I develop some internal applications for a client startup. All internal applications go through a reverse proxy, that verifies an OAuth login and lets the proxied webapp know of the user with a header value (X-Forwarded-User).
I would like to have users be logged in to the Meteor app when this header is sent, and to create the user if it does not exist.
Can't seem to find any good info on this use case online.
Where to start?
Would an ideal solution be to create a package for this (eg. accounts-from-headers)?
If so, would this be a common enough use case to make it public?
Related
I would like to authenticate a specific application to make POST requests to a server. Imagine I have a game that can manage high scores via HTTP requests. It can retrieve them, but also create new ones on said server. Now, of course, I want to avoid that a user uses exactly this HTTP request to create a highscore, so I need to authenticate the application (the game).
One idea of mine would be to hard-code an authentication token into the game. This would then be sent with requests. But there I see the danger that this request will be intercepted by the user and the user will get the token with a program like Wireshark. Also, the application should be open source if possible, so I would like to avoid this option.
If you know of a way to authenticate a particular application without the user being able to read and use it, feel free to let me know.
Thank you in advance!
Let me clarify my use case:
I have a next.js application which is a plattform for listing real estate objects. I have several api routes which im using inside my next.js app. for example:
/api/createpost ->
Takes informations from my form on my next.js app and creates a database entry to perform a new post
/api/getposts ->
fetching all the real estate posts from my database and displays it
/api/login ->
logs in a user by checking the credentials in the database and sends a jwt
/api/register ->
registers a user by taking the credentials from a form from my next.js app, registering a user and creating an entry in my database
Now in order to secure my apis I want to make sure to check if there is a valid user session if anybody is calling one of the apis (except the register/login api) to get the expected result. Im doing this by calling the /api/login route and getting a valid user session. Until here everything just works fine. Apis like the /api/createpost can only be called if we have a valid user session.
Now I want to create a mobile app and I want to use my api routes from above to provide full functionality in my mobile app too. It should work the same, if i want to call the /api/createpost on my mobileapp for example, i need a valid user session.
But I want to restrict my api by asking for a key in my database which is pointing to my app and saying okay if you call the /api/createpost api, first of all i need to verify that its the mobile app asking. The mobile app will provide the key in the request then.
I didnt try this yet, but it should work i think. Now the big mess: If we call the /api/createpost and the api wants a valid token to check in the database, which will work for the mobile app, because we are giving it a valid token to check in the database, how can we provide a token if we are calling the api from inside our next.js application? Since I have to do the api call clientside, there is no way for me to provide a secret key or something to validate that the call is coming from my next.js application.
If your application is private
(to be used only by you or a few select people)
You can send a private API key over SSL with each request from your application to the server and verify it. Or you can limit your API to only accept requests from certain IPs.
If your application is public
Unfortunately there's no way to determine where the request is coming from, since anything your app can send, an attacker can send it manually.
Think about it, if your app is trying to make a request to your API, any user can intercept this request before its sent out of his/her machine, and send the exact same request from a different app on the same machine.
You might say, well I can encrypt the requests and responses so that they are of no use to the attacker. But such an encryption will require either a key that's already agreed upon, or some way to provide a new key at the beginning of each session.
If the key is already agreed upon, the app must contain it, as you've already guessed in the question, the attacker can retrieve this key no matter how well you try to hide it.
If the encryption key is a new key provided at the beginning of each session, that's almost how SSL works, your browser handles this transaction. Your server sends a public key to your browser to encrypt the requests which the server can then decrypt with a private key. In this case you've circled back to the same problem, how can you verify to whom you give out an encryption key? What would stop an attacker from requesting the encryption key?
There has to be some way you'd be able to design apps that don't require this restriction. I think the question you should be asking isn't how to restrict your api to a certain app, but how to design apps that don't require this restriction.
We might be able to help you out if you could tell us why you need this restriction.
Update
There is actually a way to verify that requests are coming from your app, but not with an api key.
For Webapps
You can use Google's reCAPTCHA to verify a user on your /register and '/login` routes, and provide an access token or start a valid user session on successful captcha response. With reCAPTCHA v3, you could even verify every user action without interrupting the user. This eliminates both the problems I mentioned in my answer above -
You don't have to store an api key into the app/web app.
