VPN. They want to roll out the external access only to those specific users at first (thinking: a Windows credential prompt), BUT everyone will still need access internally (HTTP), without the prompt. I have the SSL cert installed on the server and public DNS configured. I've been trying to figure out how to work the authentication/authorization. I was thinking I need to disable Anonymous authn and set Windows authn, then I keep coming back to 'URL Authorization' in my research for the group setting; however, when I tried URL authz, (removed allow all, added allow rule for the special group), it broke the site internally (403.2 Forbidden, I believe it was). I thought maybe setting up a second site in IIS pointing to the same program would work, but the exact same thing happened (and again with a new app pool, just for kicks). So I guess my question is, how would you do this: allow external access, limited to users in a specific AD group, while still allowing internal access without a credentials prompt? How do I separate the external HTTPS and internal HTTP authorization requirements? Will I need to just copy the entire contents of the app in Windows Explorer to a new folder and create my external site from that? Is Windows authentication the correct option for this? I did come across this, which refers to creating a custom module. While it sounds like a solution, it's not one I'm familiar with, and I just wondered if there is a simpler way to get it to work: http://forums.iis.net/p/1182792/2000775.aspx Thanks!

    Read the article

  • ExtJS.Ajax - Authentication?

    - by lajuette
    Is there a way to send requests using ExtJS.Ajax to endpoints that require authentication (e.g. Basic Authentication)? Adding an Authorization-Header won't work. headers : { Authorization : 'Basic ' + Ext.util.base64.encode(username + ':' + password) }

    Read the article

  • Retrieve file from url with autorization PHP

    - by Belgin Fish
    Hi, I'm currently trying to grab a file from an external url that has an authorization box that pops up (like the default one asking for a username and password) How can I have a script get the contents of the page (it's a video), save it to a directory and handle the authorization (i have a username and password) Thanks :)

    Read the article

  • How to get a OAuth token for Google Buzz using username and password without showing Googles login p

    - by Witek
    To read Google Buzz activities, an authorization token is required. A web application would redirect to Googles login page, where the user logs in and a token is returned back to the web application. But I have a local Java application without a UI (like a script). This application knows username and password. How to get an authorization token, using this username and password, without presenting the Google login page?

    Read the article

  • FormsAuthentication redirecting to login page when visiting root of website

    - by Ryan Lattimer
    I wanted to use FormsAuthentication to secure my static files as well on my site, so I followed the instructions located here http://learn.iis.net/page.aspx/244/how-to-take-advantage-of-the-iis7-integrated-pipeline/ under title "Enabling Forms Authentication for the Entire Application". Now though, when I try to visit the site by going directly to http://www.mysite.com I get redirected to http://www.mysite.com/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2f instead of it using my DefaultDocument I have set. I can go to my default document by just visiting http://www.mysite.com/Home.aspx without any issues because it is set to allow anonymous access. Is there something I need to add into my web.config file to make iis7 allow anonymous access to the root? I tried adding with anonymous access but no such luck. Any help would be much appreciated. Both Home and the Login form allow anonymous. <location path="Home.aspx"> <system.web> <authorization> <allow users="*" /> </authorization> </system.web> </location> <location path="Login.aspx"> <system.web> <authorization> <allow users="*" /> </authorization> </system.web> </location> Login form is set as the loginUrl <authentication mode="Forms"> <forms protection="All" loginUrl="Login.aspx"> </forms> </authentication> Default document is set as Home.aspx <defaultDocument> <files> <add value="Home.aspx" /> </files> </defaultDocument> I have not removed any of the iis7 default documents. However, Home.aspx is first in the priority.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET 2.0 and 4.0 seem to treat the root url differently in Forms Authentication

    - by Kev
    If have the following web.config: <configuration> <system.web> <authentication mode="Forms"> <forms name="MembershipCookie" loginUrl="Login.aspx" protection="All" timeout="525600" slidingExpiration="true" enableCrossAppRedirects="true" path="/" /> </authentication> <authorization> <deny users="?" /> </authorization> </system.web> <location path="Default.aspx"> <system.web> <authorization> <allow users="*"/> </authorization> </system.web> </location> </configuration> The application is an ASP.NET 2.0 application running on Windows 2008R2/IIS7.5. If the site's application pool is configured to run ASP.NET 2.0 and I browse to http://example.com then Default.aspx is rendered as you'd expect from the rules above. However if the application pool is set to run ASP.NET 4.0 I am redirected to the login page. If I explicitly specify http://example.com/default.aspx then all is good and default.aspx renders. I've tried rewriting / -> /default.aspx (using IIS UrlRewriter 2.0) but the result is still the same, I get kicked to the login page. I've also tried this with an ASP.NET 4.0 application with the same result (which is where the problem initially arose). The reason I tried this with a 2.0 application was to see if there was a change in behaviour, and it seems that / is handled differently in 4.0. So to summarise, using the configuration above the following is observed: ASP.NET Version Url Behaviour ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2.0 http://example.com Renders Default.aspx 2.0 http://example.com/Default.aspx Renders Default.aspx 4.0 http://example.com Redirects to Login.aspx 4.0 http://example.com/Default.aspx Renders Default.aspx Is this a bug/breaking change or have I missed something glaringly obvious?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >