I was trying to use SAML through SSO,my question is when a session becomes invalid in IDP, how does IDP notifies this to SP, if I have multiple copy of SP sitting in geographically distributed region sitting behind a load balancer,how the message reaches a particular SP as the DNS name for all will be same.
Depends on specific IdP implementation. Some IdPs are using back channel. Sending SOAP message to inform all SP's that are in partner trust. OpenAM per instance is using this mechanism. Performing SLO request to all SP's.
Related
Our javaspring application (sp) allows SSO integration for the clients. We have planned to introduce SLO (Single Logout) as part of the security audit requirement.
I have a doubt, if our application request for SLO to idp then the particular customer's all other open app's get logged out ?
We don't want to make customer's other application get logged out due to our application.
Kindly advise. If the SAML SLO request will only impact the only the service provide which requests the logout or all the service provider which customer SSO logged in with?
Typically single-logout (SLO) will cascade from one SP to the IdP back to all related child sessions at the other SPs. Depending on what IdP you use, you may be able to control that / be more fine-grained but you have to be careful you're not opening yourself up to any attacks (on orphaned sessions).
As per SAML spec the IdP has to inform all other session participants.
I'm having an issue with SAML 2.0 single logout.
I have a SAML 2.0 environment with an IdP (identity provider) and a web application acting as SP (service provider).
As user I start a web application session in an user agent (browser). The user is authenticated using the IdP.
In a different browser (running on the same client machine) I start another session as the same user in the same web application, i.e. in the same SP in terms of SAML.
Now I have two independent web application sessions where the same user is authenticated.
When I then perform a single logout initiated by the IdP in one of the browsers the IdP issues only one logout request which terminates the session that is running in that browser. The element of the logout request issued by the IdP equals the one that was sent by the IdP in the attribute SessionIndex of the AuthnStatement of the Assertion sent to the SP using that browser (user agent).
Wouldn't it actually be necessary for the IdP to send logout requests for all open sessions in order to achieve a true "single logout"?
Short answer: The SAML spec allows for Single Logout (SLO) to behave the way you want but a typical implementation isn't that sophisticated.
From SAML Profiles spec, section 4.4 (Single Logout Profile):
Once a principal has authenticated to an identity provider, the
authenticating entity may establish a session with the principal
(typically by means of a cookie, URL re-writing, or some other
implementation-specific means). The identity provider may subsequently
issue assertions to service providers or other relying parties, based
on this authentication event; a relying party may use this to
establish its own session with the principal. In such a situation, the
identity provider can act as a session authority and the relying
parties as session participants.
If the SLO sequence were to be initiated by one of the session participants, this whole discussion would be moot. The spec requires the session participant to identify the "shared" session being terminated via a unique ID (aka session index) that was originally sent to the session participant by the identity provider. As required by the spec, this ID will be different in your SP session #1 vs SP session #2.
...but when the SLO sequence is initiated by the IdP, your scenario is possible. Section 4.4.4.1 talks about the rules around issuing and processing <LogoutRequest>:
If the requester is a session participant, it MUST include at least
one <SessionIndex> element in the request. [...] If the requester is a
session authority (or acting on its behalf), then it MAY omit any such
elements to indicate the termination of all of the principal's
applicable sessions
Translation: if you could somehow tell the IdP to issue a <LogoutRequest> without a <SessionIndex> and your SP is sophisticated enough to correctly interpret such request and the SP can terminate all sessions for a particular user via its backend, then you've won.
In reality, the combination of conditions above is a very tall order. Out of the box, most IdPs will not issue a <LogoutRequest> without a <SessionIndex>. The very few SPs that even bother implementing SLO will not accept a request without a <SessionIndex>. In an extremely rare case where you'll be able to come up with a correct <LogoutRequest> and SP won't choke on it, you'll be very, very lucky if the SP correctly identifies all IdP-initiated sessions AND will be able to terminate them via the backend.
So I'm struggling a bit with the basics of the flow of SAML. Here's the scenario I find confusing.
I have a java web application. The user is logged in. I know they want to order cookies from a 3rd party because they've clicked on the "I want chocolate chip cookies" link. I also know that "Mrs. Pillsbury Cookies Co." is a "Service Provider" because she sent me her meta-data and I've registered her with my Gluu Server (IdP). I've also sent her my IdP meta-data so we've done the whole hand-shaking thing.
My question is...how do I now send the SAMLResponse to Mrs. Pillsbury? She's given me a SOAP endpoint that is waiting for a SAMLResponse. How do I tell my Java application to get some XML from my gluu server as a SAMLReponse that I can then pass to the Pillsbury SOAP endpoint? That's the part where I'm stuck...I don't know how to get a response to forward. I can see in the metadata that there are lots of SSO endpoints
<SingleSignOnService Binding="urn:mace:shibboleth:2.0:profiles:AuthnRequest" Location="https://idp.myjavaapp.com/idp/profile/SAML2/Unsolicited/SSO"/>
<SingleSignOnService Binding="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:bindings:HTTP-POST" Location="https://idp.myjavaapp.com/idp/profile/SAML2/POST/SSO"/>
<SingleSignOnService Binding="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:bindings:HTTP-POST-SimpleSign" Location="https://idp.myjavaapp.com/idp/profile/SAML2/POST-SimpleSign/SSO
Am I supposed to hit one of those SSO endpoints and it'll generate a response that I can then forward on to Pillsbury? Can one of you SAML experts out there get me straigtened out? Thanks in advance.
