Referencing in the context of asp.net Identity 2.0 separation - asp.net

I try to separate one of my API projects into three different layers.
The API
Data access(repos + uow)
Data Entities
The API is using Asp.net Identity 2.0 with code from a sample I installed, just enough to work with OAuth Authorization.
However, When I do this separation, sometimes I get an error telling me that I need to reference the third layer(entities) from my first layer. And I can't figure out why. That would break the whole purpose of the separation, right?
For example, when I try to replace this line(from the API layer in Startup.Auth.cs, ConfigureAuth method)
app.CreatePerOwinContext(ApplicationDbContext.Create);
With
app.CreatePerOwinContext(uow.CreateDbContext())
A method that returns a new instance of the ApplicationDbContext.
I would expect that context to be returned from my second layer, where my UnitOfWork is(which in turn gets the ApplicationDbContext from the data layer).
Could someone please explain how this works?

To solve your issue you need to start use Interfaces and any DI-framework. Here I can provide you with the code if you want to start using AutoFac (https://code.google.com/p/autofac/wiki/WebApiIntegration).
When you installed AutoFac to your solution through Nuget. Add this part of code in your Global.asax.cs file.
protected void Application_Start()
{
...
SetupAutoFac();
...
}
private static void SetupAutoFac()
{
var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
builder.RegisterApiControllers(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly());
var container = builder.Setup();
var resolver = new AutofacWebApiDependencyResolver(container);
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.DependencyResolver = resolver;
}
Create this part of code in your BLL-layer:
public static class AutoFacConfiguration
{
public static IContainer Setup(this ContainerBuilder builder)
{
REGISTER ALL YOUR SERVICES AND UOW HERE
return builder.Build();
}
}
After this you can inject every services Interface to your ApiControllers, and the the WebAPi will only have a reference to your BLL-layer or to the layer where you put all your interfaces.

Related

Autofac OWIN TestServer and HttpContext

I am trying to setup Integration tests with my IIS Hosted WebAPI 2.2 application. I use Autofac for DI and I am using the new ASP.net Identity stack which uses OWIN. I am running into an issue with Autofac where the HttpContext class is always null. Here is how I am setting up my base integration test class-
[TestClass]
public class TestBase
{
private SimpleLifetimeScopeProvider _scopeProvider;
private IDependencyResolver _originalResolver;
private HttpConfiguration _configuration;
public TestServer Server { get; private set; }
[TestInitialize]
public void Setup()
{
Server = TestServer.Create(app =>
{
//config webpai
_configuration = new HttpConfiguration();
WebApiConfig.Register(_configuration);
// Build the container.
var container = App_Start.IocConfig.RegisterDependencies(_configuration);
_scopeProvider = new SimpleLifetimeScopeProvider(container);
//set the mvc dep resolver
var mvcResolver = new AutofacDependencyResolver(container, _scopeProvider);
_originalResolver = DependencyResolver.Current;
DependencyResolver.SetResolver(mvcResolver);
//set the webapi dep resolvers
_configuration.DependencyResolver = new AutofacWebApiDependencyResolver(container);
app.UseAutofacMiddleware(container);
app.UseAutofacWebApi(_configuration);
app.UseAutofacMvc();
});
}
[TestCleanup]
public void Cleanup()
{
// Clean up the fake 'request' scope.
_configuration.Dispose();
DependencyResolver.SetResolver(_originalResolver);
_scopeProvider.EndLifetimeScope();
Server.Dispose();
}
}
When a simple test starts, I get an ArgumentNullException "Value cannot be null" httpContext. Which if I track down into the autofac code, I think it is coming from this extension method -
public static class AutofacMvcAppBuilderExtensions
{
internal static Func<HttpContextBase> CurrentHttpContext = () => new HttpContextWrapper(HttpContext.Current);
/// <summary>
/// Extends the Autofac lifetime scope added from the OWIN pipeline through to the MVC request lifetime scope.
/// </summary>
/// <param name="app">The application builder.</param>
/// <returns>The application builder.</returns>
[SecuritySafeCritical]
[SuppressMessage("Microsoft.Reliability", "CA2000:Dispose objects before losing scope")]
public static IAppBuilder UseAutofacMvc(this IAppBuilder app)
{
return app.Use(async (context, next) =>
{
var lifetimeScope = context.GetAutofacLifetimeScope();
var httpContext = CurrentHttpContext();
if (lifetimeScope != null && httpContext != null)
httpContext.Items[typeof(ILifetimeScope)] = lifetimeScope;
await next();
});
}
}
loacted in the Core/Source/Autofac.Integration.Mvc.Owin/AutofacMvcAppBuilderExtensions.cs file. Is there a problem with my setup, or a proper way to use Autofac in integration tests with a WebApi application using IIS Host and OWIN Middleware?
It appears you already asked this as an issue over on the Autofac project. I'll copy/paste the answer here (though in the future it'd probably be better to go with one or the other and not both).
Part of the awesomeness of OWIN-only apps is that you don't need HttpContext anymore. Nothing is tied to that; instead, it's all HttpContextBase and things that are separate from the legacy IIS. Like, in Web API, the current context is always shipped around with the HttpRequestMessage - there's no global static HttpContext.Current because that's legacy stuff.
Thus, when you run unit tests with an OWIN test host, you can expect there to not be an HttpContext.Current. It's decoupled from all that.
MVC can't run as OWIN-only because the libraries are tightly coupled to the legacy IIS/ASP.NET stack. Trying to test MVC stuff using an OWIN-only test server is going to give you trouble like this. That will change with the new ASP.NET 5.0 coming out with the new Visual Studio.
If you need to test MVC in an integrated way, there isn't a way to do that with OWIN right now. You have to fire up IIS Express.
Finally, I do see that you're missing the Web API middleware for OWIN (the actual Microsoft Web API middleware). That might give you other problems down the line.
app.UseAutofacMiddleware(container);
app.UseAutofacWebApi(_configuration);
app.UseAutofacMvc();
// You're missing this:
app.UseWebApi(config);

