ok so, i have this dilemma on how i should save login credentials in mvc at the same time avoid as much hit on the database. i know i can easily use Forms Authentication to save a User instance but is it advisable?
At the moment the way I do it is I store the User Id in a cookie which i then would access everytime an Action gets called that would "require" a login access. Before the action gets accessed the User Id will be used to retrieve a "New" User instance. This will be the same on every Action, I don't store the User in the cookie as I feel like once the cookie is compromised everything about the User shall be available for the hacker (Userid, email, roles, etc)
So if i have a ton of actions that would require a login that will be difficult on my bandwidth. What do you think of the method I'm using? Should I change it to have all the User object be stored in the cookie with a short timeout? Any ideas are greatly appreciated.
thanks!!
It seems like you are trying to address a bandwidth issue. That alone would suggest that you shouldn't store more than you have to (ie: session id) in the cookie.
There are two major problems (among others) for using cookies.
1) They are sent up on every request
2) There is only limited amount of information you can store.
In general, trusting anything the user gives you (that includes encrypted cookies) is bad.
How many concurrent users do you foresee having on your website? Keep in mind that the database will be able to cache certain calls. Furthermore, if you are using a ORM like nhibernate, you will get 2nd level caching there. If all else fails, could you use the in-memory session management?
The biggest problem I have with putting userid's in the cookie is the entropy of that key. Say your userId is an email. All I have to do as an attacker is guess a userid that is valid in your system, and I will "automatically" become that user. The reason why people use sessionID's and then retrieve the user is that in theory sessionID's are harder to guess.
My suggestion would be to use database session management if you are in a load balanced situation. If not, use in-memory. It is fast. Memory is cheap. And unless you are storing 10's of mb of data in session for each user, and you have 10000's of users, you should be fine.
As Ken stated, you should probably be using the standard [authorize] tags available with MVC as opposed to creating your own method.
It sounds like you pretty much implemented form based authentication and something comparable to the [Authorize] attribute.
So if i have a ton of actions that would require a login that will be difficult on my bandwidth
Forms Authentication uses a cookie and is baked into the system. If you don't want to store your user information in SQLServer there are plenty of other options.
It sounds like you are trying to implement something that is already done. In my opinion, let's leave the security stuff to people that know about security. I would suggest working within the framework provided unless you have proof that you solution needs something else!
There is a UserData property on the FormsAuthenticationTicket object that could be used to store additional data other than the Username.
I had a project that had a similar need. I stored the values as a NameValueCollection encoded like a query string:
"email=myemail#some.com&roles=Somebody&roles=Special"
(there's also a handy HttpUtility.ParseQueryString() method that is useful for getting the values back out of the UserData property)
You can use the FormsAuthentication.Encrypt and FormsAuthentication.Decrypt to convert the ticket to and from the Cookie value.
Related
I have two models doing login (Devise) in my Rails app - Admin and User, both currently use the default cookie store for session data.
I want to be able to identify an Admin session in AJAX requests coming in from the admin, for authorization of these API calls. I plan to do this by setting an encrypted cookie upon Admin login. When the AJAX API call comes in, I open the cookie, grab some identification from it and look for a matching existing Admin session in the store.
As I understand it, to do this, I must have session information stored in the back-end, either by DB or memcache stores.
I expect to have millions of sessions of Users and just a few sessions of Admin at any given time. For this reason, I don't want to just move all session information to a DB or memory, since this is a heap of unneeded data to store. I only want to store/look at Admin session data.
A solution will be creating some custom model which enumerates Admin user sessions, and is maintained by the app. This is simple enough but requires for instance, a way to clean up sessions when they die without signing out. Essentially this is an attempt to duplicate Rails's session store mechanism, which comes with all the problems of storing and maintaining sessions. Instinct tells me to avoid this solution. Am I correct to avoid it?
If so, then my question is, is there a way to configure multiple session stores in a Rails app, a different store for every logged in Model? In this case, have Admin sessions stored in memory, and User sessions stored in cookie. If not, I'll greatly appreciate any comments and suggestions.
Thanks!
You may be thinking about it wrong.
Session are a low level mechanism that you build your authentication on top of. Its just a cookie containing an identifier (a random hash) which is linked to a session storage (by default cookies). This is a simple mechanism to add persistence to a stateless protocol.
Confusingly we also use the concept "sessions" when talking about authentication - for example logging a user in is often referred to as "creating a session". This is complete poppycock as we are just storing a claim (often a user id) in the session that was created when the user first visits the application.
If so, then my question is, is there a way to configure multiple
session stores in a Rails app, a different store for every logged in
Model?
No. Thats a chicken-vs-egg conundrum. In order to know which session storage to use you would need to access the session storage to know which session storage to use... you get the picture.
While you could create your own session storage mechanism that works differently does this is most likely a complete waste of time. Premature optimization is the root of all evil.
As I understand it, to do this, I must have session information stored
in the back-end, either by DB or memcache stores.
Not quite true. You can perfectly well build an authentication solution with just the cookie storage. In that case Rails just keeps a record on the server of which session identifiers are valid.
