Hi,
I am building a ASP.NET MVC 2 website and need to bound the current user/session to some data. The following is possible solutions but what is best practice?
Create a GUID and set it as hidden field on view, the data will then be saved in a singelton object (like a cache). the security will however not be the best(the user could change the value of the hidden field).
Use Session.SessionId. to maintain the same SessionId between calls I need to store somthing in the session which feels wrong? Im not sure if there is any security problems here?
BestRegards
My Solution : I ended up to create a GUID for the current client and then set this as a hidden field on the form. I did however had some problems to get the hidden field to be rendered correcly, see : ASP.NET MVC 2 HiddenField is empty?
Maintaining state across web requests is always a challenge as the web is inherently stateless.
Whether you use a hidden Guid (or other system-unique identifier) or a session ID in a cookie, both are open to abuse. That said, most systems that implement a 'session state' do so through the use of cookies.
The purpose of the session state 'bag' is to store information between web requests, exactly the objective you mention, so while it may feel 'wrong' it is a very commonly accepted approach. Remember, only the session ID is stored with the client browser, not the actual session data; that's held at the server.
Related
I'm trying to figure out best or common practices for API design.
My concern is basically this:
PUT /users/:id
In my view this endpoint could by used for a wide array of functions.
I would use it to change the user name or profile, but what about ex, resetting a password?
From a "model" point of view, that could be flag, a property of the user, so it would "work" to send a modification.
But I would expect more something like
POST /users/:id/reset_password
But that means that almost for each modification I could create a different endpoint according to the meaning of the modification, i.e
POST /users/:id/enable
POST /users/:id/birthday
...
or even
GET /user/:id/birthday
compared to simply
GET /users/:id
So basically I don't understand when to stop using a single POST/GET and creating instead different endpoints.
It looks to me as a simple matter of choice, I just want to know if there is some standard way of doing this or some guideline. After reading and looking at example I'm still not really sure.
Disclaimer: In a lot of cases, people ask about REST when what they really want is an HTTP compliant RPC design with pretty URLs. In what follows, I'm answering about REST.
In my view this endpoint could by used for a wide array of functions. I would use it to change the user name or profile, but what about ex, resetting a password?
Sure, why not?
I don't understand when to stop using a single POST/GET and creating instead different endpoints.
A really good starting point is Jim Webber's talk Domain Driven Design for RESTful systems.
First key idea - your resources are not your domain model entities. Your REST API is really a facade in front of your domain model, which supports the illusion that you are just a website.
So your resources are analogous to documents that represent information. The URI identifies the document.
Second key idea - that URI is used by clients to cache representations of the resource, so that we don't need to send requests back to the server all the time. Instead, we have built into HTTP a bunch of standard ways for communicating caching meta data from the server to the client.
Critical to that is the rule for cache invalidation: a successful unsafe request invalidates previously cached representations of the same resource (ie, the same URI).
So the general rule is, if the client is going to do something that will modify a resource they have already cached, then we want the modification request to go to that same URI.
Your REST API is a facade to make your domain model look like a web site. So if we think about how we might build a web site to do the same thing, it can give us insights to how we arrange our resources.
So to borrow your example, we might have a web page representation of the user. If we were going to allow the client to modify that page, then we might think through a bunch of use cases (enable, change birthday, change name, reset password). For each of these supported cases, we would have a link to a task-specific form. Each of those forms would have fields allowing the client to describe the change, and a url in the form action to decide where the form gets submitted.
Since what the client is trying to achieve is to modify the profile page itself, we would have each of those forms submit back to the profile page URI, so that the client would know to invalidate the previously cached representations if the request were successful.
So your resource identifiers might look like:
/users/:id
/users/:id/forms/enable
/users/:id/forms/changeName
/users/:id/forms/changeBirthday
/users/:id/forms/resetPassword
Where each of the forms submits its information to /users/:id.
That does mean, in your implementation, you are probably going to end up with a lot of different requests routed to the same handler, and so you may need to disambiguate them there.
We're starting to migrate our Website to a REST Service based system and are in the process of developing the core right now.
In our current setup a user has one or more "accounts" assigned which define what data he can see on the website. Only one account can be active for a given user at any time. Right now we store the selected account in the database and use it to filter all queries.
Now I'm not sure how to handle this properly in a REST environment. Possible solutions I found are:
Sending the requested account with every request
Storing the current account in the auth token. (We're using JWT for that)
Having the current account stored on the server and calling a specific resource to change it
Each of these has its pros and cons for our setup. Currently we're using the 3rd approach in our Website. But what would be the correct way to handle such a thing in a REST environment?
Yea the design you are dealing with is fairly bad, and what you really want to do is remove the state completely out of this system.
For that reason the first option is by far superior:
Sending the requested account with every request
If this is simply an id, there's a very simple way to do this, just prefix all your (relevant) routes / uris with this account id. For example:
http://api.example.org/accounts/{id}/...
This way the 'state' is maintained by virtue of which url you are accessing, and the server can be unaware of the state.
I am attempting to make a website's back-end API (I want to make the back-end independent of the front-end so I'm only making a server-side API for now, abiding to RESTfulness as much as possible). I haven't done this before so I'm unaware of the 'best' & most secure way to do things.
How I do it now:
Some parts of the API should only be accessible to a specific user after they login and up to 24 hours later.
To do this, I am generating a random Session ID whenever a user logs in (I'm using passwordless logins so the user is assigned that ID when they click on a link in their email) on the server side, which respond by sending that session ID to the client once. The client then stores this session ID in localstorage (or a file in disk if the client is not a web browser).
