I know that REST is not supposed to use HttpSession.
From the other side, the REST service is running within a servlet container.
From what I saw, the HttpSession object will be created only when:
HttpSession session = request.getSession();
code is executed. Is it always the case? Besides using JSP?
My question is: will be HttpSession objects be created when the REST method is executed or not?
Let's say I use the JAX-RS framework, if it can make any difference.
If such objects are not created, it actually can mean that the size of the server memory may not grow irrespective of how many clients use it the server.
HTTP sessions are actually used quite often with REST interfaces, but should never contain anything truly critical. Thus, they can be used to contain the fact that you've authenticated or what your preferred default ordering of some list is; in the former case, you could also support other authentication mechanisms at the same time allowing fully stateless operation, and in the latter you can easily also support explicit overrides. So long as you don't require a session — well, under the assumption that your site was using HTTP BASIC auth for the sake of argument; if you're using OAuth then you need sessions enabled to stop performance from being crippled — then you're still potentially reasonably close to RESTful (in this area for sure; REST is not “don't use sessions” after all).
Is there a concern about how long a session lasts before timing out? Well, maybe but not really. A session is really an object that you've mapped into some database table, and you can configure the expiry policy on them so that they last long enough to support effective use without being over-burdensome. Which depends on how many clients use the site at once, what their usage patterns are, and what hardware resources you've got available (of course).
I think this is the limitation of Java EE framework at the moment I haven't seen it done otherwise any other server yet. If you need to have a container managed security-constraint a session will be created.
That being said you do not require to implement your code to use container managed authentication. People do implement authentication login/mechanisms themselves like Shiro and what not.
If you're concerned about scalibility, you may have to handle the authentication on your own. However, before you continue with this path consider the following... how many people are you expecting to use your app? Unless you're some really big and popular service like Facebook or Google etc, present hardware/cloud offerings should be able to handle your load with HTTP Sessions with a lot of room to spare.
However, if you wanted to do it an implement yourself then I suggest the following:
unauthenticated client passes credentials (via WWW-Authorization is the easiest to test with)
credentials are validated and a token is returned. The token is an encoded encrypted string containing client ID, an expiration and a reauth token. This token is passed back to the client with Set-Cookie
Client makes future requests with the Cookie containing the token
The token can be used as long as it hasn't expired, this would just be crypto calculations on a server node and thus can be scaled across multiple servers if needed there's no single data store to deal with.
The reauth token can be used to generate a new token for the client should it expire (this is useful for user applications where the interaction can last for minutes).
You can add an enterprise cache to store which ones are still valid at the expense of an extra backend call.
Related
I am writing a REST Api gateway for an Angular SPA and I am confronted with the problem of securing the data exposed by the API for the SPA against "data thiefs". I am aware that I can't do much against HTML scraping, but at least I don't want to offer such data thiefs the user experience and full power of our JSON sent to the SPA.
The difference between most "tutorials" and threads about this topic is that I am exposing this data to a public website (which means no user authentication required) which offers valuable statistics about a video game.
My initial idea on how to protect the Rest API for SPA:
Using JWTs everywhere. When a visitor opens the website the very first time the SPA requests a JWT from my REST Api and saves it in the HTTPS cookies. For all requests the SPA has to use the JWT to get a response.
Problems with that approach
The data thief could simply request the oauth token from our endpoint as well. I have no chance to verify that the token has actually been requested from my SPA or from the data thief?
Even if I solved that the attacker could read the saved JWT from the HTTPS cookies and use it in his own application. Sure I could add time expiration for the JWT
My question:
I am under the impression that this is a common problem and therefore I am wondering if there are any good solutions to protect against others than the SPA having direct access to my REST Api responses?
From the API's point of view, your SPA is in no way different than any other client. You obviously can't include a secret in the SPA as it is sent to anybody and cannot be protected. Also the requests it makes to the API can be easily sniffed and copied by another client.
So in short, as diacussed many times here, you can't authenticate the client application. Anybody can create a different client if they want.
One thing you can actually do is checking the referer/origin of requests. If a client is running in a browser, thr requests it can make are somewhat limited, and one such limitation is the referer and origin headers, which are always controlled by the browser, and not javascript. So you can actually make sure that if (and only if!) the client is running in an unmodified browser, it is downloaded from your domain. This is the default in browsers btw, so if you are not sending CORS headers, you already did this (browsers do, actually). However, this does not keep an attacker from building and running a non-browser client and fake any referer or origin he likes, or just disregard the same origin policy.
Another thing you could do is changing the API regularly just enough to stop rogue clients from working (and changing your client at the same time ofc). Obviously this is not secure at all, but can be annoying enough for an attacker. If downloading all your data once is a concern, this again doesn't help at all.
