Posted this on google groups for Roadkill wiki, but there seems to be not much activity. Stackoverflow was mentioned, but there's only 2 posts per year... Bitbucket account is closed... Seems wrong to add an issue in github to just ask questions... https://github.com/roadkillwiki/roadkill/issues
I want to create a help wiki for a password protected website (asp.net, c#, iis...). This website is using Form Authentication. Only users logged onto the site will be able to see the help pages. They will be able to READ the pages, not add or edit or register new users or anything like that.
1) admin access
There will be 1 (or 2 or 3) admin users who can add/edit/delete pages. They can use a special URL to get to the admin pages if required.
- They use their own credentials from the real website somehow mapped as admin in Roadkill, or
- have special Roadkil user+pwd, defined in Roadkill rather than the real website.
2) For the read only requirement, I see it's work in progress for v3.
https://github.com/roadkillwiki/roadkill#viewer-role
http://roadkillwiki.userecho.com/topics/27-viewer-role/
I know it says "no ETA", but are we talking 1 month, 6 months, 1 year? I might have to do my own as I need this within a month or two!
3) For authentication of my readonly users... I thought I would have to write my own "User Manager", using the technique described here:
http://www.roadkillwiki.net/wiki/12/users-and-permissions
But then I thought... If I just install Roadkill in a protected folder in the root of my website, doesn't this give me Form Authentication for free? I don't care who the users are, all pages will be readonly for them... a kind of anonymous access... but I saw anonymous access doesn't exist.
Then I saw this question:
http://roadkillwiki.userecho.com/topics/10-port-it-to-aspnet-identity/
and the answer is no, "asp.net identity doesn't support groups". But it supports roles, so you could have admins, editors (and viewers), am I missing something?
Any tips regarding the 3 points above? It's borderline off topic by stackoverflow standards, I know. So let's make it a real question: how to configure Roadkill in a Form authenticated asp.net website so that all users have readonly access, to create a series of help pages?
There aren't that many .net wikis out there! It's all php!
Related
I am working on a news media website, and I am looking to add feature to allow users to register, login and make comments.
For example (New York Times login/register screen)
May I know what options are available, what are the common approaches publishers would choose ?
So far I have been looking at:
AWS Cognito: Allows to create own user directory, and authenticate.
Disquss SSO: also implemented commenting.
In house development: Code a new microservice to manage user directory and store/serve comments, alternatively using AWS Lambda. I am very keen to go down that path, example, but this might costs a lot to develop + maintain.
User data security is my top consideration, I would prefer to use a separate system to store user data. Either a robust third party service or complete in house development of a new system.
Any suggestions?
Thank you.
These are web-standards for single sign on:
OpenID
OpenID Connect
Companies like Google and Facebook provide authentication using Google-/Facebook-accounts. As far as I know, Google uses OpenID Connect which is based on OAuth. However, I don't know if you don't have to store user data any more at all when using this.
I believe it's worth checking again if authentication and commenting should be combined, especially when using a third-party-solution. It makes it harder to change one of the two.
This could give you some more ideas: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_single_sign-on_implementations.
I've just integrated my app with IBM's SSO via Cloud Directory. The idea here is that I want access to be very secure and only authorized users (pre-approved) can access the application (e.g. website in this case).
However, I've just realised now that anyone that goes to the app's webpage can, instead of logging in, just select "Register New User" and fill in some details and he's given access? Is there a way to:
1) EITHER keep that registration form, but require one of the admins to approve it before access is given? (better solution)
2) OR completely remove the self-registration option?
As the current situation is far from secure for what I need.
Thanks a lot!
I talked with the support team and that is the best (only) way to do it, just remove the links from the HTML templates.
Can anyone think of a neat solution for this; we operate an website service and sell to large organisations. Rather than have a logon for everyone, we'd like to be able to provide a direct link to our website from the organisation's Intranet page. We'd then like to check the referrer and if it's in our listed of 'trusted referrers', i.e. the intranet url, then we grant logon without asking for credentials.