There are a few ways SAML Requests/Responses can be generated.
IdP initiated:
This is a SAML Response generated w/o a SAML request. This requires the user to login/be logged into the idP and the idP will generate a SAML Response based off the SP setup in the idp.
SP initiated:
This is usually an HTTP Redirect but can be a POST as well. This is a SAML Request Redirect/POST that gets sent to the idP based of some link or button on the SP's website.
As I understand it you have the following relationship:
Your App
\
3rd Party ordering
/
IdP Server
Your app needs to make a request to the 3rd party, but also need it to authenticate against the IdP. Yes?
Normally the process works such that the 3rd party requests the token itself. Your app shouldn't have the token intended for the 3rd party -- it should only have the token for its own app.
Usually you send whatever your app-specific request is to the 3rd party first. When they receive that bit of information they hold onto it and then make a SP-Initiated authentication request to your IdP. They will attach a bit of information as part of the auth request called relay state. This bit of information is used to reconstitute the session after the IdP responds.
Once the IdP receives the request it does whatever it needs to do to authenticate the user, and sends the token back to the 3rd party. As part of that response they also send the relay state. The 3rd party then verifies the token and sets the session as necessary, then reads the relay state and sets whatever internal state is necessary to continue the order.
You're on the right track. As the previous answers have explained, it can be done one of two ways: the SP site (Pillsbury) sends you an authentication request, or you can direct your IDP/Gluu server to send an SAML message to the SP without them prompting: "unsolicited".
In the case of the first "SP-Initiated", you just create a link to the SP site for the user's browser to follow. The user's browser hits the SP site, the SP site realizes that it needs to authenticate the user: so it creates a SAML Authentication Request to your IDP endpoint, directing the user's browser there. Then your IDP server will respond according to the metadata/relationship that you've set up with the SP site. Just as one of the other answers explained, this Authentication Request can include a RelayState parameter which will be sent back to the SP to tell them where to send the user after the SAML message had been consumed & validated. I haven't used Gluu but I believe the SP would use the second endpoint you showed in your question to do this.
In the case of the second "IDP-initiated", you need to direct the user's browser to one of the Gluu server endpoints to generate a SAML assertion, which will be POST'd back to the SP site without the SP site's prompting. This one is less used because every time the user is directed to the SP site from your site, they will be forced through the AuthN process among other reasons. I believe this is the first listed endpoint that you showed in your question.
Here's a really good explanation of IDP-initiated from Shibboleth, that should help clear this up for you: https://wiki.shibboleth.net/confluence/display/SHIB2/IdPUnsolicitedSSO
Best of luck!
My understanding of the SAML (v2) protocol is that Service Providers should be interacting directly with Identity Providers to exchange authorisation request and assertion messages.
I can think of a number of reasons why this would be a bad idea (undermines message signing, gives intermediate IdP access to info from other IdP), but are there any scenarios supported by SAML that would allows the following arrangement?
SP <------> MainIdP <------> ThirdPartyIdP
So (hypothetically) assuming that MainIdP has some clever way of determining that the SP user needs to authenticate against ThirdPartyIdP, it would delegate to the ThirdPartyIdP and then receive the response, process it and reply to the SP. Does SAML allow this? (I am asking because a software supplier has suggested this approach and I believe it isn't supported, as well as being fundamentally insecure.)
The "correct" approach as I understand it is for the SP to be configured to know about both IdPs independently, and either present the user with a list to pick from, or delegate to a Discovery Service which can ask the user, or infer by some other means, which IdP to use. Is this right?
Thanks.
Most federation identity providers for SAML have the concept of a "Home Realm Discovery" screen.
The SP is "bound" to the MainIdP but the MainIdP presents a screen which shows all the other IDP's that it is federated with. From that list, you pick the ThirdPartyIdP.
I've implemented my Service Provider and Identify Provider following the SAML Profile for Web SSO using HTTP POST Protocol Binding. However, I am a bit confused as to how the Identity Provider will provide an <AuthnStatement> if the HTTP POST coming from the Service Provider is not tied to a session on the Identity Provider.
Could someone enlighten me how one would be able to do this?
The other approach I could use is the HTTP Redirect Binding, but that requires User-Agent intervention (i.e., the browser), often using the User-Agent simply as a pass-thru intermediary to faciliate the Request-Response message exchange. I'd rather use HTTP POST for this reason, because the message exchange occurs server-side, so the user sees nothing happening on their screen.