Next, I store that ID along with the associated email in my DB (MySQL table) on the server side.
Now every time the client want something from my API, they have to provide the email & session ID in the URL (I don't want cookies for now), which the server checks against the ones in the DB, if they exist then the server responds fully else responds with an error.
After 24 hours, the server deletes the email/session ID pair and the user has to login again (to generate another session ID and associate it with their email).
Now the questions:
Is my method secure or does it have obvious vulnerabilities? Is
there another battle-tested way I'm not aware of?
Is there a better way for the client to store the session ID (if
they are a web browser)?
What is the best way to generate a unique session ID? Currently I
generate a random 16-char string that I set as the primary key of
the session-email table.
Is using a MySQL table the most performant/best way to store session
IDs (given it will be queried with each request)?
Do I need to encrypt session IDs in any way? Is it secure for the
client to send it as a 'naked' URL param?
Sorry for having too many questions in one post but I think they're related by the single scenario above. If it makes any difference, I'm using F# and I expect my client to either be an android app or a web app.
Your REST API MUST not know anything about the REST client session, not even the session id. If you don't want to send a password by every request, all you can do is signing the user id, and the timeout, so the service can authenticate based on the signature. Use JSON web token: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSON_Web_Token
You can have a server side REST client, which can have the session your described. The question is, does it really worth the effort to develop a REST service instead of a regular web application? I am not sure in your case, but typically the answer is no, because you won't have any 3rd party REST client and your application does not have enough traffic to justify the layered architecture or it is not big enough to split into multiple processes, etc...
If security is important then you MUST use a true random generator algorithm or hardware. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_number_generation#.22True.22_vs._pseudo-random_numbers It is not safe to send anything through HTTP, you must use HTTPS instead. You MUST use the standard Authorization header instead of a query param. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_access_authentication
I am supposed to make web services for an app and thought I could do a nice job practicing the good practice. As I found out it's using REST. But there is one thing that makes very little sense in it.
Why use URI to pass any variable?
What we did in our last project is use POST only and pass whatever as raw POST data (which was JSON). That's not very RESTful. But it has some advantages. It was quite simple on the client side - I had a general function that takes URI and data as arguments and then it wraps it up and sends it.
Now, if I used proper REST, I would have to pass some data as part of the URI (user ID, for instance). All the other data (username, email and etc.) would have to go as raw data, like we did, I guess. That means I would have to separate user ID and the other data at some point. That's not so bad but still - why?
EDIT
Here is a more detailed example:
Let's say you want to access (GET) and update (POST) user data. You may have a service accessible under /user but what RESTful service would do is accept user's ID as part of the URI (/user/1234). All the other data (name, email and etc) would go to request content (probably as JSON).
What I pose is that it seems useless to make put user id in the URI. If you wanted to update user data - you would send additional data as content anyway. If you wanted to access it - you could use same generic method to request web service.
I know GET gets cached by a browser but I believe you have to cache it manually anyway if you use AJAX (web) or any HTTP client library (other platforms).
From point of scalability - you can always add more services.
You use the URI to identify the resource (user/document/webpage) you want to work with, and pass the related data inside the request.
It has the advantage that web infrastructure components can find out the location of the resource without having any idea how your content is represented. For example, you can use standard caches and load balancers, all they need to know is the URL and headers (which are always represented the same way) Whether you use JSON, protobuf or WAV audio to communicate with your resource is irrelevant.
This will for example let you keep different resources in totally different places, if you send it all as content you won't have the advantage of being able to place the resources in totally different locations, as for example http://cloud.google.com/resource1 and http://cloud.amazon.com/resource2.
All this will allow you to scale massively, which you won't be able to do if you put it all on http://my.url.com/rest and pass all resource info as content.
Re: Your edit
Passing the user id in the URL is the only way to identify the individual resource (user). Remember, it's the user that's the resource, not the "user store".
For example, a cache that caches http://my.url/user won't be much good, since it would return the same cached page for every user. If the cache can work with http://my.url/user/4711, it can cache every user separately. In the same way, a load balancer could know that users 1-5000 are handled by one machine, 5001-10000 by another etc. and make intelligent decisions based on the URL only.
Imagine a RESTful web service as a database.
To get or modify specific object you need to identify it by providing its primary key.
You identify a user by his ID, not his Name+Nickname+e-mail+mother's maiden name.
The information that identifies an object or selects a set of objects goes to the URL. The information that modifies objects should be POSTed to the corresponding URL.
Ive got a asp.net mvc site that works with ASP.net Authentication. I have a UserInformation table which stores extra information on each user aswell. On pretty much every page i am calling to the database to pull the UserInformation record for the current user at least once.
Im thinking all these repeated data calls for the same information has to be overkill. Is there anyway i can cut these down? Caching? Storing the userinformation record for future use etc etc?
Im sure im not the first person to come across this issue, so i didnt want to reinvent the wheel.
Thanks in advance
You could use a custom IIdentity and IPrincipal. Here's a nice article describing how to achieve this (the interesting part is happening in the btnAuthenticate_Click method which in an ASP.NE MVC application would be the authenticate controller action, here is emitted the authentication ticket with custom data). In this example the idea is that the authentication ticket is manually created and the userData property is used to store additional information. This might not be appropriate for your case if you have lots of data because this is stored in a cookie. But instead of using the userData you could store it somewhere else like Session or Cache. You could also write a custom [Authorize] attribute to deal with the custom principal (the part that corresponds to the Application_AuthenticateRequest method in the article should go in this custom authorization filter in order to reconstruct the user back).