I'm aware you can do $_SERVER['HTTP_REFERER']; to get the referrer, but I'm also aware that can be spoofed. Can anyone think of how we could achieve what we want, but while also guaranteeing it won't be hackable?
Thanks in advance
It's not exectly what you want, but to make logging on easier and ensure you don't need to store all the passwords you could use, for example, OpenID.
I think that there is no perfect and safe solution for this.
One solution would be to append tokens to the urls. It will work and it will be save, but anyone who knows the link (including token) will be able to login as that organization
Another solution would be to check the source ip. This can be done in different ways *apache, load balancer, app, etc).
Also a combination of token + ip could work (this token for that organization but only if the request comes from allowed_ips for that organization)
A more elegant solution (which I implemented for several big companies) would be to integrate you website login with the active record domain login. It is possible to use the current user window login as login into a website, using domain authorization. If a user is logged in into a domain, when enters your site will automatically login to the website.
This solution is much more easy to implement than it sounds. But, requires Active directory and workstation that connects to a domain to be in the company (this shouldn't be a problem, most of corporations are using windows on workstations and active directory for domain controller). Also is working best on IE only (direct login to the website). On other browsers the domain login popup will appear and user will have to enter again the domain password.
Also, I am pretty sure that can be made to work on linux environments, but I have no idea how.
Using this link I can see that my (tonylampada) id on github is 218821
https://api.github.com/users/tonylampada
How could I do the opposite? Given the user id = 218821, what's the username?
Update
Answering nulltoken here because it's a long story and it won't fit in a comment.
FreedomSponsors is a django application that uses django-social-auth to enable login with Github (and others).
(You should check it out, btw, please see the about page in the blog :-)
Django-social-auth has a configuration flag that allows the application to store the github username on the database.
A few days ago I deployed a new version of FS with github login enabled, but with "storeGithubUsername" set to false.
A few users registered their github accounts, and now the database has their github ids, but not their usernames.
You can se in my profile that I have github as a "connected account" but there's no link to my github page.
I need it to make the link point to https://github.com/tonylampada
I'm ready to deploy a new version that fixes this, by setting the "storeGithubUsername" (that's not what it is called, I'm just simplifying here) to true.
But I'd like to patch the database with the already github-registered users. I have their github ids, but not their github usernames.
We need to do this on Gitter to deal with the situation where a user has changed their username on GitHub and we get a 404 response when querying their old username.
Here's an undocumented endpoint, so use as your own peril, but it does work for now.
Use the endpoint: https://api.github.com/user/:id, where :id is the ID of the user.
Similar endpoints exist for repos and orgs, at
https://api.github.com/repositories/:id and https://api.github.com/organizations/:id respectively.
Note that the new repository redirects preview API only supports repositories, not renamed users or organizations. In fact, the HTTP 301 redirect actually points to https://api.github.com/repositories/:id, so there's a good chance that these "ID" endpoints may in fact become official soon.
There's no documented feature, nor undocumented ones that I know of, that expose the retrieval of the username from the id. From the GitHub API consumer perspective, the user id is an "implementation detail". The real key is the username.
From what I understand, you only require a batch of usernames given a list of ids. And this would be a one time only request, not a permanent need.
As your request seems legit and limited in its scope, you might get this answer directly from GitHub support by dropping them an email at support#github.com.
Indeed, xpaulbettsx, a GitHubber, even tweeted about this:
Support# is good for Anything you want to tell GitHub - bugs, features, high 5s; everything but security which go to security#
By the time I answer this question, the method that works is:
https://api.github.com/user/USER_ID
Remark: It is similar to what Andrew shared in 2015; you just have to remove the colon in the URL he shared.
I'm developing a small CMS in PHP and we're putting on social integration.
The content is changed by a single administrator who as right for publishing news, events and so on...
I'd to add this feature, when the admin publishes something it's already posted on facebook wall. I'm not very familiar with facebook php SDK, and i'm a little bit confused about it.
