Alfresco: query documents readable by specific user - alfresco

I need to get all documents readable by a specific user. Assuming that the performer user is admin, Is that possible with "standard" queries or some kind of workaround?
As an example, to be clear, say there are only two documents in the repository and only two users (beside admin). The ACL is something like that:
\ Mike | Bob
doc1 | rw | r
doc2 | r | -
I want to perform a query as admin to get all documents readable by Bob, thus I expect only doc1 as result.
Thanks

I don't think this is possible without traversing the entire collection of search results and inspecting the permissions on each result.
As others have said, if you do the search as the user instead of admin, you'll only get the results the user is allowed to see.
I suppose as admin you could do a search as the user and see what comes back, but if you have multiple users, as in your example, this will become tedious.

The only thing which is possible is to write some Java code to execute the query with another runas user.
Here is a working Java code which extends the default Alfresco webscript behaviour where you can submit a runas parameter. If you create a Java Backend Webscript and implement the runas function and perform a SearchService.query then you're good to go.
#Override
protected void transactionedExecute(final WebScript script,
final WebScriptRequest scriptReq, final WebScriptResponse scriptRes)
throws IOException
{
//already authenticated here
//already pass the authentication
//get the runAs Parameter
String runAs = scriptReq.getParameter(runAsParamName);
final String fixCurrentAuthenticatedUser = authenticationService.getCurrentUserName();
RetryingTransactionCallback<Boolean> exampleWork = new RetryingTransactionCallback<Boolean>()
{
public Boolean execute() throws Exception
{
return authorityService.isAdminAuthority(fixCurrentAuthenticatedUser);
}
};
boolean isAdmin = retryingTransactionHelper.doInTransaction(exampleWork);
//only admins are allowed to do that
if ( !isAdmin || runAs == null || runAs == "")
{
//ignore runAs
super.transactionedExecute(script, scriptReq, scriptRes);
return;
}
final RunAsRepositoryContainer thisIsThis = this;
RunAsWork<Object> work = new RunAsWork<Object>()
{
public Object doWork() throws Exception
{
super.transactionedExecute(script, scriptReq, scriptRes);
return null;
}
};
AuthenticationUtil.runAs(work, runAs);
}

Related

Is there a better way to implement role based access in ASP.NET framework?

