I'm trying to implement Feign Clients to get my user info from the user's service, currently I'm requesting with oAuth2RestTemplate, it works. But now I wish to change to Feign, but I'm getting error code 401 probably because it doesn't carry the user tokens, so there is a way to customize, if Spring support for Feign is using, a RestTemplate so I can use my own Bean?
Today I'm implementing in this way
The service the client
#Retryable({RestClientException.class, TimeoutException.class, InterruptedException.class})
#HystrixCommand(fallbackMethod = "getFallback")
public Promise<ResponseEntity<UserProtos.User>> get() {
logger.debug("Requiring discovery of user");
Promise<ResponseEntity<UserProtos.User>> promise = Broadcaster.<ResponseEntity<UserProtos.User>>create(reactorEnv, DISPATCHER)
.observe(Promises::success)
.observeError(Exception.class, (o, e) -> Promises.error(reactorEnv, ERROR_DISPATCHER, e))
.filter(entity -> entity.getStatusCode().is2xxSuccessful())
.next();
promise.onNext(this.client.getUserInfo());
return promise;
}
And the client
#FeignClient("account")
public interface UserInfoClient {
#RequestMapping(value = "/uaa/user",consumes = MediaTypes.PROTOBUF,method = RequestMethod.GET)
ResponseEntity<UserProtos.User> getUserInfo();
}
Feign doesn't use a RestTemplate so you'd have to find a different way. If you create a #Bean of type feign.RequestInterceptor it will be applied to all requests, so maybe one of those with an OAuth2RestTemplate in it (just to manage the token acquisition) would be the best option.
this is my solution, just to complement the another answer with the source code, implementing the interface feign.RequestInterceptor
#Bean
public RequestInterceptor requestTokenBearerInterceptor() {
return new RequestInterceptor() {
#Override
public void apply(RequestTemplate requestTemplate) {
OAuth2AuthenticationDetails details = (OAuth2AuthenticationDetails)
SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication().getDetails();
requestTemplate.header("Authorization", "bearer " + details.getTokenValue());
}
};
}
Related
I am working on Spring - Kafka using Java DSL and I see that the messages are not produced/sent to the kafka topic.
The code I have been using is:
#Bean
public IntegrationFlow sendToKafkaFlow() {
return IntegrationFlows.from(kafkaPublishChannel)
.handle(kafkaMessageHandler())
.get();
}
private KafkaProducerMessageHandlerSpec<String, Object, ?> kafkaMessageHandler() {
return Kafka
.outboundChannelAdapter(_kafkaProducerFactory.getKafkaTemplate().getProducerFactory())
.messageKey(m -> m
.getHeaders()
.getId())
//.headerMapper(mapper())
.topic(_topicConfiguration.getCheProgressUpdateTopic())
.configureKafkaTemplate(t -> t.getTemplate());
}
#Bean
public DefaultKafkaHeaderMapper mapper() {
return new DefaultKafkaHeaderMapper();
}
The producer configurations I am using are:
private ProducerFactory<String, Object> producerFactory() {
final Map<String, Object> producerProps = new HashMap<>();
producerProps.put(ProducerConfig.BOOTSTRAP_SERVERS_CONFIG, kafkaProducerConfiguration.getKafkaServerProducerHost());
producerProps.put(ProducerConfig.KEY_SERIALIZER_CLASS_CONFIG, StringSerializer.class);
producerProps.put(ProducerConfig.VALUE_SERIALIZER_CLASS_CONFIG, StringSerializer.class);
producerProps.put(ProducerConfig.ENABLE_IDEMPOTENCE_CONFIG, kafkaProducerConfiguration.isKafkaProducerIdempotentEnabled());
producerProps.put(ProducerConfig.ACKS_CONFIG, kafkaProducerConfiguration.getKafkaProducerAcks());
producerProps.put(ProducerConfig.RETRIES_CONFIG, kafkaProducerConfiguration.getKafkaProducerRetries());
producerProps.put(ProducerConfig.BATCH_SIZE_CONFIG, kafkaProducerConfiguration.getKafkaProducerBatchSize());
producerProps.put(ProducerConfig.LINGER_MS_CONFIG, kafkaProducerConfiguration.getKafkaProducerLingerMs());
return new DefaultKafkaProducerFactory<>(producerProps);
}
Not sure why I am not seeing the messages in the kafka topic. Can you please help me out here?
Try to use sync(true) on that Kafka.outboundChannelAdapter(). I believe there should be some errors if you don't see any progress during sending. You may also consider to use a DEBUG logging level for the org.springframework.integration category to see how your messages are traveling through your integration flow.
