API protection for on-premise product - rest

Context:
We have started exposing the functionality of an on-premise product through REST APIs.
Questions:
How do I protect REST APIs? One of the options is OAuth2 but I don't want a dependency on an OAuth2 server which, IMO, may not be available with all customers. Is HMAC signature a viable option? If yes, what are the advantages and disadvantages as compared with OAuth2?

OAuth 2.0 is the way to go to secure REST APIs. The Authorization Server can be delivered as a part of your product and deployment, it does not need to be a heavy-weight pre-existing component that is run by the customer.

Related

apigee gateway, authn and authz: REST API calls another REST API

We are using apigee API gateway and exposing a REST endpoint. We understand apigee supports various options for securing the endpoint.
Our use case is that this REST endpoint should call another REST API provided by a software vendor. Software vendor have their own authentication and authorisation mechanism. Basically they have users and roles concept.
My question what is the best practise in this case? Should we authn and authz at gateway level Or at vendor REST API level or both ?
In any case, there is no escaping authn and authz at vendor REST API level.
Please suggest. Thank you.
In your case it first depends on whether you are simply presenting a proxy in front of the vendor API, or if your own API provides distinctive services and the vendor's API is only one of perhaps several "call outs" your middleware makes to offer its overall value. Another way to look at it is to ask: are the customers of your API endpoint uniquely your customers, or are they really just customers of the vendor's underlying API? You might choose to use your own layer of API client AuthN/AuthZ if this is uniquely your own API 'product' or you may choose to pass-through credentials directly to the vendor API if your endpoint is really just a thin and light abstraction. Net-net, it depends on your end-to-end use-case.

Prevent untrusted clients to use login/register endpoints of REST API

I have actually one SPA in ReactJs + one mobile application in Flutter + one REST API developed with SailsJs running on a separate server. I managed user authentication with a secured session cookie sent back by the API when we are login with valid information (id/password).
So all the endpoints that require users to be authenticated are protected (unless there are others security best practices that I'm not aware of?). The session cookie expiration and validity are checked with each call to one of the protected endpoints.
I really read a massive amount of topics and blog posts talking about securing REST API. And my problem is never or barely represented. So now my main problem is :
How can I restrict my public API endpoints (login & register currently) that does not require users to be authenticated (since there are the endpoints used to achieve this mission...) to be used only in my trusted client apps (web and mobile)?
How can I prevent another app developed by another person to use these endpoints?
I don't want anyone to login via my API unless it is done in the client apps I am developing... I don't want anyone to replicate my applications and successfully use my API that way with 0 protection, without knowing it...
I see a lot of popular services with login API routes (Heroku for example) that can't be accessed in Postman with the same parameters (403 error code). So it is possible. But how they do that? There is nothing in specialized forums that handle this or I missed something!
I tough of a secret token stored in the client to authenticate it but it is literally public with web developer tools for example.
Need some advice.
Thanks
USER AUTHENTICATION IS NOT APP AUTHENTICATION
So all the endpoints that require users to be authenticated are protected...
This endpoints are only protected regarding to identify, authenticate and authorize Who his in the request, but not for What is doing the request, and this is a topic not very well understood among developers, be them juniors or seniors.
The Difference Between WHO and WHAT is Accessing the API Server
In an article I wrote, entitled Why Does Your Mobile App Need An Api Key? you can read with more detail the difference between Who and What is accessing your API server, from where I quote the following:
The what is the thing making the request to the API server. Is it really a genuine instance of your mobile app, or is it a bot, an automated script or an attacker manually poking around your API server with a tool like Postman?
The who is the user of the mobile app that we can authenticate, authorize and identify in several ways, like using OpenID Connect or OAUTH2 flows.
So the Who is the user of your API server that you will be able to Authenticate and Authorize access to the data, and the What is the software making that request in behalf of the user, your genuine app, a tampered one, an automated script or someone manually poking around with your API via cURL, Postman or similar tools.
By now I hope that you have enough knowledge to understand why user(who) authentication is not the same as app(what) authentication.
LOCK THE API SERVER TO THE APPS
How can I restrict my public API endpoints (login & register currently) that does not require users to be authenticated (since there are the endpoints used to achieve this mission...) to be used only in my trusted client apps (web and mobile)?
I think that by now it may be clear to you that it's not only the login and registration endpoints that need to be protected from What is doing the request.
How can I prevent another app developed by another person to use these endpoints?
I don't want anyone to login via my API unless it is done in the client apps I am developing... I don't want anyone to replicate my applications and successfully use my API that way with 0 protection, without knowing it...
This is extremely hard to achieve for web apps, but possible with an high degree of confidence for mobile apps when the Mobile App Attestation concept is implemented.
For web apps
Due to the nature of how the web was built, all it's necessary to inspect a web app is to hit F12 or inspect the page source, and then search for whatever you need to access the API server from another tool.
You can learn some useful techniques to help your API server to try to respond only to requests coming from What you expect, your genuine web app, and to do so I invite you to read my answer to the question Secure api data from calls out of the app, specially the section dedicated to Defending the API Server.
For mobile apps
To learn how you can lock your API server to your mobile app I recommend you to read my answer to
the question How to secure an API REST for mobile app? for the sections on Securing the API Server and A Possible Better Solution.
Endpoints to Secure
So all the endpoints that require users to be authenticated are protected (unless there are others security best practices that I'm not aware of?).
It's up to you if you only want to enhance the security of your login and register endpoints, but my advice is that you enhance the security of all them regarding the detection for What is accessing them.
POSTMAN WITH HEROKU AND OTHERS
I see a lot of popular services with login API routes (Heroku for example) that can't be accessed in Postman with the same parameters (403 error code). So it is possible. But how they do that? There is nothing in specialized forums that handle this or I missed something!
I never used Heroku, but when I am using an API that doesn't work in Postman, but works in other clients, let's say from cURL, then I disable Postman from sending it's own user-agent and normally the API will start accepting the requests.
If doesn't then they may be doing device fingerprinting:
A device fingerprint or machine fingerprint is information collected about the software and hardware of a remote computing device for the purpose of identification. The information is usually assimilated into a brief identifier using a fingerprinting algorithm. A browser fingerprint is information collected specifically by interaction with the web browser of the device.
The fingerprinting can be done in active or passive mode. In active mode some Javascript runs on the client to collect some data to send back to the API server, while in passive mode it uses the information available from the request in the server, like the http headers and request parameters.
While this raises the bar to fake What is doing the request, it can be bypassed by observing how a trusted client sends the request and mimic it. For an attacker it's just a little more work to enumerate all variants and then automate them.
DO YOU WANT TO GO THE EXTRA MILE?
I really read a massive amount of topics and blog posts talking about securing REST API.
First and foremost my congratulations for putting such effort in educating yourself about securing your API.
I don't know if you already read some of the OWASP resources I am about to link, but in any response to a security question I always like to reference the excellent work from the OWASP foundation ;)
For Web Apps
OWASP Web Top 10 Risks
The OWASP Top 10 is a powerful awareness document for web application security. It represents a broad consensus about the most critical security risks to web applications. Project members include a variety of security experts from around the world who have shared their expertise to produce this list.
The Web Security Testing Guide:
The OWASP Web Security Testing Guide includes a "best practice" penetration testing framework which users can implement in their own organizations and a "low level" penetration testing guide that describes techniques for testing most common web application and web service security issues.
For Mobile Apps
OWASP Mobile Security Project - Top 10 risks
The OWASP Mobile Security Project is a centralized resource intended to give developers and security teams the resources they need to build and maintain secure mobile applications. Through the project, our goal is to classify mobile security risks and provide developmental controls to reduce their impact or likelihood of exploitation.
OWASP - Mobile Security Testing Guide:
The Mobile Security Testing Guide (MSTG) is a comprehensive manual for mobile app security development, testing and reverse engineering.
For APIS
OWASP API Security Top 10
The OWASP API Security Project seeks to provide value to software developers and security assessors by underscoring the potential risks in insecure APIs, and illustrating how these risks may be mitigated. In order to facilitate this goal, the OWASP API Security Project will create and maintain a Top 10 API Security Risks document, as well as a documentation portal for best practices when creating or assessing APIs.