Basically I've spent the last few days trying to figure out how to add simple Admin and Member roles onto a website I'm developing for a friend. (I am using ASP.NET Framework 5.2.7.0). I know that Microsoft has a nice role based access feature built in which allows you to put something like [Authorize Role=("Admin") at the top of the controller; however I have not been able to get it to work at all and most of the resources I've found are for ASP.NET Core.
I've tried modifying my web.config file to enable the role based access (and hopefully migrate the roles and such to my database). But since I've been unable to figure any of this out, I've tried going a more hacky route. (**I am not an advanced programmer, I've been doing this for about a year now and am in no way a pro). This is what I've basically come up with in my attempt to verify if a user is an admin (which also didn't work).
[Authorize]
public class AdminController : Controller
{
private LDSXpressContext db = new LDSXpressContext();
public ActionResult AdminPortal()
{
IsAdmin();
return View();
}
private ActionResult IsAdmin()
{
string name = User.Identity.Name;
//The User.Identity.Name stores the user email when logged in
var currentUserObject = db.accounts.Where(x => x.clientEmail == name);
Account currentUser = new Account();
foreach (var user in currentUserObject)
{
//I loop through the results, even though only one user should
//be stored in the var CurrentUserObject because it's the only
//way I know how to assign it to an object and get its values.
currentUser = user;
}
if (currentUser.role == 2) //the number 2 indicates admin in my db
{
return null;
}
else
{
//Even when this is hit, it just goes back and returns the
//AdminPortal view
return RedirectToAction("Index", "Home");
}
}
}
Now I'm nearly positive that is is NOT a very secure way to check if a signed in user is an admin, but I was hoping that it would at least work. My idea was when someone attempted to access the AdminPortal, the IsAdmin method would run and check if the user is an admin in the database. If they are, then it returns null and the AdminPortal view is displayed, if they are not an Admin, then they are redirected to the Index view on the home page. However, the AdminPortal page is always displayed to any user and this doesn't seem to work either. I've even stepped into the code and watched it run over the return RedirectToAction("Index", "Home"); action, but then it jumps back to the AdminPortal method and just returns the AdminPortal view. So my question is:
1) If anyone happens to have experience with Role Based access in ASP.NET Framework, I would love some tips on how to get it set up
or,
2) If all else fails and I need to use my hacky method, why does it continue to return the AdminView even when the user is not an admin.
**Note: I know I could create a function that returns true or false if the user is an Admin or not, and then have an if/else statement in the AdminPortal controller that will return on view for true and another for false, however I don't want to have to implement that onto every ActionMethod, it'd be nice to keep it down to one line, or just the [Authorize Role="Admin] above the controller if possible.
Thank you guys so much for any help provided, I've been trying to research and fix this for days now and decided to reach out and ask the community!
At a minimum, you'll want to make some adjustments to what you're doing:
[Authorize]
public class AdminController : Controller
{
public ActionResult AdminPortal()
{
if(IsAdmin())
{
return View();
}
return RedirectToAction("Index", "Home");
}
private bool IsAdmin()
{
bool isAdmin = false;
using(LDSXpressContext db = new LDSXpressContext())
{
string name = User.Identity.Name;
//The User.Identity.Name stores the user email when logged in
// #see https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.linq.enumerable.singleordefault
var currentUser = db.accounts.SingleOrDefault(x => x.clientEmail.Equals(name, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase));
// If the email doesn't match a user, currentUser will be null
if (currentUser != null)
{
//the number 2 indicates admin in my db
isAdmin = currentUser.role == 2;
}
}
return isAdmin;
}
}
First off, DbContext instances are meant to used, at most, per the lifetime of an HTTP request. Moving it from the class / controller level and placing it within a using block makes sure that it's properly disposed.
Next, your IsAdmin function really just needs to return a true/false value based on your lookup, and then the AdminPortal action can decide what to do with that result.
Since email seems to be a unique field in your table, use the SingleOrDefault or FirstOrDefault LINQ extension to fetch a single matching record. Which one you use is up to you, but if it's truly a unique value, SingleOrDefault makes more sense (it will throw an exception if more than one row matches). Using the StringComparison flag with the String.Equals extension method makes your search case-insensitive. There are a few culture-specific versions of that, but ordinal matching is what I would normally use, here.
Implementing some version of the Identity framework is a bit too long for an answer here, but it's possible to implement a claims-based authentication scheme without too much work. That's something that probably needs a separate answer, though.

