I have two web applications (A and B). I need to login to application B from Application A.
what is the best and secure way to handle this, keep in mind that I don't have IDM solution to manage single sign on?
Related
I'm just starting a new project. The result will be an API server and a progressive web app. The API server is implemented with TypeScript and the NestJS framework, the client with Angular 6.
I've been flirting with keycloak for some time. Still, I'm not quite sure it's right for me yet. But I don't want to worry about things like token renewal anymore and find it sexy that Keycloak tells me how to create user roles.
What bothers me, is the following - integration. For my use case it is necessary that the login and all features like password reset and so on are part of my application. That means I want to create forms myself in order to be able to do this perfectly in my own design and not have a second translation process, etc. Keycloak themes are not an option. So is it possible to hide keycloak in such a way, or is it so complex that I shouldn't use Keyloak in the first place? Afaik there is already an issue with password resets - I can't request it from the user side but have to make an REST call to the admin endpoint - which is okay but not ideal since it requires me to do more server side logic ( and that is not why I want to use Keycloak).
In addition, Keycloak is too much about the GUI - which makes it difficult for me, especially during development. Because I also want to provide my team with a local instance of keycloak during development. But what is the concept to import the initial data into realms, apps and also users into Keycloak? I found some JSON imports - but so far only for realms and apps. Is there also a function to import a whole dumb?
So that my team builds on a pre-built setup and has a user for each role. A reproducible setup with Vagrant or Docker which contains the import of initial data - that would be the goal.
So in short my questions:
Is it still worth the effort using Keycloak if I want to use everything via the API or should I simply use Passport and JWT?
Can I have a reproducible setup during my development that includes realms, apps, users, user roles, etc?
So, the question asked few months ago, but I also faces with that question, and I want to answer on it.
I think that you don't need Keycloak, it is fairly enough for you to use OAuth2 and JWT.
Let's justify my answer:
You have just one client - Angular application. Keycloak useful, when you have many clients (web-js, mobile platforms) and you want to create and manage them dynamically. But, I think that, in your case, you create your client once without modification in the future.
Also, Keycloak very useful, when you have a lot of integration with third part systems (Google, Fb, Twitter and etc) because Keycloak has them out-of-box. Or you need to integrate with some SAML or LDAP provider.
You may use Keycloak, if you need some Identity and User management platform, and when you have complicated user access flow.
In the end, you could consider Keycloak, if you need SSO (Single Sign On) feature. Once logged-in to Keycloak, users don't have to login again to access a different application. But, by your description, you have just one application.
Keycloak offers features such as Single-Sign-On (SSO), Identity Brokering and Social Login, User Federation, Client Adapters, an Admin Console, and an Account Management Console.
It's an out of box solution for rapid security layer development of application.You could have single common security layer for multiple application .
You can implement you security mechanism without using keycloak.
I'm getting into the world of fullstack development and I'm trying to develop app which front is completely separated from backend (front is being served from node server and backend is java).
Now, the issue - how should I get about securing my app?
I'd like to have many fronts and many backend instances connected through load balancers and I'd like to keep all the state on client, so I can without any issue switch to another backend server and continue as nothing happened.
Currently I'm using OAuth2 tokens but I'm concerned about security and stealing the tokens, which are completely stored in cookie on user side. Also, The app (obviously) stores those tokens somewhere, so another instance of my backend app wouldn't accept the token. In best case scenario I can implement some mechanism that would automatically request a new one and in worst case I'd have to login again. I don't want that to happen.
Also, here I have a problem with social auth. Allright, I'm receiving token from Google on front, but giving it to backend and creating a user there is major pain, I have to write a lot of code manually to create such user and save it.
And again, I'm not certain about security level of this solution.
So the question is basically - currently, what is the best way to secure an app which should have completely separate front and backend, which would have no issue with switch backend server between requests?
As regards tokens being stolen from the Client: you can't do anything about this. It is up to the client to protect themselves. What I mean is, if you need a username and password to access a service, and the Client is infected with a key-logger, and a hacker steals those credentials, there is nothing you can do on the server side to protect against this.
As regards your idea of multiple back-ends, this is a common feature of any system with multiple application servers. For example, if you have multiple web servers and want any request to be routable to any server. For this, you need a central database which stores any information which needs to be shared. It's slower, obviously, but much more resilient.
I have a requirement where I need to implement SSO between two different websites.
One of the website say www.abc.com is written using ASP.NET and is hosted on IIS 7.0. The second website say www.xyz.com is written using PHP and uses Apache web server. Both the websites uses different databases and uses different algorithms to authenticate the user.
I cannot use a third party SSO as that would mean changing the authentication for both the websites. Wanted to know if this is possible and if yes, what should be the approach?
Thanks in advance...
We could find an alternative approach. Basically, we were trying to address this issue by using two cookies (one each for www.abc.com and www.xyz.com created by each site), but since we were unable to find a way for reading cross-domain cookies, we were stuck up.
But then, I stumbled upon the way forums.asp.net and hotmail works. They use the live.microsoft.com to set the authentication cookie.
Now, we plan to create a third website for authenticating the user. The login forms in both the www.abc.com and www.xyz.com will call the third website to set the authentication cookie. Using this authentication cookie, we will be able to allow user to have seamless browsing across both the websites.
Also, found a very good article on this implementation.
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/114484/Single-Sign-On-SSO-for-cross-domain-ASP-NET-applic
i'm in the early stages of developing an API for my site so that third party developers can build an iPhone application for it. The API would have a limited subset of the functionality of the full site. The trouble i have is around security and authentication for the user who downloads the application. I have come up with the following options:
The user enters the same credentials they use on the site to authenticate themselves. My API would then take the credentials when accessing information specific to the user. This is my least preferred solution as the third party application could log these details and use them maliciously on the full site.