How to plug my Autofac container into ASP. NET Identity 2.1

I have been looking into the new features of the new version of ASP.NET Identity 2.1 and one of its enhancements is the new IoC features integrated into the OWIN Middleware.
One of the sentences that I looked in the examples is this one:
app.CreatePerOwinContext<ApplicationUserManager>(ApplicationUserManager.Create);
This sentence receives a function delegate which returns a new instance of a manager implementation provided on the examples:
public static ApplicationUserManager Create(IdentityFactoryOptions<ApplicationUserManager> options,
IOwinContext context)
{
var manager = new ApplicationUserManager(new UserStore<ApplicationUser>(context.Get<ApplicationDbContext>()));
I personally dont like this implementation because I am not able to use a container to inject any dependency that I want for these managers.
Also there is an "IdentityFactoryOptions" and a "IOwinContext" that are "magically" injected to the function which Im not able to pull out into my IoC container.
Do anyone have a better workaround on this implementation?
I'm starting from an out-of-the-box MVC5 installation and using AutoFac as an IoC container. It sounds like I am trying to acheive a similar goal as you, so let me explain what I've done. As a disclaimer, I am fairly new to using IoC and to Identity.
I believe the IOwinContext is unnecessary in a role as an IoC if you are using your own - I switched over to registering my ApplicationUserManager with AutoFac. To achieve this I had to:
Remove CreatePerOwinContext lines from Startup.Auth since I'll register ApplicationDbContext and ApplicationUserManager in AutoFac.
//app.CreatePerOwinContext(ApplicationDbContext.Create);
//app.CreatePerOwinContext<ApplicationUserManager>(ApplicationUserManager.Create);
Modify the ApplicationUserManager constructor arguments and included everything from the Create function.
public ApplicationUserManager(IUserStore<ApplicationUser> store, IdentityFactoryOptions<ApplicationUserManager> options)
: base(store)
{
//all the code from the 'Create' function here, using `this` for `manager`
}
Set the AccountController to have a single constructor taking an ApplicationUserManager as an argument and scrapped the UserManager property that grabs the ApplicationUserManager from the OwinContext.
private ApplicationUserManager _userManager; //every thing that needs the old UserManager property references this now
public AccountController(ApplicationUserManager userManager)
{
_userManager = userManager;
}
Register everything with AutoFac, including an instance of IdentityFactoryOptions.
var x = new ApplicationDbContext();
builder.Register<ApplicationDbContext>(c => x);
builder.Register<UserStore<ApplicationUser>>(c => new UserStore<ApplicationUser>(x)).AsImplementedInterfaces();
builder.Register<IdentityFactoryOptions<ApplicationUserManager>>(c => new IdentityFactoryOptions<ApplicationUserManager>()
{
DataProtectionProvider = new Microsoft.Owin.Security.DataProtection.DpapiDataProtectionProvider("ApplicationName")
});
builder.RegisterType<ApplicationUserManager>();
That's the rough summary. I may have missed a couple of other tweaks I had to do along the way.
Ben's answer gets the general idea right, but it manually instantiates the DbContext and uses this instance when registering the rest of the types. IMO, that's a bad idea (one shouldn't use the same eternal db context for ALL requests).