I have wrote a Middleware which checks if Authorization Token is included in the header and based on that request are executed or returns error if token is missing. Now it is working fine for other Controllers.
But What should I do for Login/Registration Controller which don't required Authorization headers. How can I configure my Middleware to ignore these.
Current Implementation of MiddleWare to Check Headers for Authorization Token.
public class AuthorizationHeaderValidator
{
private readonly RequestDelegate _next;
private readonly ILogger<AuthorizationHeaderValidator> _logger;
public AuthorizationHeaderValidator(RequestDelegate next, ILogger<AuthorizationHeaderValidator> logger)
{
_next = next;
_logger = logger;
}
public async Task InvokeAsync(HttpContext context)
{
StringValues authorizationHeader;
Console.WriteLine(context.Request.Path.Value);
if (context.Request.Headers.TryGetValue("Authorization", out authorizationHeader))
{
await _next(context);
}
else
{
_logger.LogError("Request Failed: Authorization Header missing!!!");
context.Response.StatusCode = 403;
var failureResponse = new FailureResponseModel()
{
Result = false,
ResultDetails = "Authorization header not present in request",
Uri = context.Request.Path.ToUriComponent().ToString(),
Timestamp = DateTime.Now.ToString("s", CultureInfo.InvariantCulture),
Error = new Error()
{
Code = 108,
Description = "Authorization header not present in request",
Resolve = "Send Request with authorization header to avoid this error."
}
};
string responseString = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(failureResponse);
context.Response.ContentType = "application/json";
await context.Response.WriteAsync(responseString);
return;
}
}
}
This is not a complete answer but only directions. Please post your code once you finish this task for next generations.
It seems you need a Filter and not Middlware as Middleware don't have access to rout data. Create new authorization filter by inheriting from Attribute and implementing IAuthorizationFilter or IAsyncAuthorizationFilter. There is only one method to implement
public void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationFilterContext context)
{
}
or
public Task OnAuthorizationAsync(AuthorizationFilterContext context)
{
}
Decorate controllers and/or actions that you want to exclude from this logic with AllowAnonymousAttribute. Inside your OnAuthorization method check if current action or controller has AllowAnonymousAttribute and if it is return without setting Result on AuthorizationFilterContext. Otherwise execute the logic from you original Middleware and set Result property. Setting Result will short-circuit the remainder of the filter pipeline.
Then register your filter globally:
services.AddMvc(options =>
{
options.Filters.Add(new CustomAuthorizeFilter());
});
Not sure why you need middleware to validate if the Authorization header is present. It's difficult to exclude the controllers this way as all requests will go through this middleware before they hit the MVC pipeline.
[Authorize] attribute will do the job for you, given that you have some form of authentication integrated. If you need to exclude the controllers which don't require authorization, you can simply add [AllowAnonymous] at the controller level or at the action method level. Please see the code snippet below from the Microsoft Docs
[Authorize]
public class AccountController : Controller
{
[AllowAnonymous]
public ActionResult Login()
{
}
public ActionResult Logout()
{
}
}
If you must use a middleware, you can consider using it as an MVC filter, which means that it will be scoped to the MVC pipeline. For more details, please see this link. However, that will still not solve the problem to exclude the controllers without adding some convoluted logic, which can be quite complicated.
I have solved my problem by Implementing PipeLine
public class AuthorizationMiddlewarePipeline
{
public void Configure(IApplicationBuilder applicationBuilder)
{
applicationBuilder.UseMiddleware<AuthorizationHeaderValidator>();
}
}
And than I am using it like this on either Controller Scope or Method scope
[MiddlewareFilter(typeof(AuthorizationMiddlewarePipeline))]
I've got REST FeignClient defined in my application:
#FeignClient(name = "gateway", configuration = FeignAuthConfig.class)
public interface AccountsClient extends Accounts {
}
I share endpoint interface between server and client:
#RequestMapping(API_PATH)
public interface Accounts {
#PostMapping(path = "/register",
produces = APPLICATION_JSON_VALUE,
consumes = APPLICATION_JSON_VALUE)
ResponseEntity<?> registerAccount(#RequestBody ManagedPassUserVM managedUserDTO)
throws EmailAlreadyInUseException, UsernameAlreadyInUseException, URISyntaxException;
}
Everythng works fine except that my FeignClient definition in my client application also got registered as independent REST endpoint.
At the moment I try to prevent this behavior using filter which returns 404 status code for FeignClinet client mappings in my client application. However this workeraund seems very inelegant.
Is there another way how to prevent feign clients registering as separate REST endpoints?