Loading multiple sets of data in a content page in ASP.NET MVC Entitiy Framework

I need to load multiple entity types in my View page. I am using ViewModel for this purpose. However, I need to make around 5-6 database calls to load each set of data and assign them to the relevant property of the ViewModel. I wonder if this is a recommended approach since it requires multiple database calls. Or, am I being over-concerned about this? Here is a snapshot from my code:
var model = new EntryListVM();
string userid = "";
if (ViewBag.CurrentUserId == null)
userid = User.Identity.GetUserId();
else
userid = ViewBag.CurrentUserId;
ViewBag.CurrentUserId = userid;
//First database call
model.DiscussionWall = db.DiscussionWalls.Find(wallId);
//Second database call to learn if the current students has any entry
model.DiscussionWall.DoesStudentHasEntry = db.Entries.Any(ent => ent.DiscussionWallId == wallId && ent.UserId == userid);
model.PageIndex = pageIndex;
//Third database call
model.TeacherBadges = db.Badges.Where(b => b.CourseId == model.DiscussionWall.CourseId && b.IsSystemBadge == false && b.IsEnabled == true).ToList();
//Fourth database call
model.Reactions = db.Reactions.Where(re => re.CourseId == model.DiscussionWall.CourseId).ToList();
int entryPageSize = Convert.ToInt32(ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["EntryPageSize"]);
int firstChildSize = Convert.ToInt32(ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["FirstChildSize"]);
List<ViewEntryRecord> entryviews = new List<ViewEntryRecord>();
bool constrainedToGroup = false;
if (!User.IsInRole("Instructor") && model.DiscussionWall.ConstrainedToGroups)
{
constrainedToGroup = true;
}
//Fifth database call USING VIEWS
//I used views here because of paginating also to bring the first
//two descendants of every entry
entryviews = db.Database.SqlQuery<ViewEntryRecord>("DECLARE #return_value int;EXEC #return_value = [dbo].[FetchMainEntries] #PageIndex = {0}, #PageSize = {1}, #DiscussionWallId = {2}, #ChildSize={3}, #UserId={4}, #ConstrainedToGroup={5};SELECT 'Return Value' = #return_value;", pageIndex, entryPageSize, wallId, firstChildSize, userid, constrainedToGroup).ToList();
model.Entries = new List<Entry>();
//THIS FUNCTION MAP entryviews to POCO classes
model.Entries = ControllerUtility.ConvertQueryResultsToEntryList(entryviews);
//Sixth database call
var user = db.Users.Single(u => u.Id == userid);
model.User = user;
I wonder if this is too much of a burden for the initial page load?
I could use SQL-View to read all data at once, but I guess I would get a too complicated data set to manage.
Another option could be using Ajax to load the additional results after the page loading (with the main data) is completed. For example, I could load TeacherBadges with AJAX after the page is being loaded.
I wonder which strategy is more effective and recommended? Are there specific cases when a particular strategy could be more useful?
Thanks!
It all depends on your scenario - different scenarios have different ways of doing things. There is no single right way of doing things that are similar in nature. What might work for me might not work for you. Ever heard that saying: there are many ways to kill a cat? Well this certainly applies to programming.
I am going to answer based on what I think you are asking. Your questions are very broad and not that specific.
However, I am not sure if this is a recommended approach since it
requires multiple database calls.
Sometimes you need to do one database call to get data, and sometimes you need to do more than one database call to get the data. For example:
User details with addresses: one call for user and one call for addresses
User details: one call
I am using ViewModel for this purpose.
Using view models for your views is a good thing. If you want to read up more on what I had to say about view models then you can go and read an answer that I gave on the topic:
What is ViewModel in MVC?
View models are ideal for when you have data that is coming from multiple datasets. View models can also be used to display data coming from one dataset, for example:
Displaying user details with multiple addresses
Displaying only user details
I read the data in the controller in separate linq statements, and
assign them to the relevant List property of the ViewModel.
I would not always return a list - it all depends on what you need.
If I have a single object to return then I will populate a single object:
User user = userRepository.GetById(userId);
If I have a list of objects to return then I will return a list of objects:
List<User> users = userRepository.GetAll();
It is of no use to return a single object and then to populate a list for this object:
List<User> user = userRepository.GetByUserId(userId).ToList();
Second option could be using SQL-View to read all data with one
database call, and then map them to the entities properly in
controller.
This is similar to your first question, how you return your data on the database level is up to you. It can be stored procedures or views. I personally prefer stored procedures. I have never used views before. Irrespective of what you choose your above mentioned repository methods should still look the same.
Third option could be using Ajax to load the additional results after
the page loading (with the main data) is completed.
You can do this if you want to. I would not do it if it is not really needed. I try to load data on page load. I try to get as much data on the screen before the page is fully loaded. There have been times that I had to go the AJAX route after the page was loaded. After the page was loaded I had to do an AJAX call to load my HTML table.
If you really just need to have data displayed then do just that. You do not need any fancy ways of doing this. Maybe later you need to change on screen data, then AJAX is cool to use.
I wonder which strategy is more effective and recommended? Are there
specific cases when a particular strategy could be more useful?
Let us say you want to display a list of users. We do a database call and return the list to the view. I do not normally use view models if I only return a list:
public class UserController : Controller
{
private IUserRepository userRepository;
private IAddressRepository addressRepository;
public UserController(IUserRepository userRepository, IAddressRepository addressRepository)
{
this.userRepository = userRepository;
this.addressRepository = addressRepository;
}
public ActionResult Index()
{
List<User> users = userRepository.GetAll();
return View(users);
}
}
And your view could look like this:
#model List<YourProject.Models.User>
#if (Model.Count > 0)
{
foreach (var user in Model)
{
<div>#user.Name</div>
}
}
If you need to get a single user's details and a list of addresses, then I will make use of a view model because now I need to display data coming from multiple datasets. So a user view model can look something like this:
public class UserViewModel
{
public UserViewModel()
{
Addresses = new List<Address>();
}
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public List<Address> Addresses { get; set; }
}
The your details action method could look like this:
public ActionResult Details(int id)
{
User user = userRepository.GetById(id);
UserViewModel model = new UserViewModel();
model.Name = user.Name;
model.Addresses = addressRepository.GetByUserId(id);
return View(model);
}
And then you need to display the user details and addresses in the view:
#model YourProject.ViewModels.UserViewModel
<div>First Name: #Model.Name</div>
<div>
#if (Model.Addresses.Count > 0)
{
foreach (var address in Model.Address)
{
<div>#address.Line1</div>
<div>#address.Line2</div>
<div>#address.Line3</div>
<div>#address.PostalCode</div>
}
}
</div>
I hope this helps. It might be to broad of an answer but it can guide you on the correct path.
Includes for linked data
For linked data it's simple (you probably know this way):
var users = context.Users.Include(user => user.Settings).ToList();
It queries all users and pre-loads Settings for each user.
Use anonymous class for different data sets
Here is an example:
context.Users.Select(user => new
{
User = user,
Settings = context.Settings
.Where(setting => setting.UserId == user.Id)
.ToList()
}).ToList();
You still kinda need to choose your main query collection (Users in this case), but it's an option. Hope it helps.