Some real things you should consider though are:
Does anybody actually want to download your data? How much is it worth? Most of the times nobody wants to create a different client, and nobody is that much interested in the data.
If it is that interesting, you should implement user authentication at the very least, and cover the remaining risk either via points below and/or in your contracts legally.
You could implement throttling to not allow bulk downloading. For example if the typical user accesses 1 record every 5 seconds, and 10 altogether, you can build rules based on the client IP for example to reasonably limit user access. Note though that rate limiting must be based on a parameter the client can't modify arbitrarily, and without authentication, that's pretty much the client IP only, and you will face issues with users behind a NAT (ie. corporate networks for example).
Similarly, you can implement monitoring to discover if somebody is downloading more data than it would be normal or necessary. However, without user authentication, your only option will be to ban the client IP. So again it comes down to knowing who the user is, ie. authentication.
Say you're developing an application which consists of a backend HTTP API, which serves a frontend UI. The UI, upon being rendered on the client's browser, will need to make certain calls to the backend (e.g., fetch data for views). However, all these calls are can be checked on Chrome's developer console, for example. This exposes my application's overall logic and internal API endpoints.
Is this a concern for a web application? I looked around some other websites (e.g., Reddit) and I was indeed able to check an API call was being made and I even managed to reproduce it via cURL, getting the same response back.
My first idea to solve this would be to encrypt all data and have it decrypted internally in the frontend app. However, I don't think this would provide much security since the private key would have to be hardcoded in the app's source code, which can also be checked by modern browsers. Besides, this could greatly impact the application's performance.
The best I could think of was to somehow assign a token (JSON Web Tokens, maybe?) to the session (which in turn is assigned to a user). This token would be needed to make the API calls, and maybe it could have a short expiration time. However, the token can still be seen in the HTTP request.
Any ideas?
I am using bcrypts => https://www.npmjs.com/package/bcryptjs + jsonwebtokens in my MEAN app for the same. Bcryptjs creates a salt at the server side and send an encrypted token to the client. The same token is used for API calls. This makes decoding a bit harder for any phishing attempt.
Use HTTPS instead. => Are querystring parameters secure in HTTPS (HTTP + SSL)?
My task is to implement a resource server(RS) for IdentityServer4(IS4). The RS should fetch data from a database and send the necessary information as a json object back to the caller (client). This is needed because we have to return complex objects.
I already setup IS4 succesfully and its already running in Docker for testing purpose. I also setup the needed database.
My understanding of the flow would be, the user requests data from the RS sending the access-token, the RS then validates the token, checking if the caller is allowed to access the api using the IS4, if everything is okay the RS returns the data to the caller.
My problem is, as I'm new to this subject, how would I implement a RS? Do I create an API which is added as a scope to the user? Or is there a RS already implemented in IS4?
So yes you'll need to write your own API to serve your own resources, IdentityServer will only manage your identities for you (as well as handling external logins if that's what you need). I'd recommend going to the IdentityServer docs and working through the quick starts in order as shown below:
This will give you a good start but you'll then need to go away and research APIs more generally, there's a tonne of good info online about building (RESTful) APIs. You may find it useful to sign up to something like PluralSight and work through a couple of their courses, they're often very good.
One other thing to bear in mind is that IdentityServer is for identity, in other words Authentication and not specifically for Authorisation so you may need to add something for this. You can of course use a users identity for authorisation purposes but in most cases you'll probably need to augment the info you store about their identity to authorise them for access. See this link for more info around this topic.
I am working on a webapi project which of course is supposed to be stateless.
The point is that it requires authetication and the majority of it's services is available to logged in users.
The catch is that there are several pieces of information about that user which should be used on all subqsequent calls to the legacy backend.
Should I force the clients to send back all those parameters on each request? (doesn't seem fair)
Should I use a caching on the webapi side - this is tricky as currently there is no out-of-memory distributed cache in use in the deployment environment....
What options do you see?
You could choose to issue the user some kind of session token on the first call. The server could then use the session token to authenticate the user and remember the settings for that session on subsequent calls.
You can read more about managing sessions in a stateless environment here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Session_management
What options are available for authentication of an MVC3 Web API application that is to be consumed by a JQuery app from another domain?