If (make it an example) 10 different sites are using my CMS, do I have to create 10 different facebook application? (let's assume the 10 websites are all in different domains and servers)
2nd, is there a way for authenticating with just PHP (something like sending username&password directly) so that the user does not need to be logged on facebook?
thanks
You might want to break up your question in to smaller understandable units. Its very difficult to understand what you are driving at.
My understanding of your problem could be minimal, but here goes...
1_ No you do not create 10 different facebook application. Create a single facebook application and make it a service entry point. So that all your cms sites could talk to this one site to interact with facebook. ( A REST service layer).
2_ Facebook api does not support username and password authentication. They only support oauth2.0. Although Oauth is not trivial, but since they have provided library for that, implementing authentication is pretty trivial.
Please read up on http://developers.facebook.com/docs/.
Its really easy and straight forward and well explained.
Your question is so vague and extensive that it cannot be answered well here.
If you experience any specific implementation problems, this is the right place.
However to answer atleast a part of your question:
The most powerful tool when working with facebook applications is the Graph API.
Its principle is very simple. You can do almonst any action on behalf of any user or application. You have to generate a token first that identifies the user and the proper permissions. Those tokens can be made "permanent" so you can do background tasks. Usually they are only active a very short time so you can perform actions while interacting with the user. The process of generating tokens involves the user so that he/she has to confirm the privileges you are asking for.
For websites that publish something automatically you would probably generate a permanent token one time that is active as long as you remove the app in your privacy settings.
Basically yuo can work with any application on any website. There is no limitation. However there are two ways of generating tokens. One involves on an additional request and one is done client side, which is bound to one domain oyu specifiedin your apps settings.
Addendum:
#ArtoAle
you are right about every app beeing assighend to exactly one domain. however once you obtained a valid token it doesnt matter from where or who you use it within the graph api.
let me expalin this a little bit:
it would make no sense since it is you doing the request. there is no such thing as "where the request is coming from". of course there is the "referer" header information, but it can be freely specified and is not used in any context of this.
the domain you enter in your apps settings only restricts where facebook redirects the user to.
why?
this ensures that some bad guy cannot set up a website on any domain and let the user authorize an app and get an access token with YOUR application.
so this setting ensures that the user and the access token are redirected back to YOUR site and not to another bad site.
but there is an alternative. if you use the control flow for desktop applications you don't get an access token right after the user has been redirected back. you get a temporary SESSION-TOKEN that you can EXCCHANGE for an access token. this exchange is done server side over the REST api and requires your application secret. So at this point it is ensured that it is YOU who gets the token.
This method can be done on any domain or in case of desktop applications on no domain at all.
This is a quote from the faceboo docs:
To convert sessions, send a POST
request to
https://graph.facebook.com/oauth/exchange_sessions
with a comma-separated list of
sessions you want to convert:
curl client_id=your_app_id \
-F client_secret=your_app_secret \
-F sessions=2.DbavCpzL6Yc_XGEI0Ip9GA__.3600.1271649600-12345,2.aBdC...
\
https://graph.facebook.com/oauth/exchange_sessions
The response from the request is a
JSON array of OAuth access tokens in
the same order as the sessions given:
[ {
"access_token": "...",
"expires": 1271649600, }, ... ]
However you don't need this method as its a bit more complex. For your use case i would suggest using a central point of authorization.
So you would specify your ONE domain as a redirect url. This domain is than SHARED between your websites. there you can obtain the fully valid access token and seamlessly redirect the user back to your specific project website and pass along the access token.
This way you can use the traditional easy authentication flow that is probably also more future proof.
The fact remains. Once the access token is generated you can perform any action from any domain, there is no difference as ther is literally no "domain" where the request is coming from (see above).
apart from that, if you want some nice javascript features to work - like the comments box or like button, you need to setup up open graph tags correctly.
if you have some implementation problems or as you said "domain errors" please describe them more clearly, include the steps you made and if possible an error message.