Search Results

Search found 31 results on 2 pages for 'iprincipal'.

Page 2/2 | < Previous Page | 1 2 

  • Moq: Unable to cast to interface

    - by Pickels
    Hello, earlier today I asked this question. So since moq creates it's own class from an interface I wasn't able to cast it to a different class. So it got me wondering what if I created a ICustomPrincipal and tried to cast to that. This is how my mocks look: var MockHttpContext = new Mock<HttpContextBase>(); var MockPrincipal = new Mock<ICustomPrincipal>(); MockHttpContext.SetupGet(h => h.User).Returns(MockPrincipal.Object); In the method I am trying to test the follow code gives the error(again): var user = (ICustomPrincipal)httpContext.User; The error is the following: Unable to cast object of type 'IPrincipalProxy4081807111564298854aabfc890edcc8' to type 'MyProject.Web.ICustomPrincipal'. I guess I still need some practice with interfaces and moq but shouldn't I be able to cast the class that moq created back to ICustomPrincipal? I know httpContext.User returns an IPrincipal so maybe something gets lost there? Well if anybody can help me I would appreciate that. Pickels Edit: As requested the full code of the method I am testing. It's still not finished but this is what I have so far: public bool AuthorizeCore(HttpContextBase httpContext) { if (httpContext == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("httpContext"); } var user = (ICustomPrincipal)httpContext.User; if (!user.Identity.IsAuthenticated) { return false; } return true; }

    Read the article

  • Implementation review for a MVC.NET app with custom membership

    - by mrjoltcola
    I'd like to hear if anyone sees any problems with how I implemented the security in this Oracle based MVC.NET app, either security issues, concurrency issues or scalability issues. First, I implemented a CustomOracleMembershipProvider to handle the database interface to the membership store. I implemented a custom Principal named User which implements IPrincipal, and it has a hashtable of Roles. I also created a separate class named AuthCache which has a simple cache for User objects. Its purpose is simple to avoid return trips to the database, while decoupling the caching from either the web layer or the data layer. (So I can share the cache between MVC.NET, WCF, etc.) The MVC.NET stock MembershipService uses the CustomOracleMembershipProvider (configured in web.config), and both MembershipService and FormsService share access to the singleton AuthCache. My AccountController.LogOn() method: 1) Validates the user via the MembershipService.Validate() method, also loads the roles into the User.Roles container and then caches the User in AuthCache. 2) Signs the user into the Web context via FormsService.SignIn() which accesses the AuthCache (not the database) to get the User, sets HttpContext.Current.User to the cached User Principal. In global.asax.cs, Application_AuthenticateRequest() is implemented. It decrypts the FormsAuthenticationTicket, accesses the AuthCache by the ticket.Name (Username) and sets the Principal by setting Context.User = user from the AuthCache. So in short, all these classes share the AuthCache, and I have, for thread synchronization, a lock() in the cache store method. No lock in the read method. The custom membership provider doesn't know about the cache, the MembershipService doesn't know about any HttpContext (so could be used outside of a web app), and the FormsService doesn't use any custom methods besides accessing the AuthCache to set the Context.User for the initial login, so it isn't dependent on a specific membership provider. The main thing I see now is that the AuthCache will be sharing a User object if a user logs in from multiple sessions. So I may have to change the key from just UserId to something else (maybe using something in the FormsAuthenticationTicket for the key?).

    Read the article

  • Global.asax Event: Application_OnPostAuthenticateRequest

    - by Hemant Kothiyal
    Hi, I am using Application_OnPostAuthenticateRequest event in global.asax to get roles and permissions of authenticated user also i have made my custom principal class to get user detail and roles and permission. To get some information which remain same for that user. following are the code void Application_OnPostAuthenticateRequest(object sender, EventArgs e) { // Get a reference to the current User IPrincipal objIPrincipal = HttpContext.Current.User; // If we are dealing with an authenticated forms authentication request if ((objIPrincipal.Identity.IsAuthenticated) && (objIPrincipal.Identity.AuthenticationType == "Forms")) { CustomPrincipal objCustomPrincipal = new CustomPrincipal(); objCustomPrincipal = objCustomPrincipal.GetCustomPrincipalObject(objIPrincipal.Identity.Name); HttpContext.Current.User = objCustomPrincipal; CustomIdentity ci = (CustomIdentity)objCustomPrincipal.Identity; HttpContext.Current.Cache["CountryID"] = FatchMasterInfo.GetCountryID(ci.CultureId); HttpContext.Current.Cache["WeatherLocationID"] = FatchMasterInfo.GetWeatherLocationId(ci.UserId); Thread.CurrentPrincipal = objCustomPrincipal; } } My question is as following This event fires every time for every request. Hence for each request the code execute? My approach is right or not? Is it right to add HttpContext.Current.Cache in this event or we should move it on session start

    Read the article

  • MVC 2 AntiForgeryToken - Why symmetric encryption + IPrinciple?

