I have a question regarding the Attribute Contract configuration of an OpenToken Adapter for an IdP Server. As I was trying out the sample applications, it already has a config provided with it. Now that I'm trying to configure it without using data.zip, I'm having problems.
As I was trying to create a new adapter, the core contract subject shows up automatically. I have no idea what are the default attributes included in this contract.
Question: How will I edit what are the contents of this contract? Will my IdP Application handle it?
subject is the core contract, because that is what will carry the identity of the user, and is therefore the "minimum" - it must be returned (hence, "core"). Extended attributes can be added at the adapter, as long as the authentication method (such as a custom login page that retrieves attributes from a DB or something similar) can populate them into the token.
You may wish to review the documentation of the OpenToken Adapter.
Within PingFederate, the IdP Adapters are essentially Authentication plug-ins. There are many different types of IdP Adapters, whether it be the IWA IdP Adapter, HTML Form IdP Adapter, or the OpenToken IdP Adapter. The main use of the OpenToken adapter is to create a custom authentication plug-in that is an application you would implement. This is normally done for organizations that have very custom requirements for authentication that the out-of-the-box HTML Form Adapter or IWA Adapter cannot meet. The PingFederate sample applications for IdP show how to implement the interface.
When you use the OpenToken adapter, it is a secure interface between the PingFederate IdP Server and a custom application using the OpenToken specification. The custom application can be written in Java, .NET, or PHP and integrate using the OpenToken agent for the target programming language. As Andrew stated above, that custom application could query for attributes beyond simple authentication of the subject. Then within the application when the OpenToken is being generated you would need to insert the additional fields into the OpenToken. Then in the OpenToken Adapter hosted on the PingFederate you would need to configure the extended attributes using the matching syntax so that they could be used.
Related
I want to setup custom authentication flow for some applications, registered in Wso2 Api Manager. Say for some applications I want to direct them to federated IDP when they request access token using authorization code or implicit flow. As a key manager I use IdentityServer.
I know that in Identity server I can create Service provider and setup custom authentication scheme for it, e.g. using Federated Authentication. Unfortunetely this service provider can't act as a subscriber for apis in Api Manager. I found an article that describes how to override default auth scheme, but I don't what override defaults.
Is it possible to setup custom IDP only for specific applications and avoid tuning default authentication scheme for oauth flows. The reason here is that I still want to use attached userstores for most of the applications but override that behaviour only for some predefined applications.
WSO2 APIM 3.2.0 onward it supports multiple key managers support. With that, you can create an application binding to a specific key manager you register. You can register a KM from UI and by default, it supports multiple IDPs like okta,oauth0 and WSO2 IS.
We have multitenant asp.net MVC web site which supports multiple partners. Currently we are using forms authentication to authenticate users. Now some of the partners have asked for single sign on support with SAML.
I did quick POC to test it against “Thinktecture” identity provider. All I did was to install “Identity and access” extension for VS 2012 and configure the identity provider. I noticed that the extension added configuration settings like URL of the IP and realm in the web.config file. It also added “WSFederationAuthenticationModule” module to handle the authentication. This module was handling all the redirects and the validation of response behind the scene.
In my case since we will have multiple identity providers, depending upon the partner, I will be choosing the Identity provider. The URLs of the different IPs will be stored in the database. I cannot list all the IPs in web.config. Hence I need mechanism in which I can redirect user to appropriate IP URL and once the IP posts back the result, verify the result and retrieve user information through claims. I don’t want to do the XML parsing of the result and validate the response, but just want to call methods in “WSFederationAuthenticationModule” to do the heavy duty work. But I am not sure which methods will be useful for me. Can somebody help me out or list of the sequence of methods I need to execute to achieve this?
Take a look at my simple example
http://www.wiktorzychla.com/2014/11/simplest-saml11-federated-authentication.html
The trick is not to have the WSFam module in the pipleline but rather use its api to trigger redirects and consume responses. If you follow my code, you'll see there are two clauses
// wsfed response or not
if ( !fam.IsSignInResponse(...) )
// redirect to provider
else
// create local config and validate the incoming token
This simple example is perfectly suitable for multitenant scenario, in fact we use ws-fed daily in multitenant environment and most clients are based on this core approach.