Here are the constraints/things I've tried so far:-
I don't want to use OAuth; for private apps with limited user bases I cannot expect end users to have their accounts on an existing provider and there is no scope to implement my own
I've had a fully functioning HMAC-SHA256 implemention working just fine using data passed in headers; but this doesn't work in IE because CORS in IE8/9 is broken and doesn't allow you to send headers
I require cross-domain as the consuming app is on a different domain to the API, but can't use jsonp becuase it doesn't allow you to use headers
I'd like to avoid a token (only) based approach, as this is open to replay and violates REST by being stateful
At this point I'm resigned to a HMAC-SHA256 approach that uses either the URL or querystring/post to supply the hash and other variables.
Putting these variables in the URL just seems dirty, and putting them in the querystring/post is a pain.
I was succesfully using the JQuery $.ajaxSetup beforeSend option to generate the hash and attach it to the headers, but as I mentioned you can't use headers with IE8/9.
Now I've had to resort to $.ajaxPrefilter because I can't change the ajax data in beforeSend, and can't just extend data in $.ajaxSetup because I need to dynamically calculate values for the hash based on the type of ajax query.
$.ajaxPrefilter is also an issue because there is no clean/simple way to add the required variables in such a way that is method agnostic... i.e. it has to be querystring for GET and formdata for POST
I must be missing something because I just cannot find a solution that:-
a) supports cross-domain
a) not a massive hack on both the MVC and JQuery sides
c) actually secure
d) works with IE8/9
There has to be someone out there doing this properly...
EDIT
To clarify, the authentication mechanism on the API side is fine... no matter which way I validate the request I generate a GenericPrincipal and use that in the API (the merits of this are for another post, but it does allow me to use the standard authorization mechanisms in MVC, which I prefer to rolling my own... less for other developers on my API to learn and maintain)
The problem lies primarly in the transfer of authentication information from the client to the API:-
- It can't rely on server/API state. So I can't pass username/password in one call, get a token back and then keep using that token (open to replay attack)
- Anything that requires use of request headers is out, because IE uses XDR instead of XHR like the rest of the browsers, and it doesn't support custom headers (I know IE10 supports XHR, but realistically I need IE8+ support)
- I think I'm stuck generating a HMAC and passing it in the URL somewhere (path or querystring) but this seems like a hack because I'm using parts of the request not designed for this
- If I use the path there is a lot of messy parsing because at a minimum I have to pass a username, timestamp and hash with each request; these need to be delimited somehow and I have little control over delimiters being used in the rest of the url
- If I use data (querystring/formdata) I need to change the place I'm sending my authentication details depending on the method I'm using (formdata for POST/PUT/etc and querystring for GET), and I'm also polution the application layer data space with these vars
As bad as it is, the querystring/formdata seems the best option; however now I have to work out how to capture these on each request. I can use a MessageHandler or Filter, but neither provide a convienient way to access the formdata.
I know I could just write all the parsing and handling stuff myself (and it looks like I will) but the point is I can't believe that there isn't a solution to this already. It's like I have (1) support for IE, (2) secure and (3) clean code, and I can only pick two.
Your requirements seem a little bit unjustified to me. You can't ever have everything at the same time, you have to be willing to give something up. A couple of remarks:
OAuth seems to be what you want here, at least with some modifications. You can use Azure's Access Control Service so that you don't have to implement your own token provider. That way, you have "outsourced" the implementation of a secure token provider. Last I checked Azure ACS was still free. There is a lot of clutter when you look for ACS documentation because people mostly use it to plug into another provider like Facebook or Google, but you can tweak it to just be a token provider for your own services.
You seem to worry a lot about replay attacks. Replay attacks almost always are a possibility. I have to just listen to the data passing the wire and send it to your server, even over SSL. Replay attacks are something you need to deal with regardless. Typically what I do is to track a cache of coming requests and add the hash signature to my cache. If I see another request with the same hash within 5 minutes, I ignore it. For this to work, I add the timestamp (millisecond granularity) of the request and some derivative of the URL as my hash parameters. This allows one operation per millisecond to the same address from the same client without the request being marked as replay attack.
You mentioned jQuery which puzzles me a bit if you are using the hashing method. That would mean you actually have your hash algorithm and your signature logic on the client. That's a serious flaw because by just inspecting javascript, I can now know exactly how to sign a request and send it to your server.
Simply said; there is not much special in ASP.NET WebAPI when it comes to authentication.
What I can say is that if you are hosting it inside ASP.NET you'll get support by ASP.NET for the authentication and authorization. In case you have chosen for self-hosting, you will have the option to enable WCF Binding Security options.
When you host your WebAPI in ASP.NET, you will have several authentication options:
Basic Authentication
Forms Authentication - e.g. from any ASP.Net project you can enable Authentication_JSON_AppService.axd in order to the forms authentication
Windows Authentication - HttpClient/WebHttpRequest/WebClient
Or explicitly allow anonymous access to a method of your WebAPI