The desktop application I am developing (C#/.NET, WPF) uses a feature which requires connection to IMAP- and SMTP servers of the user. I am using a package called MailKit for this. Some of our users are using Microsoft365 and will require modern authentication in the future, as opposed to the basic authentication they are using right now. This is supported by MailKit and I am able to authenticate using OAuth2.0.
However, this requires a client secret, which expires after a certain amount of time (e.g. two years) after creation in Azure. This client secret is compiled with the application, after which the application is distributed. Does this mean the users need to update their installation at least every two years, so I can supply a new client secret? This is undesirable to our users. The best solution for me would be if I could refresh expired client secrets without the user having to perform any action.
Perhaps its a good idea to force the users to upgrade the software after two years? Like forcing them to buy an upgrade (business opportunity) or as a way to distribute fixes and updates to the application?
Most applications today you do update at least every year?
Related
So long story short, I need to pass in a username and password to a web API in order to receive a JWT giving me access to use the API. I'll need to call the API for both web and console apps, so it will be used a lot.
I obviously don't want to call it using plaintext in the app(s) (them)selves because I don't want the credentials stored in version control. I also don't want to use Secret Manager or Environment Variables, because these apps will be used in production.
The only thing I can think of is storing the username/password (as plaintext) somewhere on the server and letting Windows Authentication handle the security of the data.
Is that a good practice though? I mean I guess it's as secure as the server is and if someone got access into the server we'd have bigger problems, but it just seems like it isn't good practice.
Also, I know Azure Key Vault would be ideal in this scenario, but the company is going through a lot of transitions and finances are up in the air with covid - so we're trying to minimize costs as much as possible for the time being.
Any one have any input?
I'm designing a database monitoring application. Basically, the database will be hosted in the cloud and record-level access to it will be provided via custom written clients for Windows, iOS, Android etc. The basic scenario can be implemented via web services (ASP.NET WebAPI). For example, the client will make a GET request to the web service to fetch an entry. However, one of the requirements is that the client should automatically refresh UI, in case another user (using a different instance of the client) updates the same record AND the auto-refresh needs to happen under a second of record being updated - so that info is always up-to-date.
Polling could be an option but the active clients could number in hundreds of thousands, so I'm looking for a more robust and lightweight (on server) solution. I'm versed in .NET and C++/Windows and I could roll-out a complete solution in C++/Windows using IO Completion Ports but feel like that would be an overkill and require too much development time. Looked into ASP.NET WebAPI but not being able to send out notifications is its limitation. Are there any frameworks/technologies in Windows ecosystem that can address this scenario and scale easily as well? Any good options outside windows ecosystem e.g. node.js?
You did not specify a database that can be used so if you are able to use MSSQL Server, you may want to lookup SQL Dependency feature. IF configured and used correctly, you will be notified if there are any changes in the database.
Pair this with SignalR or any real-time front-end framework of your choice and you'll have real-time updates as you described.
One catch though is that SQL Dependency only tells you that something changed. Whatever it was, you are responsible to track which record it is. That adds an extra layer of difficulty but is much better than polling.
You may want to search through the sqldependency tag here at SO to go from here to where you want your app to be.
My first thought was to have webservice call that "stays alive" or the html5 protocol called WebSockets. You can maintain lots of connections but hundreds of thousands seems too large. Therefore the webservice needs to have a way to contact the clients with stateless connections. So build a webservice in the client that the webservices server can communicate with. This may be an issue due to firewall issues.
If firewalls are not an issue then you may not need a webservice in the client. You can instead implement a server socket on the client.
For mobile clients, if implementing a server socket is not a possibility then use push notifications. Perhaps look at https://stackoverflow.com/a/6676586/4350148 for a similar issue.
Finally you may want to consider a content delivery network.
One last point is that hopefully you don't need to contact all 100000 users within 1 second. I am assuming that with so many users you have quite a few servers.