Derek's comment is a big improvement, but it doesn't pass the database context to the user store, resulting in errors such as "The entity type ApplicationUser is not part of the model for the current context.".
I've included my code below, for reference - it's really similar to Derek's.
builder.RegisterType<MyApplicationContext>().AsSelf().InstancePerRequest()
//...
builder.RegisterType<ApplicationUserManager>().AsSelf().InstancePerRequest();
builder.RegisterType<ApplicationSignInManager>().AsSelf().InstancePerRequest();
builder.Register(c => new UserStore<ApplicationUser>(c.Resolve<MyApplicationContext>())).AsImplementedInterfaces().InstancePerRequest();
builder.Register(c => HttpContext.Current.GetOwinContext().Authentication).As<IAuthenticationManager>();
builder.Register(c => new IdentityFactoryOptions<ApplicationUserManager>
{
DataProtectionProvider = new Microsoft.Owin.Security.DataProtection.DpapiDataProtectionProvider("Application​")
});
For reference here's how you can wire everything up using Unity:
var container = new UnityContainer();
container.RegisterType<MyDbContext>(new InjectionConstructor("ConnectionStringName"));
container.RegisterType<IAuthenticationManager>(
new InjectionFactory(c => HttpContext.Current.GetOwinContext().Authentication));
container.RegisterType<IUserStore<ApplicationUser>, UserStore<ApplicationUser>>(
new InjectionConstructor(typeof(MyDbContext)));
container.RegisterType<IRoleStore<IdentityRole, string>, RoleStore<IdentityRole>>(
new InjectionConstructor(typeof(MyDbContext)));
container.RegisterType<IdentityFactoryOptions<ApplicationUserManager>>(new InjectionFactory(x =>
new IdentityFactoryOptions<ApplicationUserManager>
{
DataProtectionProvider = new Microsoft.Owin.Security.DataProtection.DpapiDataProtectionProvider("ApplicationName")
}));
container.RegisterType<ApplicationSignInManager>();
DependencyResolver.SetResolver(new UnityDependencyResolver(container));
Now detailed for MVC5 Owin integration on Autofac Docs:
"
Do all the stuff for standard MVC integration - register controllers, set the dependency resolver, etc.
Set up your app with the base Autofac OWIN integration.
Add a reference to the Autofac.Mvc5.Owin NuGet package.
In your application startup class, register the Autofac MVC middleware after registering the base Autofac middleware.
public class Startup
{
public void Configuration(IAppBuilder app)
{
var builder = new ContainerBuilder();
// STANDARD MVC SETUP:
// Register your MVC controllers.
builder.RegisterControllers(typeof(MvcApplication).Assembly);
// Run other optional steps, like registering model binders,
// web abstractions, etc., then set the dependency resolver
// to be Autofac.
var container = builder.Build();
DependencyResolver.SetResolver(new AutofacDependencyResolver(container));
// OWIN MVC SETUP:
// Register the Autofac middleware FIRST, then the Autofac MVC middleware.
app.UseAutofacMiddleware(container);
app.UseAutofacMvc();
}
}
"
I also have RoleManager wrapper so added:
builder.RegisterType<RoleStore<IdentityRole>>().As<IRoleStore<IdentityRole, string>>();
as per SO answer
I managed the workaround by using autofac service locator:
app.CreatePerOwinContext(() => DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<ApplicationUserManager>());
Yes, it is not good enough, but in the mean time, we could use object same scope as declared in autofac registration process.