Best Practices when using .NET Session for temporary storage?

I'm still relatively new to .NET and ASP.NET MVC, and I have had a few occasions where it would be nice to store information retrieved from the DB temporarily so it can be used on a subsequent server request from the client. I have begun using the .NET Session to store this information, keyed off of a timestamp, and then retrieve the information using the timestamp when I hit the server again.
So a basic use case:
User clicks 'Query' button to gather information from the system.
In JS, generate a timestamp of the current time, and pass this to the server with request
On server, gather information from DB
On server, use unique timestamp from client as a key into the Session to store the response object.
Return response object to client
User clicks 'Generate Report' button (will format query results into Excel doc)
Pass same timestamp from #2 down to server again, and use to gather query results from #4.
Generate report w/o additional DB hit.
This is the scheme that I have begun to use in any case where I use the Session as temporary storage. But generating a timestamp in JS isn't necessarily secure, and the whole things feels a little... unstructured. Is there an existing design pattern I can use for this, or a more streamlined/secure approach? Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks.
You may take a look at TempData which stores the data in Session.When you pull something out of TempData it will be removed after the Action is done executing.
So, if you put something in TempData in an Action, it will live in TempData across all other actions until its requested TempDatafrom TempData again.
You can also call TempData.Peek("key") which will keep it in memory until you call TempData["key"] or TempData.Remove("key")
Ok, I'm not sure I understand you correctly as the JS timestamp step seems superfluous.
But this is what I would do.
public static string SessionReportKey = "Reports";
public static string ReportIDString = "ReportID";
public Dictionary<string, object> SessionReportData
{
get
{
return Session[SessionReportKey] == null ?
new Dictionary<string, object>() :
(Dictionary<string, object>) Session[SessionReportKey];
}
set
{
Session[SessionReportKey] = value;
}
}
public ActionResult PreviewReport()
{
//retrive your data
object reportData = GetData();
//get identifier
string myGUID = new GUID().ToString();
//might only need [SessionReportData.Add(myGUID, reportData);] here
SessionReportData = SessionReportData.Add(myGUID, reportData);
//in your view make a hyperlink to PrintReport action with a
//query string of [?ReportID=<guidvalue>]
ViewBag[ReportIDString] = myGUID;
return View(reportData);
}
public FileContentResult PrintReport()
{
if(SessionReportData[QueryString[ReportIDString]] == null)
{
//error no report in session
return null;
}
return GenerateFileFromData(SessionReportData[QueryString[ReportIDString]]);
}

ASP.NET SQL Profile Provider - Does the ProfileBase.Create() method hit DB?

