Asp.Net MVC5 How to ensure that a cookie exists? - asp.net

I'm new to MVC (5). In order to add localization support to my website I added a "Language" field to my ApplicationUser : IdentityUser
What's the best approach to now store this information in the browser and ensure that it gets re-created even if the user manually deletes it?
TL; but I've got time
What I've tried until now:
I started creating a cookie in my method private async Task SignInAsync(ApplicationUser user, bool isPersistent) but I notice that:
This method is not used if the user is already authenticated and automatically logs in using the .Aspnet.Applicationcookie and my language cookie could be meanwhile expired (or been deleted).
A user could manually delete the cookie, just for fun.
I thought about checking its existence in the controller (querying the logged user and getting it from the db) and it works but I'd need to do it in EVERY controller. I'm not sure is the correct way to do this.
Any suggestion about how to approach this problem and guarantee that the application has a valid "language cookie" on every request?

It sounds to me like what you want here is a Custom Action Filter. You can override the OnActionExecuting method which means the logic is run before any action is called
public class EnsureLanguagePreferenceAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute
{
public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext)
{
var langCookie = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.Cookies["LanguagePref"];
if (langCookie == null)
{
// cookie doesn't exist, either pull preferred lang from user profile
// or just setup a cookie with the default language
langCookie = new HttpCookie("LanguagePref", "en-gb");
filterContext.HttpContext.Request.Cookies.Add(langCookie);
}
// do something with langCookie
base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext);
}
}
Then register your attribute globally so it just becomes the default behaviour on every controller action
public static void RegisterGlobalFilters(GlobalFilterCollection filters)
{
filters.Add(new HandleErrorAttribute());
filters.Add(new EnsureLanguagePreferenceAttribute());
}

To me, the easiest way would be to create your own Authorize attribute (since your language options are tied to an authenticated user account). Inside of your new authorize attribute, simply perform the check if the cookie exists. If it does, then life is good. Else, query the user's database profile and reissue the cookie with the stored value
public class MyAuthorization : AuthorizeAttribute
{
protected override bool AuthorizeCore(HttpContextBase httpContext)
{
//no point in cookie checking if they are not authorized
if(!base.AuthorizeCore(httpContext)) return false;
var cookie = httpContext.Request.Cookies["LanguageCookie"];
if (cookie == null) {
CreateNewCookieMethod();
}
return true;
}
}
To use, replace [Authorize] with [MyAuthorization] in your project.
If you don't want to mess with the [Authorize] attribute, you could create your own attribute that does the cookie checking and decorate your controller with that one as well.
One last alternative is to create your own Controller class that does the checking on the OnActionExecuting.
public class MyBaseController : Controller
{
public string Language {get;set;}
protected override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext)
{
var cookie = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.Cookies["LanguageCookie"];
if(cookie == null){
cookie = CreateNewCookieMethod();
filterContext.HttpContext.Request.Cookies.Add(cookie);
}
Language = cookie.Value;
base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext);
}
How to use (note that we inherit from MybaseController now)
public class HomeController : MyBaseController{
public ActionResult Index(){
//Language comes from the base controller class
ViewBag.Language = Language;
Return View();
}
}
This method is neat because now that Language variable will be available in any controller that inherits from this new class.
Either of these will give you a single, cookie checking point. Additionally, you are only going back to the database only in the instance that the cookie does not exist.

Related

ASP.NET allow anonymous access to OData $metadata when site has global AuthorizeAttribute

I have an ASP.NET OData site that has the following in the WebApiConfig file:
config.Filters.Add(new AuthorizeAttribute())
This forces all callers to authenticate before calling any of the controllers.
Unfortunately, this also forces user authentication to access the "$metadata" url.
I need to globally force authentication for all controller access while also allowing anonymous access the the "$metadata" url.
I realize this question has already been answered, but I have a couple concerns with the accepted answer:
Assumes the metadata endpoint will not change
Requires updating the code if an endpoint is added/moved
Does not handle the root endpoint (without /$meatdata)
I agree with creating your own AuthorizeAttribute, but I would implement the method a little differently.
protected override bool IsAuthorized(HttpActionContext actionContext)
{
if (actionContext.ControllerContext.Controller is System.Web.OData.MetadataController)
return true;
return base.IsAuthorized(actionContext);
}
My solution simply checks to see if the controller being accessed is OData's MetadataController. If it is, allow anyone access, otherwise, go through the normal authorization checks.
Create a custom filter that derives from AuthorizeAttribute and override the IsAuthorized method as follows:
public class CustomAuthorizationFilter : AuthorizeAttribute
{
protected override bool IsAuthorized(HttpActionContext actionContext)
{
if (actionContext.Request.RequestUri.AbsolutePath == "/$metadata" ||
actionContext.Request.RequestUri.AbsolutePath == "/%24metadata")
{
return true;
}
return base.IsAuthorized(actionContext);
}
}
Register the filter:
config.Filters.Add(new CustomAuthorizationFilter());
I wanted to add one more option. If you replace the default Web API dependency resolver (HttpConfiguration.DependencyResolver = YourIDependencyResolver) you can intercept the request for the metadata controller (ODataMetadataController or MetadataController, depending on the version of the OData library) and replace it with your own implementation, like below:
[AllowAnonymous, OverrideAuthorization]
public class AnonymousODataMetadataController : ODataMetadataController
{
protected override void Initialize(HttpControllerContext controllerContext)
{
// You must replace the controller descriptor because it appears
// that the AuthorizeAttribute is pulled from the
// controllerContext.ControllerDescriptor.ControllerType (which
// is the original type) instead of from controlContext.Controller
// (which is the type we injected).
controllerContext.ControllerDescriptor = new HttpControllerDescriptor
{
Configuration = controllerContext.Configuration,
ControllerName = GetType().Name,
ControllerType = GetType()
};
base.Initialize(controllerContext);
}
}
See Dependency Injection in ASP.NET Web API 2 for info about the Web API dependency injection system.