The main reason you would need to store additional session information in the database or memcached is if you need to store more data in the session than the 4093 bytes allowed by a cookie. Cookie storage is after all much faster and does the job fine 99% of the time. YAGNI.
You should also recognize that not everything needs to be saved in the session storage. For example the Devise trackable module saves log in / out timestamps on the user table as part of the process of authenticating a user. This is "session information" yet has nothing to do with session storage.
I want to be able to identify an Admin session in AJAX requests coming
in from the admin, for authorization of these API calls.
There are many ways to use different authentication logic for different parts of the application such as Warden strategies. For an API you may want to consider using stateless (and sessionless) authentication such as JWT.
I have an application that has an actual map of objects that any visitor can view as long as they have the correct access code. I don't require the user to login because I don't want to make them create an account as it is unnecessary. I want to allow the users to mark the objects on the map with a check and save the edits within the session. So if the user refreshed the page or they close the application and reopen it an hour or so later, I would like to save their marks based off their session id. But I am confused on how to set this up without requiring them to login because I am unsure how the sessions would work.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Sessions in Rails work the exact same way regardless if you have a proper authentication system or not.
When a first time visitor visits your application the sessions middleware creates a session identifier. This is a cryptographic hash that is kept by the server and also passed to the user in a cookie.
This lets you identify users across requests.
This session identifier is also linked to a session storage. By default this is ActionDispatch::Session::CookieStore which lets you store session data in a encrypted cookie held by the client. This is where you would normally store a user id. Since its a cookie the amount of storage space is very limited. If you want to store more data in the session you can use a different store such as Memcached, Redis or ActiveRecord.
But what you may want to consider is creating (guest) user records implicitly without the normal sign up procedure. I would just use Warden and have a bare bones user model and a cron tab that cleans out unneeded data periodically.
This gives you a database oriented application model where you can use associations and build it like a standard rails application instead of the untestable mess that results when someone goes bonkers with sessions.
I would implement Cookies (with their permission of course). You can store basic data in it, or even create a sort of ID for them so when they return you can restore their settings
ASP.NET MVC Web application where I am wanting to hold on some sensitive information (an account number) while the user navigates from page to page. I currently am using FormsAuthentication and storing it in a custom IPrinciple. I've encrypted the session cookie and set it to be HttpOnly (can't be accessed via client-script only). This seems like a good and secure solution to me.
However, I've been told we probably want zero sensitive information in a cookie for any reason. So an alternative I'm considering is storing the sensitive information in HttpContext.Current.Items. This would require the user to re-log in for each request but that's ok in this case. They should never come to the site directly, but through links from other sites (which posts authentication information, so the user never manually logs in).
Is there any reason not to use HttpContext.Current for this purpose?
I want to allow a new login to 'kick' a prior login session by the same account, in ASP.NET MVC.
It seems pretty clear that I'll give each browser a cooking representing the session ID. I'll track the currently active session ID in a server-side cache. If an already-active user attempts to log in, I'll verify the business logic (username, password, has been at least 15 minutes since last activity), and then update the active session ID cached at the server.
Now my issue is, a browser is holding an invalid session ID. What is the best point for me to inject a rejection or redirect to sign-in for this scenario?
I could modify the AuthorizeAttribute, but it seems like there should be a cleaner place to do this that won't require me to search and replace all my Authorize attributes, for example via a Global.asax event, or a controller event (I've already extended Controller in my project).
For example, if PreAuthorize existed, I would write some code there to test the request's cookies for a valid user/session ID pair, and if it didn't exist, I could simply remove the authentication cookie from the request, which would result in a standard unauthorized redirection.
So after a bit of research, it seems that a custom AuthorizeAttribute would typically be the correct approach. However, in my case, since I already had a custom role provider implemented, it was just a line of code to do it there. This also benefited me because I only wanted session concurrency for a single role. A side effect is that any use of web.config to control access to static files by role is also in-effect for session concurrency.
I currently using my own membership implementation on a ASP.MVC project. I've got an Account and an Account can have more than 1 memberships.
I am not sure what is the best approach to follow with Account information being cached. I am currently loading the account information for almost each request from the User property of the controller.
Should I cache the account information? And if where would be the best place, cookies or Session?
I recommend fairly strongly against sessions. They won't scale well and do not fit into web/HTTP type of architectures. See 'Key REST principles' in this REST article if you like the REST stuff.
I would suggest to put the user information in cookies (don't over do it, just really required stuff).
And keep sensitive information in the ASP.NET Forms authentication cookie. See Forms Authentication article, "Step 4: Storing Additional User Data in the Ticket".
Fetch the rest of the data from the database. Avoid premature optimization.
As is often the case with these questions, the answer is "it depends".
Cookies are fine if you are only storing small amounts of string data. There are limitations (4k per cookie, HTTP header limit) and they are sent across the wire with every request and response. You might have to "re-inflate" your account/member info from data stored in the cookie. Users can opt to not accept cookies from your website.
Session is strongly-typed (no re-inflation) and not transmitted with every request/response. There are several options for scaling up session storage if you think your web app will need it. Most small-medium sites use session with no problems.