The request can't be spoofed as it requires human user interaction within your app. The captcha verification success will arrive to your API from Google's reCAPTCHA server, not from your client app. This communication will be authenticated with a pre-mediated private API key shared by Google to you, which works in the same way as to how you authenticate your external domains.
For Android apps
A similar way to achieve the same thing would be via Android SafetyNet Attestation API. This checks the runtime environment and signs the response with a dynamically generated nonce that your app provides the SafetyNet API.
Please read its docs carefully to understand how you could create potential security loopholes and how to avoid them while using this API.
For iOS apps
DeviceCheck works in a similar way, except the device validity is provided to you by Apple server.
Important edit: "secured" is not the right word here! You cannot tell that a request comes from your app just because the domain is yours. The domain name is not a safe information, as it can be altered easily. See #Mythos comments below.
Initial answer:
Web applications access is secured not based on an API key, but based on a whitelist of domains. That's how we achieve security, because only you have access to the domain where you host your own application: so the request has to be coming from an app you own.
If you try some 3rd party services that provides API for web apps, that's often how they'll work: they will let you configure a set of whitelisted domains that can access your data.
If they provide you an API key, this API key is always meant to be used by a server, not a client-only app.
So if I understand you question correctly, you would do like this for each request:
Check the domain. If it's in the whitelist, perfect, you can keep going. This is meant for web apps (look for "CORS").
If not, check for a valid API token in the headers. This is meant for any app that can store this API token securely (another server for instance, or a mobile app in your scenario though I don't know mobile enough to tell how you store such a key)
Background
I want to create a PHP application that eventually will be installed on a "countless" web servers.
The application is going to access the Google Drive associated with the web server's administrator Google account (it will basically write some files on user's cloud storage). So my PHP app will be authorized by the end-user to use its Google Drive storage. This is done (via the OAuth2 protocol) by connecting the Google OAuth2 service.
So basically I have to create a ClientID/Secret pair (on behalf of my Google Account) that is gonna be used to execute the authorization flow.
Google provides 3 authorization methods:
for web applications (web browsers over network)
for service account (my server to Google server)
for installed application (like Android, IPhone)
(1) is perhaps the best choice EXCEPT that I have to define a REDIRECT_URI where the authorization code will be sent. Because my APP will be installed on a "countless" different servers I don't know in advance the protocol, domain name and the path (also the URI) where the Google's response should be returned. If I would install this application only on 3 servers I could create upfront a ClientID/Secret pair for each of them. It's not the case.
(2) means to deploy my P12 private key with the PHP application and I don't feel comfortable with that!
(3) means to put the end-user to copy/paste an authorization token from a Google web page into my application web interface. I am trying to avoid doing that.
I already made it to work by using the method 1 when I know in advance the REDIRECT_URI. I also embedded the client_id/secret pair in the source code so the whole authorization process is user-friendly. But this is not going to work on a "countless" deployment scenario.
Questions
Which method and how should I use it in order to make the whole process safe for me (as developer) and for the client too (the web server administrator). Note that the authorization process should not involve the end-user to copy paste some codes. I want that step to be transparent/user-friendly for the end-user (no one likes copy-paste when it can be done automatically).
Should I embed my client_id/secret into the application or that's totally wrong? I suppose no end-user wants to go through the creation of its own ClientID in Google Developer Console, right? On the other hand why I would give my client_id/secret to an unknown end-user?
Final thoughts
I could create a proxy application on my (the developer) web server such that my PHP application (which is supposed to be deployed "everywhere") will send the authorization request to my proxy server (which has already its own client_id/secret) which in turn will redirect the call to the Google OAuth service which then REDIRECT_URI back the authorization code to my proxy and finally I will redirect back the response to the original sender (the PHP application). What do you think?
Some useful answers here and here or here.
#Edit: as I've already said earlier a proxy would be a solution. I've made it and it works. The same solutions I've received also from user pinoyyid. Thanks for your answer too.