Using a Custom Authentication/Authorization attribute for an action

We have a website that uses ASP Identity and works great with the [Authorize] attribute sprinkled on all the appropriate classes.
What i'm looking to do is create a separate authentication system for a specific set of actions. It's a page that isn't exactly anonymous, but can be viewed if a PIN is entered correctly.
I started looking into Authentication/Authorization attributes and got to a point where it redirects to my PIN entry page if not authenticated.
So I guess what i'm asking is how do I authenticate a virtual user (aka: not in the database) to be able to access those pages after entering in the correct PIN?
You could create your own version of the AuthorizeAttribute by inheriting from it and overriding the AuthorizeCore method.
public class PinAuthorizeAttribute : AuthorizeAttribute
{
private readonly string _password;
public PinAuthorizeAttribute(string password)
{
_password = password;
}
protected override bool AuthorizeCore(HttpContextBase httpContext)
{
//Check if user has entered the correct PIN, perhaps
//by keeping the PIN in the Session
if(Session["PIN") == _password)
return true;
return false;
}
}
Now add it to your action method:
[PinAuthorize("1234")]
public ActionResult ProtectedIndex()
{
//snip
}

Custom WebApi Authorization Database Call

I'm trying to decide if the custom Authorization attribute I wrote is really a good idea.
Scenario
Say we have a collection of stores, each Store has an owner. Only the owner of the store can do CRUD operations on the store. EXCEPT for users with a Claim that basically overrides the ownership requirement and says they can do CRUD operations on ANY store.
Sidenote: I'm using Thinktecture and ADFS
So I made a StoreOwnerAuthorize attribute who's parameters ("Manage", "Stores") are used to check if the user has the appropriate claim to "override" not being an owner but still able to pass the authorization check.
I'm not sure how I feel about having a claim like "ManageStores" and making the database call inside the attribute. It makes me think I'm going down the wrong road, even though it does accomplish exactly what I need.
API Routes
api/v1/Store/{storeId:int:min(1)}/employees
api/v1/Store/{storeId:int:min(1)}/inventory
API Method
[StoreOwnerAuthorize("Manage", "Stores")]
[ResourceAuthorize("View", "Store")]
[Route("")]
//api/v1/Store/{storeId:int:min(1)}/employees
public IHttpActionResult GetStoreEmployees(int storeId)
{
return Ok(collectionOfStoreEmployees);
}
StoreOwnerAuthorizeAttribute
public class StoreOwnerAuthorizeAttribute : ResourceAuthorizeAttribute
{
private readonly DbContext _context = new DbContext();
public StoreOwnerAuthorizeAttribute(){ }
public StoreOwnerAuthorizeAttribute(string action, params string[] resources)
: base(action, resources) { }
protected override bool IsAuthorized(HttpActionContext actionContext)
{
//If the user has the Claim that overrides the requirement that the user
//is the Owner of the Store, skip checking if they are the owner
if (base.IsAuthorized(actionContext))
return true;
//Get route parameter to lookup Store and determine if the user is the owner
object storeId;
actionContext.ControllerContext.RouteData.Values.TryGetValue("storeId", out storeId);
var isOwner = false;
if (storeId != null)
{
isOwner =
_context.Store_Get_ByStoreID(int.Parse(storeId.ToString()))
.Any(x => x.OwnerId == theUser.Id());
}
return isOwner;
}
}