Using an existing IoC Container in SignalR 2.0

How can I use an existing IoC with SignalR 2.0?
From the tutorial, it seems I need to setup a class to be called from OWIN via an attribute:
using Microsoft.Owin;
using Owin;
[assembly: OwinStartup(typeof(SignalRChat.Startup))]
namespace SignalRChat
{
public class Startup
{
public void Configuration(IAppBuilder app /*HOW AM I GONNA GET UNITY CONTAINER HERE?*/)
{
var hubConfig = new HubConfiguration()
{
EnableJSONP = true,
EnableDetailedErrors = true,
EnableJavaScriptProxies = true,
Resolver = new SignalRUnityDependencyResolver(container)
};
// Any connection or hub wire up and configuration should go here
app.MapSignalR(hubConfig);
}
}
}
The problem here is that I already have a container, that's boot strapped and there are singleton instances in the container that needs to be shared with the MVC app shared under the same host.
However the trouble here is that unlike before, it doesn't look like I can call the MapSignalR method from my own code. Rather I need to rely on OWIN to do this for me. However OWIN is not aware of the container that I already setup.
What's the best way to resolve this? I have some very crude ideas how to hack a solution together using static variables to hold some of these - but I hate the very thought of it. The code will be brittle and order of operation could easily introduce a subtle bug.
Is there a way to get a hold of the IAppBuilder instance without having OWIN invoke the above method? This way I can control better when SignalR gets initialized and I can pass my own IoC into the configuration.
In my case I have created a custom hub activator which uses a shared container between my app and signalR (by constructor injection) that way you´ll have single composite root for the whole application.
try the following:
public class CustomHubActivator : IHubActivator
{
private readonly Container _container;
public MseHubActivator(Container container)
{
_container = container;
}
public IHub Create(HubDescriptor descriptor)
{
return _container.GetInstance(descriptor.HubType) as IHub;
}
}
register your custom hub activator when you´re bootstrapping your app (maybe the global.asax)
GlobalHost.DependencyResolver.Register(typeof (IHubActivator),
() => new CustomHubActivator(Container));
that´s much simplier solution rather than to configure again the signalR dependencyResolver

Problems integrating NServiceBus with ServiceStack IRequiresRequestContext

I am looking to integrate NServiceBus into an existing ServiceStack web host. ServiceStack is currently using the built in Funq IoC container. NServiceBus has been configured (elsewhere in the system) to use Unity for IoC.
ServiceStack has a feature whereby IRequestContext will be automatically injected when it finds the IRequiresRequestContext interface on a class. NServiceBus has a similar feature for Message Mutators, via the IMutateOutgoingTransportMessages interface.
The application is a multi-tenant application. Single application, which via an API Key, passes an account code through to the NServiceBus handler (indirectly via a provider that is called on the construction of the handler's constructor injection using Unity).
My problem arises in ServiceStack. I am using a request filter to drag the API key out of the request headers, which I look-up in a database, and then finally write into the IHttpRequest.Items collection:
appHost.RequestFilters.Add((req, res, requestDto) =>
{
var tenant = tenantRepository.GetByApiKey(
req.Items.Add("AccountCode", tenant.AccountCode);
}
I then have an NServiceBus transport message mutator, that implements that IRequiresRequestContext interface, and this class is located in the same assembly as the ServiceStack services registered in the AppHost:
public class MessageHeaderMutator : IMutateOutgoingTransportMessages, INeedInitialization, IRequiresRequestContext
{
#region IRequiresRequestContext Members
public IRequestContext RequestContext { get; set; }
#endregion
#region IMutateOutgoingTransportMessages Members
public void MutateOutgoing(object[] messages, NServiceBus.TransportMessage transportMessage)
{
transportMessage.Headers.Add("AccountCode", RequestContext.Get<IHttpRequest>().Items["AccountCode"].ToString());
}
#endregion
#region INeedInitialization Members
public void Init()
{
Configure.Instance.Configurer.ConfigureComponent<MessageHeaderMutator>(DependencyLifecycle.InstancePerCall);
}
#endregion
}
However, RequestContext is never injected, and is always null. My theory is that the two interface injections, injected via the two separate frameworks, are somehow clashing.
I have a workaround, which is to use the ServiceStack HostContext.Items instead, as per this discussion, but I am concerned that the HostContext is not a per request collection, so I might end up writing data to the wrong tenant. Workaround is:
// app host
appHost.RequestFilters.Add((req, res, requestDto) =>
{
var accountCode = tenantRepository.GetByApiKey(
HostContext.Instance.Items.Add("AccountCode", client.AccountCode);
}
// message mutator
public class MessageHeaderMutator : IMutateOutgoingTransportMessages, INeedInitialization
{
#region IMutateOutgoingTransportMessages Members
public void MutateOutgoing(object[] messages, NServiceBus.TransportMessage transportMessage)
{
var accountCode = HostContext.Instance.Items["AccountCode"].ToString();
transportMessage.Headers.Add("AccountCode", accountCode);
}
#endregion
#region INeedInitialization Members
public void Init()
{
Configure.Instance.Configurer.ConfigureComponent<MessageHeaderMutator>(DependencyLifecycle.InstancePerCall);
}
#endregion
}
My question is therefore twofold:
The first is, why does IRequiresRequestContext not correctly inject RequestContext into the Message mutator, or is there a way to inject RequestContext manually?
Is the use of the HostContext safe to assume it is per request?
Bonus question: Is the use of two separate IoC containers in the same project (Unity in NServiceBus and Funq in ServiceStack) a really bad idea? Would it be smarter to get ServiceStack to use the same Unity IoC container as NServiceBus?
P.S. This is NServiceBus 4 (beta at time of writing).
It is precisely because you're using 2 different containers that DI doesn't work for you out of the box for objects registered in different containers.
You don't necessarily need to standardize on a single container (though it would save you from dealing with these sorts of issues all the time).
What you can do to keep working with both containers is to tell the NServiceBus container how to resolve IRequiresRequestContext like this:
public class RequestContextBootstrapper : INeedInitialization
{
public void Init()
{
Configure.Component<IRequiresRequestContext>( /* get object from ServiceStack */ );
}
}
You can access the ServiceStack container via AppHostBase.Container and use it to resolve your objects as Udi suggested.