I am working with the SQLMemebershipProvider and using Profiles. I have a custom class called UserProfile that inherits from the ProfileBase class and I use this to set custom properties like "FullName". I am wanting to loop through all the users in the database and get access to their profile properties. On each iteration I am calling ProfileBase.Create() to get a new profile and then access the properties.
It looks to me like every time ProfileBase.Create() is called it hits my SQL database. But I am just looking for confirmation of this. So, does anyone know if this does in fact hit the DB each time?
And better yet, does anyone have a better solution of how I could make one call to the DB to get all users with their custom profile attributes?
I know I could write my own stored proc, but I am wondering if there is a way built in to the Membership Provider.
Mike, I believe what you observed is true. I am working with a ProfileProvider that uses Azure TableStorage as data store. I wanted to get a list of user profiles from database and merge them with information from membership provider.
It took some time until I realized that calling ProfileBase.Create() with a username as argument performs a lookup against TableStorage and actually retrieves the data associated with that username. As far as I'm concerned, calling this method Create() is misleading, I would expect Load() or Get().
Currently my code looks like this:
public IEnumerable<AggregatedUser> GetAllAggregatedUsers()
{
ProfileInfoCollection allProfiles = this.GetAllUsersCore(
ProfileManager.GetAllProfiles(ProfileAuthenticationOption.All)
);
//AggregatedUser is simply a custom Class that holds all the properties (Email, FirstName) that are being used
var allUsers = new List<AggregatedUser>();
AggregatedUser currentUser = null;
MembershipUser currentMember = null;
foreach (ProfileInfo profile in allProfiles)
{
currentUser = null;
// Fetch profile information from profile store
ProfileBase webProfile = ProfileBase.Create(profile.UserName);
// Fetch core information from membership store
currentMember = Membership.FindUsersByName(profile.UserName)[profile.UserName];
if (currentMember == null)
continue;
currentUser = new AggregatedUser();
currentUser.Email = currentMember.Email;
currentUser.FirstName = GetStringValue(webProfile, "FirstName");
currentUser.LastName = GetStringValue(webProfile, "LastName");
currentUser.Roles = Roles.GetRolesForUser(profile.UserName);
currentUser.Username = profile.UserName;
allUsers.Add(currentUser);
}
return allUsers;
}
private String GetStringValue(ProfileBase profile, String valueName)
{
if (profile == null)
return String.Empty;
var propValue = profile.PropertyValues[valueName];
if (propValue == null)
return String.Empty;
return propValue.PropertyValue as String;
}
Is there a better (more straightforward, more performant) way to
retrieve all the custom profile information from profile provider and
merge them with membership provider info to show them e.g. in an administrator page?
I have had a look at Web Profile Builder but IMO this only provides design-time intellisense for custom profile properties by generating a proxy class.
You don't persist to the database until you call Save:
The Save method writes modified
profile property values to the data
source. The profile provider can
reduce the amount of activity at the
data source by performing updates only
when the IsDirty property is set to
true. This is the case for the default
SqlProfileProvider.

Do Compiled Queries Cache?

Much of my application uses complied queries to retrieve data. In these queries I'll often refer to the current user. I'm noticing that if a user, B, logs in after another user, A, then user B will see user A's information.
I have queries much like this all through out the application
public static Func<DataContext, MyRecord> CurrentUserRecords =
CompiledQuery.Compile<DataContext, MyRecord>(
(DataContext db) =>
(from r in db.MyRecords
where
r.User == User.Current
select r).SingleOrDefault());
User.Current is a static property that changes depending on who's logged in.
public static User Current
{
get { return MyBase<User>.Get((int)(HttpContext.Current.Session["CurrentUserID"] ?? 0)); }
}
When I login for the first time with User A, the above compiled query returns User A's records. It follows that User.Current also returns the proper reference to User A. However, when I log in as User B, the above compiled query still returns User A's records, despite the fact that User.Current is returning a reference to User B.
I ran Profiler for SQL Server, and noticed when the compiled query was executed the generated TSQL referenced User A's ID both times.
So my question is this:
Do compiled queries somehow cache?
If so, what is there life span, and can I control it?
Is referencing a "current user" in a compiled query bad design for an ASP.net application?
Thanks all!
You need to allow a string parameter in the compiled query. Otherwise it will resolve the string's value during .Compile(). Try this:
public static Func<DataContext, string, MyRecord> UserRecordByParam =
CompiledQuery.Compile<DataContext, string, MyRecord>
(
(DataContext db, string UserName) =>
db.MyRecords.Where( r => r.User == UserName ).SingleOrDefault()
);
public static Func<DataContext, MyRecord> CurrentUserRecord =
(DataContext db) => UserRecordByParam(db, User.Current);

Resources