It is a known limitation of Spring Cloud's feign support. By adding #RequestMapping to the interface, Spring MVC (not Spring Cloud) assumes you want as an endpoint. #RequestMapping on Feign interfaces is not currently supported.
I've used workaround for this faulty Spring Framework behavior:
#Configuration
#ConditionalOnClass({Feign.class})
public class FeignMappingDefaultConfiguration {
#Bean
public WebMvcRegistrations feignWebRegistrations() {
return new WebMvcRegistrationsAdapter() {
#Override
public RequestMappingHandlerMapping getRequestMappingHandlerMapping() {
return new FeignFilterRequestMappingHandlerMapping();
}
};
}
private static class FeignFilterRequestMappingHandlerMapping extends RequestMappingHandlerMapping {
#Override
protected boolean isHandler(Class<?> beanType) {
return super.isHandler(beanType) && (AnnotationUtils.findAnnotation(beanType, FeignClient.class) == null);
}
}
}
I found it in SpringCloud issue
I would like to capture and save in a log file all the requests that my WebAPI should handle.
Just tried to save the Request.Content from the controller constructor but unfortunately,
the request object is null from the controller constructor scope.
Hope to learn an efficient way to do it.
I would just hook into web api tracing...
http://www.asp.net/web-api/overview/testing-and-debugging/tracing-in-aspnet-web-api
From the above article, you can implement ITraceWriter like so. This example uses System.Diagnostics.Trace.WriteLine, but you could plug in writing to a file here as well.
public class SimpleTracer : ITraceWriter
{
public void Trace(HttpRequestMessage request, string category, TraceLevel level,
Action<TraceRecord> traceAction)
{
TraceRecord rec = new TraceRecord(request, category, level);
traceAction(rec);
WriteTrace(rec);
}
protected void WriteTrace(TraceRecord rec)
{
var message = string.Format("{0};{1};{2}",
rec.Operator, rec.Operation, rec.Message);
System.Diagnostics.Trace.WriteLine(message, rec.Category);
}
}
As you can see from the Trace method, you get access to the HttpRequestMessage here.
I ended up implementing middleware to deal with it.
public class GlobalRequestLogger : OwinMiddleware
{
public override Task Invoke(IOwinContext context)
{
// Implement logging code here
}
}
Then in your Startup.cs:
app.Use<GlobalRequestLogger>();
Trying to get Unit Tests to work when using Spring RestTemplate and I18N. Everything in the setup works fine for all the other test cases.
Based upon what I read, this is what I put into the Java Config:
#Bean
public LocaleChangeInterceptor localeChangeInterceptor() {
return new LocaleChangeInterceptor();
}
#Bean
public DefaultAnnotationHandlerMapping handlerMapping() {
DefaultAnnotationHandlerMapping mapping = new DefaultAnnotationHandlerMapping();
Object[] interceptors = new Object[1];
interceptors[0] = new LocaleChangeInterceptor();
mapping.setInterceptors(interceptors);
return mapping;
}
#Bean
public AnnotationMethodHandlerAdapter handlerAdapter() {
return new AnnotationMethodHandlerAdapter();
}
Then in my usage with RestTemplate I have:
public MyEntity createMyEntity(MyEntity bean) {
Locale locale = LocaleContextHolder.getLocale();
String localeString = "";
if (locale != Locale.getDefault()) {
localeString = "?locale=" + locale.getLanguage();
}
HttpEntity<MyEntity> req = new HttpEntity<MyEntity>(bean);
ResponseEntity<MyEntity> response = restTemplate.exchange(restEndpoint + "/url_path" + localeString, HttpMethod.POST, req, MyEntity.class);
return response.getBody();
}
While this could be cleaned up a bit, it should work - but the LocalChangeInterceptor never gets invoked. I am debugging this now and will post again as soon as I figure it out - but in the hope this is a race condition that I lose - does anyone know why?
Was lucky and stumbled upon this thread. One of the notes clued me into the right direction. You don't need all those beans in the Java Config. But if you are using #EnableWebMvc as I am, but I didn't know it was important enough to even mention, all you need to do in your Java Config is:
#Bean
public LocaleChangeInterceptor localeChangeInterceptor() {
return new LocaleChangeInterceptor();
}
#Override
public void addInterceptors(InterceptorRegistry registry) {
registry.addInterceptor(new LocaleChangeInterceptor());
super.addInterceptors(registry);
}
Add the one bean for the Interceptor and then override the method to add the interceptor. Here my configuration class (annotated with #Configuration and #EnableWebMvc) also extends WebMvcConfigurerAdapter, which should be common usage.
This, at least, worked for me. Hope it may help someone else.