Namely, creating the SecurityTokenHandlerConfiguration programatically in the branch that consumes the response gives you total control over how you validate tokens for different tenants.
We run a Shibboleth Identity Provider, and have been increasingly asked to integrate with applications using non-Shibboleth SAML solutions, and encountering difficulty with regard to attribute naming. With a pure Shibboleth IdP & SP relationship, I know that the IdP can release user attributes to the Service Provider using arbitrary attribute names in the assertion. The Service Provider, having been configured to receive specific attributes using the IdP-provided names, re-maps the attributes from the IdP into attribute names useful to the Service Provider, using a configuration in the attribute-map.xml file.
My problem is with non-Shibboleth Service Provider operators, many of whom have refused to re-map attributes sent from the IdP, instead demanding new attributes be defined on the IdP (to carry values already available in existing attributes), using names dictated by the Service Provider owner. This causes the user's attribute object on the IdP to grow unnecessarily (at the time of authentication), because all defined attributes are populated with values first, and then they are filtered down to only those attributes approved for release to the requesting SP.
Is the attribute mapping feature, present in the Shibboleth Service Provider, part of the SAML/SAML 2.0 specification/standard, or is it a feature introduced by the Shibboleth developers? If it's part of the standard relationship/behavior in a SAML solution, can someone direct me to the authoritative standards document?
I've read through what I can find on OASIS regarding SAML standards, but I can't find anything regarding this behavior.
Attribute mapping is an application specific bit of functionality.
The SAML specification(s) details with things like message exchanges and XML schemas, not the functionality software should provide or how bi-lateral arrangements between IdPs and SPs should be organised. They have nothing to do with the SAML specification. Sorry.
Note that there are plenty of other SAML products that provide similar attribute mapping functionality, it's not just shibboleth that does so. I imagine the problem here is that the Service providers consider their requirements more important than yours and aren't prepared to make an exception. Either that or they don't know how.
I've implemented a custom ASP.net membership provider to deal with forms authentication. The custom provider uses a custom User object for authentication and authorization. I was wondering If I can pass this object to each WCF call without adding it to the parameters list?
Since you are already using a MembershipProvider you can utalize that on wcf as well so both are secured by the same mechanism.
See this post on msdn.
Windows Communication Foundation (WCF)
developers can take advantage of these
features for security purposes. When
integrated into an WCF application,
users must supply a user name/password
combination to the WCF client
application. To transfer the data to
the WCF service, use a binding that
supports user name/password
credentials, such as the WSHttpBinding
(in configuration, the wsHttpBinding
Element) and set the client credential
type to UserName. On the service, WCF
security authenticates the user based
on the user name and password, and
also assigns the role specified by the
ASP.NET role.
Another option would be to create a custom IAuthorizationPolicy that pulls off your user via
OperationContext.Current.IncomingMessageHeaders.GetHeader<T>
And than setup your principal like the following:
evaluationContext.Properties[Constants.EvaluationContextPrincipal] = principal;
Here is some more information on creating a custom IAuthroizationPolicy. With this method you could achieve what you want without passing your user to the method.
Just be warned if you go this route a crafty person could end up impersonating the user by simply suppling a bogus user in your header.
Using the asp.net membership provider for wcf would most likely get you what you are really after plus adding some security.
You definitely should not add this to the parameters each method.
I do not know about your custom user object but as far as WS* and most security standards concerned, your user object will have username and password.
The answer depends on the binding you use. BasicHttpBinding or BasicHttpContextBinding can use HTTP authentication schemes while WsHttpBinding can use custom Message security which you can provide user name and password.
BasicHttpContextBinding is especially good since it can work with ASP NET session.
This seems to be a simple question, but I cannot find the answer after much searching.
I have an application that uses the ASP.NET security system. The membership uses a System.Web.ClientServices.Providers.ClientFormsAuthenticationMembershipProvider type for the provider, and the roles, similarly, uses the System.Web.ClientServices.Providers.ClientRoleProvider type. Obviously, this application does NOT make a direct connection to the ASP.NET security DB, but uses these proxy classes when connecting to the configured serviceUri to get the security data.
What is the data type I should use for the provider of the profile information, using the same client services proxy method?