    - by Brad R
    We recently updated our solution to MVC 2, and this has updated the way that the AntiForgeryToken works. Unfortunately this does not fit with our AJAX framework any more. The problem is that MVC 2 now uses symmetric encryption to encode some properties about the user, including the user's Name property (from IPrincipal). We are able to securely register a new user using AJAX, after which subsequent AJAX calls will be invalid as the anti forgery token will change when the user has been granted a new principal. There are also other cases when this may happen, such as a user updating their name etc. My main question is why does MVC 2 even bother using symmetric encryption? Any then why does it care about the user name property on the principal? If my understanding is correct then any random shared secret will do. The basic principle is that the user will be sent a cookie with some specific data (HttpOnly!). This cookie is then required to match a form variable sent back with each request that may have side effects (POST's usually). Since this is only meant to protect from cross site attacks it is easy to craft up a response that would easily pass the test, but only if you had full access to the cookie. Since a cross site attacker is not going to have access to your user cookies you are protected. By using symmetric encryption, what is the advantage in checking the contents of the cookie? That is, if I already have sent an HttpOnly cookie the attacker cannot override it (unless a browser has a major security issue), so why do I then need to check it again? After having a think about it it appears to be one of those 'added layer of security' cases - but if your first line of defence has fallen (HttpOnly) then the attacker is going to get past the second layer anyway as they have full access to the users cookie collection, and could just impersonate them directly, instead of using an indirect XSS/CSRF attack. Of course I could be missing a major issue, but I haven't found it yet. If there are some obvious or subtle issues at play here then I would like to be aware of them.

    Read the article

  • IsAuthenticated is false! weird behaviour + review question

    - by Naor
    This is the login function (after I validate user name and password, I load user data into "user" variable and call Login function: public static void Login(IUser user) { HttpResponse Response = HttpContext.Current.Response; HttpRequest Request = HttpContext.Current.Request; FormsAuthenticationTicket ticket = new FormsAuthenticationTicket(1, user.UserId.ToString(), DateTime.Now, DateTime.Now.AddHours(12), false, UserResolver.Serialize(user)); HttpCookie cookie = new HttpCookie(FormsAuthentication.FormsCookieName, FormsAuthentication.Encrypt(ticket)); cookie.Path = FormsAuthentication.FormsCookiePath; Response.Cookies.Add(cookie); string redirectUrl = user.HomePage; Response.Redirect(redirectUrl, true); } UserResolver is the following class: public class UserResolver { public static IUser Current { get { IUser user = null; if (HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated) { FormsIdentity id = (FormsIdentity)HttpContext.Current.User.Identity; FormsAuthenticationTicket ticket = id.Ticket; user = Desrialize(ticket.UserData); } return user; } } public static string Serialize(IUser user) { StringBuilder data = new StringBuilder(); StringWriter w = new StringWriter(data); string type = user.GetType().ToString(); //w.Write(type.Length); w.WriteLine(user.GetType().ToString()); StringBuilder userData = new StringBuilder(); XmlSerializer serializer = new XmlSerializer(user.GetType()); serializer.Serialize(new StringWriter(userData), user); w.Write(userData.ToString()); w.Close(); return data.ToString(); } public static IUser Desrialize(string data) { StringReader r = new StringReader(data); string typeStr = r.ReadLine(); Type type=Type.GetType(typeStr); string userData = r.ReadToEnd(); XmlSerializer serializer = new XmlSerializer(type); return (IUser)serializer.Deserialize(new StringReader(userData)); } } And the global.asax implements the following: void Application_PostAuthenticateRequest(Object sender, EventArgs e) { IPrincipal p = HttpContext.Current.User; if (p.Identity.IsAuthenticated) { IUser user = UserResolver.Current; Role[] roles = user.GetUserRoles(); HttpContext.Current.User = Thread.CurrentPrincipal = new GenericPrincipal(p.Identity, Role.ToString(roles)); } } First question: Am I do it right? Second question - weird thing! The user variable I pass to Login has 4 members: UserName, Password, Name, Id. When UserResolver.Current executed, I got the user instance. I descided to change the user structure - I add an array of Warehouse object. Since that time, when UserResolver.Current executed (after Login), HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated was false and I couldn't get the user data. When I removed the Warehouse[] from user structure, it starts to be ok again and HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated become true after I Login. What is the reason to this weird behaviour?