Take a look at Maximum concurrent Socket.IO connections regarding the max number of open websocket connections;
Also consider whether your estimate of on the order of 100000 of simultaneous users is accurate.
I have experience developing software and web applications and I have decided to do some freelance work on the side. Well, I met with my first client and they are requesting a relatively simple, custom system that (without being long winded) tracks client’s paperwork as it progresses through the business’s different manual processes. It is a small business that has about 10 employees, but all of the employees will interact with the client’s paperwork, therefore everyone would need access to the new system. When I say ‘track’ I literally mean that the employees will ‘check as complete’ on a simple page the increases a progress bar at different stages for the paperwork. Now I am %110 capable of coding the custom system that meets their needs, but I am unsure about how I should go about doing it.
The information that is being tracked in the new system and stored in the DB is confidential information that they are very protective of. My main question is how should I be developing this to be as secure as I can?
-They have their own server in house, so should I develop an application (VB and SQL) for the server and require employees to log on remotely to use it? Can more than one person access/use the application at a time?
-Or should I develop a web application (ASP.Net/VB and SQL) that is only accessible on their network to their employees? They plan to expand offices, could they set up a VPN to access the site?
I’m leaning towards a web application, but I have not done too much in term of security. Basically I’m looking for pros and cons for either option or any suggestions on what I should.
PS, stackoverflow is awesome! Long time user, first time poster!
If you want to develop using vb & sql you have to consider that:
You need to have real ip
Your system will communicate threw certain port and you have to handle the security measure for letting certain port opened in your server.
You should have good knowledge in network programming
If you want to develop using asp.net you have to consider that:
in case only office employees will use the system, you can develop against users in Active Directory and for outside users with username and password with SSL connection or vpn
for preventing more than one person access the file you can simply add column 'locked' in case file is being used.
Well im not a web fan (I suck) ive seen too many security issues go with it...i.e Lulzsec, but i do very much love VB apps.
So I would definetely recommend a VB app connected to a MSSQL database (coz it's easy to configure and havent seen any security exploits yet),my Chinese friend told me there is a way to access MySQL free databases.Now, allow remote access but make sure your Windows Firewall is also configured properly do look at all angles of security.
If I remember well there is an option in MSSQL to specify the IP addresses or is it MAC addresses that can access the DB so maybe input all of the 10 employees' IP addresses assuming they are static,if they are dynamic (DHCP) don't bother. And ask them to make the IP address of the server where you will host the DB on static.
If only 10 employees use the DB then limit the connections to 10. For now develop this when it comes to VPN you can make a Remote version of the App im sure that will come later right now focus on the basics. Also use Dotfuscator when you are publishing the app I heard it is very good.N also im suggesting the document/work order is received at the reception so that user will check in the document with specifics...if they are passing on the work order to the next user they should select the user and then THAT user may enter some sort of verification code unique to the user...im sure you can envision the rest from here. Now do I also get a cut from this?lol
I've been doing the same for years now, and I always take the website side, this days I go width ASP.NET MVC 4, it's easier, everything in their place and extremely easier to test and maintain.
The web application has a very big advantage to any standalone windows application, you deploy and upgrade only one application instead to maintain all the different versions once you start deploying windows apps, and they are harder to debug once you start to having different machines with different versions and so on...
so, Web or Win app = Web app, always!
All you need is a server that run IIS and set it up for using Active Directory (Visual Studio has that project already, simply create an ASP.NET MVC and choose the "intranet" template), it will set up everything for you, and all you need later is tweak the Active Directory connection string.
I also use a self-signed SSL to protect data between client and server, as I also make the apps available outside the office without VPN needed, as long as they login with their secure AD credentials.
And... audit everything into a secondary database, every action performed by a user since they login until they logout, every view, update or creating data witch .NET makes it simple if you create your Logging method to simple log messages and Stack messages on errors.
This will greatly benefit your employer and you when something goes wrong.
I would say to go with web application. Advantage using web application is, if they want to expand bussiness .. same can you do with you WebApp. But choose .Net over VB, going with latest techonology will help you resolve current challanges.