Each user generates a unique key on the site which they can then use on the app to login. My API would take the api key as an argument when accessing information specific to the user. The main problem though is that any application can do what they like to the user once they gain access to their key even if the user has not given the application permission to do so.
To overcome the above problem the third party developer would have to register their application with the site and then the user would need to generate a unique key per application they wish to use. This would then be used to login. This is my preferred solution as each key is unique per application and user i can tell which application called the api and whether the user approved it.
My final option is to implement oAuth. We are currently waiting for the 2.0 version to be finalized and do not have the time to keep updating our code as the spec may change.
This is the first API i have had to build and i was wondering if i have understood this correctly? I'm assuming in option 1 the application could log the user credentials and use them maliciously but how does twitter overcome this issue with their third party applications? Or is it simply up to the user to trust the application they are using? If this is the case then would option 2 and/or 3 be feasible in the meantime until i switch to option 4.
I'd appreciate your feedback. Thanks
OAuth 1 and OAuth 2 are both viable options. But you will come a long way with basic authentication aswell (as long as it is over SSL). Don't be scared :)
I've implemented an API provider over OAuth 1.0. And since there are so many ready made libraries for OAuth1.0 for many platforms I would not be scared of using that either, much of the work has been done already, both for you as a provider and for third party implementors.
Anyway: you can always couple basic authentication with some very simple signing of the request using an application key and secret, say for example that as a third party developer you have to call.
https://yourapi.com/?user=11111&password=232123&random_string=23123&api_key=THIRD_PARTY_KEY×tamp=1212121212signature=efefefefefef
where the API implementor has to sign perhaps the random_string, timestamp and api_key with the secret. Then you would at least have a way of shutting down malicious apps.
I've got two separate homemade applications that need to communicate among themselves. One is a frontend application (asp.net actually), the other is a backend interface to an accounting application. The backend interface was not created specifically for this frontend - it is a generic interface that many other applications use to integrate with our product.
For the convenience of users we wish to provide a Windows Authentication in our frontend application. That means however that we need to pass the credentials on to the backend application which has to check them.
We do not wish to set up our frontend as a "trusted" application to the backend which can authenticate itself as any user. If the frontend was to be hacked, it would then also compromise the backend system.
As I understand it, one way to do it with Windows Authentication is Kerberos Delegation. However this requires to be explicitly enabled for the user that is to be delegated, and the machine which does the delegation (the server with our frontend). By default these options are disabled in Active Directory, and I suspect that many sysadmins will have their reservations about turning them on for all their users.
Also, I'm not really sure that this is what Kerberos Delegation was meant for. I don't need our frontend to impersonate the user that is connecting. I just need to prove that this user has authenticated itself to me.
How would you do this?
I'm not clear what you can and can't do with your use case but I can answer the question what Kerberos Delegation was meant for.
First let's talk about what Kerberos does prior to delegation. It is important to understand this part well because it is subtle.
Kerberos authenticates the identity of BOTH ends of a communication between two end-points across a network, those end-points can be interactive users or services running on a computer.
This is strong authentication so it will not allow a man-in-middle attack in any form. If set up correctly an end point can guarantee they won't be compromised. To the level of the service name (if you are connecting to IIs on a machine it is different than connecting to SQL Server on the same machine). It makes heavy use of modern encryption techniques and requires the use of secure certificates. The details of the authentication protocol are complicated and not worth going into now, but it involves about 20 different distinct steps of confirmation between the two authenticating end points and authentication server (in windows the Domain Controller is the authentication server).
So what the heck is delegation?
Delegation is a Microsoft extension to the Kerberos standard which
allows a trusted source to continue the authentication to another
end-point.
This allows you to act as a "man in the middle" -- however many settings have to be explicitly setup, certificates installed, etc to allow this to work. It is far from simple. (EDIT: Here is another SO answer on the details - https://stackoverflow.com/a/954154/215752)
So, for example, you could have someone authenticate to a website and then have the .NET code connect to an SQL Server AS THE SAME USER to read data with that user's rights.
Now to answer your question, since I'm not sure what you want to do I present three choices:
1) You want to connect to the back end system as the SAME user as the one authenticating at the website.
In this case Kerberos delegation is perfect -- it does exactly what you want.
2) You want to connect to the back end system as a DIFFERENT user than the one authenticating at the website (eg a service account).
In this case you don't want delegation. Kerberos to the website and Kerberos (as a different user) to the back-end will work great.
3) You want to connect to the back end system as the SAME user some of the time and as a DIFFERENT user other times. (For example, you need to validate this is a legal user for the back end system, but want to perform trusted actions as a system account other times. This is (in my experience) the most common use case.)
In this case you use both. Delegation for the connections which need to validate the user identity and then revert to the service account identity for the times when you need system access to the back end. (A previous question of mine went into the details of how to revert to the system identity on the .NET platform see How to "un-impersonate" (un-delegate?) in Kerberos.)
Here is a post describing how Kerberos works and how to set it up.
ASP.NET passing along Windows Authentication credentials
Actually Kerberos delegation is designed exactly for this use case. But the challenge here is craft this on a legacy system and with AD's settings that you do not want to change.
One possible hack is to have the Front End just send the user and the time of authentication but the backend can query the Active Directory Event Logs to determine whether that user has authenticated to the Front end. This requires you to use WIndows Event Log API.and also play around with Event Log settings in AD to log the issue of service tickets. (MY recollection is that this is the default)
-