However, using HTTP Redirect makes more sense to me with respect to how I'd be able to tie a session to a request. Since the HTTP Redirect is facilitated via a User-Agent, the request to the IdP will have a session (if previously authenticated). What I don't get though is how to send an <AuthnRequest> on a HTTP Redirect. Answered by JST
So I'm a bit confused and would love to hear what other people are doing. Here are my questions again:
Using the HTTP POST Protocol Binding with the IsPassive option the <AuthnRequest>, how do I tie a request made by the Service Provider to a session on the Identity Provider? In other words, how does the Identity Provider know who is making the request if the POST is coming from the Service Provider which is technically an anonymous session?
Using the HTTP Redirect Protocol Binding, how do I send an <AuthnRequest> to the Identity Provider if I am using a HTTP Redirect? Answered by JST
UPDATE
Sorry for the confusion if I was unclear in my explanation above. I am implementing both the IdP and SP (via a plugin). The IdP is an existing application for which I want the SP (a third-party system) to use for authentication (i.e., Web SSO). I am developing a simple PoC at the moment. The SP is actually a third-party Spring application for which I am developing a plugin to perform the SAML operations.
I should have mentioned that I am trying to do this using the IsPassive option, that meaning the User-Agent doesn't come into play during the message exchange. It is simply the catalyst that gets the SAML-party started. Right? With that in mind, given that the user is anonymous at Step 1, what does the SP send to the IdP to allow the IdP figure out whether the user is already authenticated? Because of IsPassive, the HTTP POST isn't sent via the User-Agent
UPDATE
Question 1 Revised: How does the IdP resolve the Principal when the AuthnRequset is sent with the IsPassive option on?
Straight from the SAML 2.0 Profiles document, page 15, lines 417 to 419:
In step 4, the principal is identified
by the identity provide by some means
outside the scope of this profile.
What I'm really after is an explanation how to implement some means.
The thing to keep in mind is that there's no connection between a session on the IdP and a session on the SP. They don't know about each other, and communicate only through the SAML messages. The general steps for SP-initiated SAML SSO are:
Anonymous user visits resource (page) at SP.
SP identifies that user needs to be authenticated at IdP.
SP constructs AuthnRequest and sends to IdP.
IdP does some sort of authentication, constructs SAML Response and sends to SP.
SP validates Response and, if valid, does whatever is necessary to identify user at SP and get them to originally requested resource.
Yes, there does need to be some way to connect the SP's AuthnRequest to the IdP's Response. That's covered by the SAML spec: the SP's AuthnRequest includes an ID value, and the corresponding response from the IdP MUST include an InResponseTo attribute (on its SubjectConfirmationData element) with that ID value. The Authentication Request Protocol also allows the SP to pass a RelayState parameter to the IdP, which the IdP is then REQUIRED to pass along unchanged with the SAML Response. You (in the SP role) can use that RelayState value to capture state information allowing the user to be relayed to the originally requested resource.
That implies that when you implement an SP, you'll need some mechanism for recording ID and RelayState values, and your Response processing needs to validate InResponseTo and RelayState values it receives. How you choose to create and interpret RelayState values is up to you, but keep in mind that there is a length limit. (We use random GUID values corresponding to locally saved state data, which has the extra advantage of not giving any hint of meaning to the RelayState values.)
How does the IdP know who is making the request? The AuthnRequest must include an Issuer element that identifies the SP. It might also contain an AssertionConsumerServiceURL (the URL to which the Response is to be sent), or the IdP may have a local mapping of the Issuer to the proper URL.
How do you send an AuthnRequest using HTTP Redirect? The only difference between AuthnRequest sent using POST vs. Redirect, besides using GET rather than POST, is that the AuthnRequest XML has to get compressed (using the DEFLATE encoding).
Hope that answers most of your questions.
John,
I might suggest taking a step back and doing some more research before you decide to write your own SAML IDP/SP Implementation. You appear to be mixing Bindings with Profiles, Unsolicited vs Solicited Web SSO as well as the fact that SAML requires that the User Agent (aka Browser) is the bearer of almost all the messages between the IDP and SP. There is also a ton of info in the spec that will will have to implement to ensure your solution is actually secure.
I would suggest starting with our SAML Knowledge Base and then moving on to the OASIS SAML 2.0 Technical Overview for information on these flows.
Alternatively, if you decide to go best-of-breed you can check out our PingFederate product which can enable ALL the SAML IDP/SP use cases for you in < a day.
Hope this helps -
Ian
Unlike Ian, I am not associated with a company producing SAML-related products. However, I'd give somewhat similar advice: step back and identify why you are implementing SP or IdP. Are you really acting as both SP and IdP, or are you really just one or the other? If you're implementing/acting as IdP only, then it's fairly likely that a product like PingFederate or something similar offers all you need through configuration rather than requiring you to write custom code. If you're implementing SP, then such a product MAY be able to help you out, but it depends to a large extent on the characteristics of the system you're integrating it into. I am speaking as a developer who has done both IdP and SP implementations, and evaluated several tools before determining that because of our specific system, clients, and requirements, a custom implementation was our best option. It's been in place for over a year, with several clients using it (including some using varying commercial IdP tools).
If you can identify your use cases in terms of SAML profiles/bindings, then you'll be better equipped to make a buy-vs-build decision.