I have a web role project in ASP.NET made for Azure deployment and need to have authentication.
I have to choose between Office 365 and On-Premise Active Directory.
Looks like both needs to be integrated to Azure Active Directory using Access Control Service.
What are the pros and cons of both?
Also if there are any other possibilities.
As astaykov mentions in his comment on your question you are not restricted to involving Access Control Services in this scenario. Not sure why he didn't submit that comment as an answer.
If you truly must go against your Office 365 or On Premise AD then what you are really saying asking is what is the difference between the two. I'll list some thoughts, but first if you want to implement these then here are some links:
Offerings from MS on Identity: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/security/aa570351.aspx
Using ADFS V2 in your Azure Deployment:
http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Identity/WIF-Workshop-9-WIF-and-Windows-Azure/ This is a little older material and I couldn't find much on using WIF to connect directo ADFS V2 that was more current. You do NOT have to invovle ACS in this at all. Sadly, this was misunderstood a lot when ACS was released.
Using Office 365/Windows Azure AD: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/windowsazure/dn151790.aspx
Note: I have connected Web sites running in Azure to ADFSV2 directly, but I've not had a chance to work with the WAAD/Office 365 stuff yet.
If you choose to go with exposing your AD on premise then you would likely do this by exposing it using ADFS V2. This is what opens up the endpoint for the code running WIndows Identify Foundation (WIF) objects to reach out and deal with authentication. The upshot of this is that you don't have to worry about Office 365 logins or a WAAD separately and might be an interesting choice if you don't have those services for ANY OTHER reason but this one scenario. The down side is that you are exposing a proxy to your AD on an endpoint at your own location. If you lose connectivity to the internet then no one attempting to use the apps in the cloud would be able to authenticate. This is also the option I might look at if the users of the app in the cloud will ONLY EVER access it while behind your firewall (such as being at an office or even over VPN). This is because you can set it up so that your app uses a ADFS endpoint that is NOT exposed to the internet, but if they are behind your firewall it would still work. This pretty much ensures that only people already behind your firewall can use your app.
If you choose to use Office 365/WAAD integration then the upside is that you can sync with your onpremise AD to give single sign on to resources on your network as well as to the apps in the cloud. You also make access to your cloud apps more resilient because they have no need to depend on your exposed ADFS V2 endpoint. If you use Office 365/WAAD for any other reason (such as your employess use Office 365 for email, collaboration, etc.) then this is the option I would look at first.
You should look at ACS if you want to integrate with other identify providers such as Google, Facebook or even other companies. Technically you wouldn't have to use ACS at that time either, but it will certainly save you a ton of work to use ACS and not write the integration code on your own for each provider.
So I'm making a app for a bank, but it doesnt manage very important data. I have two problems, it will run over a VERY large LAN network protected by all kinds of security(antivirus and firewalls) and the bandwidth in certain regions is as low as 56kbps.(Its a desktop app with a web server backend connected by web services)
From the security point of view all I want is to prevent someone from executing the web services from some other source or app results in change in the database . I'm thinking of each desktop app installed with a install code, this will be hashed and required as a parameter for every function call and will act as an authentication ticket? Is this good enough? Are they better SIMPLER means?
For performance, how do I measure or know if the web service will send and receive data at a decent rate?
Thanks
Gideon
Assuming you are on a windows domain. You could configure the server to use windows authentication and restrict the users which can access the web service.
For performance measuring - asp.net will show you a sample request and response if you hit the web service from a browser, you can work out the site of a message and use the bandwidth to calculate how long it should take. You could also call the web service and use the stopwatch class to measure the time it takes.
I would prefer assigning usernames and passwords. Either way, the user can disclose their code to someone else. And either the user or a recipient can access the app using other programs (there's no way to prevent someone extracting an install code). But if you assign usernames, they are more likely to take personal responsibility for what happens using the authorization.