How might I apply multiple security mechanisms to a Swagger-generated REST service?

I have generated JAX-RS stubs for a REST service using Swagger and want to set up the security.
The security side is very new to me and I would like to use standards as far as possible. (In the past, for other J2EE applications, I have used Filters to handle Authentication which put User objects into a Session. As I understand it, Sessions should be avoided for REST.)
There are 4 types of user who will access the services
Customers and business partners (Authentication via oAuth or similar)
Employees (Authentication via NTLM & LDAP)
Developers (Mock authentication/authorisation of some kind)
Integration test (JUnit with pre-defined users and roles)
Is it possible to define a security mechanism which would handle all of these users?
How would I use the Swagger security directives?
Am I making this more complicated than it needs to be?
You could use an open source API gateway like Tyk? Here’s a link to some handy info on API Security in the tyk docs.
And here is a blog post that describes taking a layered approach to API Security that goes beyond the gateway.
Disclosure: I work for Tyk!

SaaS provider wanting Single-Signon, do I need to integrate with several Identity Providers?

I work for a SaaS provider that is wanting to SSO enable our application to enterprise customers with our application acting as the service provider.
I understand the concepts behind what needs to happen and that SAML is an appropriate solution for what we are looking to do. Looking at bigger SaaS providers (slack, dropbox, new relic etc..) I can see they typically seem to integrate with a number of Identity Providers such as OneLogin, Bitium, Okta, Ping Identity etc... along with generic SAML support
As a smaller outfit we don't have the resources to partner and integrate with multiples of ID providers and to continue to add to that list as new providers emerge.
My question is that in order to provide SAML support in our application do I really need to have integrations with multiple IDPs or can I rely on a generic SAML implementation?
So if for example I used OneLogin to set up Single Sign On does that only enable SSO for clients who are using One Login as their Identity Provider?
No. It is not required IMHO. As long as you are SAML 2.0 compliant (SP-Lite typically), you'll find that you'll have customers using many different commercial (and open source) Identity Provider solutions. The vast majority of SaaS vendors have not done anything specific to support different IDP implementations. The SaaS supports the SAML 2.0 spec and ends up having customers integrating successfully with the different (IDP) products. At that point they claim to "support" the different providers.
Adhere to the spec as best you can and the rest will take care of itself.

Creating a restful service with external provider for authentication

I would like to have some guidance regarding how to handle authentication for my restful service to be able to support a couple of different scenarios, see included image?
I've been thinking about this problem for a couple of week without finding a solution for all of the cases and even if I'll make trade offs I'll be running into problems
If we skip the Mobile application and the use of Curl, there's no need to expose the service to the public and it would be possible to use basic authentication for the server to server communication. But we'll still need to put some responsibility at the "Web site for ninjas only" to pass the (openid authenticated user) as part for the http header?
In this case we're using Google apps to manage credentials for our co-workers and I don't like the idea to manage another username/password within the service if it's possible to avoid.
Is there any sustainable solution for my dreams, so that I can build awesome features for the client and implement a tight api that manages the authorization for different resources for a specific user?
Another possible to solution might be to integrate the service with the openid provider, but then I'll have problem with passing the user from "Web site for ninjas only"