A proxy is the only real option open to you. You can encode the originator URL in the "state" parameter, so that when the proxy receives the access token, it can call a webhook at the originator.
There are some contradictions in your question...
"The application is going to access the Google Drive associated with the web server's administrator Google account" and "So my PHP app will be authorized by the end-user to use its Google Drive storage." are mutually exclusive.
If the Drive storage belongs to the app, then the user isn't involved in any OAuth dialogue.
Could you edit your question to be clear who is the owner of the Drive storage as it greatly influences the OAuth flows.
I have been puzzling over this and can't think of an good way of doing this. I am developing a website that would require the user to log in to use the system. I'm thinking of using ASP.NET MVC 4's built in authentication. That isn't much of a problem.
The user would be able to use tools on another server (our server would authenticate him and tell the other website, he is good to go, these messages are passed via HTTPS using XML). The other server, require us to create an authentication token for the user to use when the messages are passed between us.
We need to keep the token in our database to authenticate for every request/response with the other server. Which means that this "token table" knows nothing about the forms authentication time out on our server and vice-verse.
Now the problem, let's say the user uses the other server's tools. He would be on the other server for a long time, this would cause the authentication on our server to log him out, since there doesn't seem to be any perceived activity. The other server will not log him out since we are manually maintaining the token. This would be a troublesome for the user, because now, if he needs to use our service, he'll have to log in again even though he was "online" all the time.
Is there a way to "sync" the 2 authentications? At first I was thinking of getting our server to look up the "token table" (instead of using the built in authentication) so that if the last activity was x ago, the user will be required to log in again, this would solve the untimely logging out from our server. But I'm worried about the security implications.
What would be the best way to do this?
Thank you.
Desmond
If I've understood you correctly you are using Forms Authentication in an MVC4 application to authenticate users, but users will also use another web service located on a different server and so while they are using this other server you don't want the MVC4 application's authentication (for the user) to timeout. Is that correct?
If so, one idea that comes to mind is that your MVC4 application could have an API to the external world that would take in a username and use RenewTicketIfOld() to refresh the timer associated with the ticket. You could do this via the other web server making an HTTP request or by simply placing some AJAX on the page to call the API on every page.
There are, of course, security concerns with this method that you would need to consider. Without knowing more about your situation I'm not sure what solution would be best.
I'm having a similar problem as was discussed in this question:
authClient.login returning error with "Unauthorized request origin"
I can't find anything on the firebase site that directly addresses this problem so I have 2 questions about the "unauthorized request origin":
1.) If I'm testing my program through my own computer (as in, it's just a file on my computer), what exactly am I supposed to add to the Auth panel? I tried following the advice offered in the link above but no luck.
2.) My eventual plan is to create an app using firebase and it's login system. Is this going to be a problem for when users try to login? Is there going to be something that I need to allow so that any user will be allowed to login to the system?
With the release of Firebase Simple Login, which contains a number of OAuth-based authentication methods (Facebook, Twitter, GitHub, etc.), we included the idea of 'Authorized Origins'. Without this restriction, malicious sites could pretend to be your application and attempt to access your users' Facebook, Twitter, etc. data on your behalf.
By restricting the domains for these requests to ones that you control and have verified, we can protect your users' data. Once you have configured your application domains, your users will be able to log in seamlessly and securely from the domains you defined.
To fix this error, log into Firebase Forge (by entering your Firebase URL into your browser), and navigate to the 'Auth' panel on the left.
For testing locally, you'll need to run at least a barebones webserver on your machine, rather than loading your test files via file://. The easiest way to run a barebones server on your local machine is to cd to the directory of your files and run python -m SimpleHTTPServer, which will allow you to access your content via http://127.0.0.1:8000/....
For your users, configure the domains that you'll be using to host your application. This can be any number of specific subdomains (such as a.b.www.domain.com) or high-level domains which will act as a wildcard (domain.com will allow requests from *.domain.com).
You can configure multiple application domains or IPs here, comma-delimited.
See https://www.firebase.com/docs/security/simple-login-overview.html for additional documentation about application configuration for Simple Login.
I hope that helps! Feel free to ping me directly if you have further questions.