Autofac, ASP.NET and Microsoft.Practices.ServiceLocation

I've been working thru the details of implementing IoC in my web apps but in a way that leverages Microsoft.Practices.ServiceLocation. I am specifically using Autofac and the asp.net integration, but I wanted to leave myself open to other containers. Along the lines of this question, i was concerned about how to access the container in my web app code.
I have a 'core' library that primarily defines interfaces to be resolved. This core library is used by my web app and other apps as well. Very handy to have common interfaces defined. I thought this was an excellent place to put access to the IoC container, and I did so with a static class. The trick is injecting the container into the static class.
It's tricky in a web environment becuase the container may be different for each request, while in a non-web app it will probably be the same all the time. At first I tried injecting the container direclty with a method but that quickly failed on the next web request! So I came up with this:
public static class IoCContainer
{
public static void SetServiceLocator(Func<IServiceLocator> getLocator)
{
m_GetLocator = getLocator;
}
static private Func<IServiceLocator> m_GetLocator = null;
public static T GetInstance<T>(string typeName)
{
return m_GetLocator().GetInstance<T>(typeName);
}
}
Now in my global.asax.cs I do this:
protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var builder = new Autofac.Builder.ContainerBuilder();
... register stuff ...
var container = builder.Build();
_containerProvider = new Autofac.Integration.Web.ContainerProvider(container);
Xyz.Core.IoCContainer.SetServiceLocator(() =>
new AutofacContrib.CommonServiceLocator.AutofacServiceLocator
(_containerProvider.RequestContainer));
}
public IContainerProvider ContainerProvider
{
get { return _containerProvider; }
}
static IContainerProvider _containerProvider;
And calls to resolve dependences look like
var someService = Xyz.Core.GetInstance<ISomeService>();
So rather than pass a specific container I pass a delegate that knows how to GET a container. For non-web applications the delegate would probably just return what builder.Build() serves up.
My question to the experts is, does this make sense? I have an easy way to get to something that can resolve dependencies without knowing what the container product is or where the container itself comes from. What do you think?
We use a similar pattern mostly due to the fact that IoC was introduced into a non-DI architecture. Thus the need to be able to explicitly call the container to get services, which basically is the Factory pattern.
The true benefit of IoC is achieved when all dependencies can be injected and your code no longer have a dependency on the service locator. Autofac.Integration.Web have handlers that will perform injection into your page objects which will make the static service locator obsolete. Imo this is the preferred way, though (as in our case also) service locator cannot always be avoided.
That said, since you already have isolated your app from the container using IoCContainer class, I see no reason to have the additional abstraction of AutofacServiceLocator within IoCContainer. Bottom line is that IoCContainer is already your service locator and should be "allowed" direct access to the container implementation.
Here is my take on your service locator class:
public static class IoCContainer
{
private static IContext GetContainer()
{
var cpa =
(IContainerProviderAccessor)HttpContext.Current.ApplicationInstance;
return cpa.ContainerProvider.RequestContainer;
}
public static T GetInstance<T>()
{
return GetContainer().Resolve<T>();
}
}

Resources