    Read the article

  • Sending Messages to SignalR Hubs from the Outside

    - by Ricardo Peres
    Introduction You are by now probably familiarized with SignalR, Microsoft’s API for real-time web functionality. This is, in my opinion, one of the greatest products Microsoft has released in recent time. Usually, people login to a site and enter some page which is connected to a SignalR hub. Then they can send and receive messages – not just text messages, mind you – to other users in the same hub. Also, the server can also take the initiative to send messages to all or a specified subset of users on its own, this is known as server push. The normal flow is pretty straightforward, Microsoft has done a great job with the API, it’s clean and quite simple to use. And for the latter – the server taking the initiative – it’s also quite simple, just involves a little more work. The Problem The API for sending messages can be achieved from inside a hub – an instance of the Hub class – which is something that we don’t have if we are the server and we want to send a message to some user or group of users: the Hub instance is only instantiated in response to a client message. The Solution It is possible to acquire a hub’s context from outside of an actual Hub instance, by calling GlobalHost.ConnectionManager.GetHubContext<T>(). This API allows us to: Broadcast messages to all connected clients (possibly excluding some); Send messages to a specific client; Send messages to a group of clients. So, we have groups and clients, each is identified by a string. Client strings are called connection ids and group names are free-form, given by us. The problem with client strings is, we do not know how these map to actual users. One way to achieve this mapping is by overriding the Hub’s OnConnected and OnDisconnected methods and managing the association there. Here’s an example: 1: public class MyHub : Hub 2: { 3: private static readonly IDictionary<String, ISet<String>> users = new ConcurrentDictionary<String, ISet<String>>(); 4:  5: public static IEnumerable<String> GetUserConnections(String username) 6: { 7: ISet<String> connections; 8:  9: users.TryGetValue(username, out connections); 10:  11: return (connections ?? Enumerable.Empty<String>()); 12: } 13:  14: private static void AddUser(String username, String connectionId) 15: { 16: ISet<String> connections; 17:  18: if (users.TryGetValue(username, out connections) == false) 19: { 20: connections = users[username] = new HashSet<String>(); 21: } 22:  23: connections.Add(connectionId); 24: } 25:  26: private static void RemoveUser(String username, String connectionId) 27: { 28: users[username].Remove(connectionId); 29: } 30:  31: public override Task OnConnected() 32: { 33: AddUser(this.Context.Request.User.Identity.Name, this.Context.ConnectionId); 34: return (base.OnConnected()); 35: } 36:  37: public override Task OnDisconnected() 38: { 39: RemoveUser(this.Context.Request.User.Identity.Name, this.Context.ConnectionId); 40: return (base.OnDisconnected()); 41: } 42: } As you can see, I am using a static field to store the mapping between a user and its possibly many connections – for example, multiple open browser tabs or even multiple browsers accessing the same page with the same login credentials. The user identity, as is normal in .NET, is obtained from the IPrincipal which in SignalR hubs case is stored in Context.Request.User. Of course, this property will only have a meaningful value if we enforce authentication. Another way to go is by creating a group for each user that connects: 1: public class MyHub : Hub 2: { 3: public override Task OnConnected() 4: { 5: this.Groups.Add(this.Context.ConnectionId, this.Context.Request.User.Identity.Name); 6: return (base.OnConnected()); 7: } 8:  9: public override Task OnDisconnected() 10: { 11: this.Groups.Remove(this.Context.ConnectionId, this.Context.Request.User.Identity.Name); 12: return (base.OnDisconnected()); 13: } 14: } In this case, we will have a one-to-one equivalence between users and groups. All connections belonging to the same user will fall in the same group. So, if we want to send messages to a user from outside an instance of the Hub class, we can do something like this, for the first option – user mappings stored in a static field: 1: public void SendUserMessage(String username, String message) 2: { 3: var context = GlobalHost.ConnectionManager.GetHubContext<MyHub>(); 4: 5: foreach (String connectionId in HelloHub.GetUserConnections(username)) 6: { 7: context.Clients.Client(connectionId).sendUserMessage(message); 8: } 9: } And for using groups, its even simpler: 1: public void SendUserMessage(String username, String message) 2: { 3: var context = GlobalHost.ConnectionManager.GetHubContext<MyHub>(); 4:  5: context.Clients.Group(username).sendUserMessage(message); 6: } Using groups has the advantage that the IHubContext interface returned from GetHubContext has direct support for groups, no need to send messages to individual connections. Of course, you can wrap both mapping options in a common API, perhaps exposed through IoC. One example of its interface might be: 1: public interface IUserToConnectionMappingService 2: { 3: //associate and dissociate connections to users 4:  5: void AddUserConnection(String username, String connectionId); 6:  7: void RemoveUserConnection(String username, String connectionId); 8: } SignalR has built-in dependency resolution, by means of the static GlobalHost.DependencyResolver property: 1: //for using groups (in the Global class) 2: GlobalHost.DependencyResolver.Register(typeof(IUserToConnectionMappingService), () => new GroupsMappingService()); 3:  4: //for using a static field (in the Global class) 5: GlobalHost.DependencyResolver.Register(typeof(IUserToConnectionMappingService), () => new StaticMappingService()); 6:  7: //retrieving the current service (in the Hub class) 8: var mapping = GlobalHost.DependencyResolver.Resolve<IUserToConnectionMappingService>(); Now all you have to do is implement GroupsMappingService and StaticMappingService with the code I shown here and change SendUserMessage method to rely in the dependency resolver for the actual implementation. Stay tuned for more SignalR posts!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2