Using object Helper Methods to implement authorization rules

I have the following:-
I am working on an asset management system using Asp.net MVC4 with windows authentication enabled.
The system allow to specify what actions a group of users can do(for example certain group can have the authority to add new physical asset , while they can only read certain logical asset, and so on).
So I found that using the build-in Asp.net role management, will not allow me to have the level of flexibility I want. So I decided to do the following:-
I have created a table named “group” representing the user groups. Where users are stored in active directory.
I have created a table named ”Security Role” which indicate what are the permission levels each group have on each asset type(edit, add, delete or view)per asset type.
Then on each action methods , I will use Helper methods to implement and check if certain users are within the related group that have the required permission ,, something such as
On the Car model object I will create a new helper method
Public bool HaveReadPermison(string userName) {
//check if this user is within a group than have Read permission on CARS, //OR is within a GROUP THAT HAVE HIGHER PERMISON SUCH AS EDIT OR ADD OR //DELETE.
}
Next, On the Action method, I will check if the user has the Read permission or not by calling the action method:-
public ActionResult ViewDetails(int id) { // to view transportation asset type
Car car = repository.GetCar(id);
if (!car.HaveReadPermision(User.Identity.Name)) {
if (car == null)
return View("NotFound");
else
return View(car);
}
else
return view (“Not Authorized”);
So can anyone advice if my approach will be valid or it will cause problem I am unaware about.
Regards
In my opinion, once you have decided to use the ASP membership and role providers you can keep leveraging them also for authorization, simply using the Authorize attribute. This will also allow to restrict access by user names and roles.
What the attribute won't do is Action-based authorization. In that case there are a few options but in my opinion this could be brilliantly resolved by a Custom Action Filter based loosely on the following code:
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)]
public class CheckUserPermissionsAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute
{
public string Model { get; set; }
public string Action { get; set; }
public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext)
{
var user = filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.Name; // or get from DB
if (!Can(user, Action, Model)) // implement this method based on your tables and logic
{
filterContext.Result = new HttpUnauthorizedResult("You cannot access this page");
}
base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext);
}
}
Yes, it is vaguely inspired to CanCan, which is a nice Ruby gem for this kind of things.
Returning Unauthorized (401) will also instruct your server to redirect to the login page if one is specified. You may want to work on that logic if you want to redirect somewhere else. In that case you should do:
filterContext.Result = new RedirectToRouteResult(new System.Web.Routing.RouteValueDictionary { { "Controller", "Home" }, { "Action", "Index" } });
and choose the appropriate controller/action pair.
You can use the attribute like this:
[CheckUserPermissions(Action = "edit", Model = "car")]
public ActionResult Edit(int id = 0)
{
//..
}
Let me know if that works nicely for you.
The approach you took looks reasonable, but I would add few changes:
What if you forgot to call HaveReadPermision method? And checking authotization from Actions is not the cleanest solution either, that is not an Action reponsibility.
It is better to keep authorization logic separately. For instance you can create a decorator over you repository which will check the permissions of the current User:
public class AuthorizationDecorator: IRepository
{
public AuthorizationDecorator(IRepository realRepository, IUserProvider userProvider)
{
this.realRepository = realRepository;
this.userProvider = userProvider;
}
public Car GetCar(int id)
{
if(this.UserHaveReadPermission(this.userProvider.GetUserName(), Id))
{
return this.realRepository.GetCar(id);
}
else
{
throw new UserIsNotAuthorizedException();
}
}
private bool UserHaveReadPermission(string username, int id)
{
//do your authorization logic here
}
}
IUserProvider will return curent user name from httpRequest.
After doing the change you don't need to warry about authorization when writing Actions

Disable Session state per-request in ASP.Net MVC

I am creating an ActionResult in ASP.Net MVC to serve images. With Session state enabled, IIS will only handle one request at a time from the same user. (This is true not just in MVC.)
Therefore, on a page with multiple images calling back to this Action, only one image request can be handled at a time. It's synchronous.
I'd like this image Action to be asynchronous -- I'd like multiple image requests to each execute without needing the previous one to complete. (If the images were just static files, IIS would serve them up this way.)
So, I'd like to disable Session just for calls to that Action, or to specify that certain requests do not have Session state. Anyone know how this is done in MVC? Thanks!
If anyone is in the situation I was in, where your image controller actually needs read only access to the session, you can put the SessionState attribute on your controller
[SessionState(SessionStateBehavior.ReadOnly)]
See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.web.mvc.sessionstateattribute.aspx for more info.
Thanks to https://stackoverflow.com/a/4235006/372926
Rather than implementing an action filter for this, why don't you implement a RouteHandler?
Here's the deal - IRouteHandler has one method - GetHttpHandler. When you make an ASP.Net MVC request to a controller, by default the routing engine handles the request by creating a new instance of MvcRouteHandler, which returns an MvcHandler. MvcHandler is an implementation of IHttpHandler which is marked with the (surprise!) IRequiresSessionState interface. This is why a normal request uses Session.
If you follow my blog post on how to implement a custom RouteHandler (instead of using MvcRouteHandler) for serving up images - you can skip returning a session-tagged IHttpHandler.
This should free IIS from imposing synchronicity on you. It would also likely be more performant because it's skipping all the layers of the MVC code dealing with filters.
I also came across the same problem and after doing R&D this link worked for me
Reference:
https://techatfingers.wordpress.com/2016/06/14/session-state-on-action/
Create custom Attribute
Override the “GetControllerSessionBehavior” method present in class DefaultControllerFactory.
Register it in global.aspx
1> Create custom Attribute
public sealed class ActionSessionStateAttribute : Attribute
{
public SessionStateBehavior SessionBehavior { get; private set; }
public ActionSessionStateAttribute(SessionStateBehavior sessionBehavior)
{
SessionBehavior = sessioBehavior;
}
}
2. Override
public class SessionControllerFactory : DefaultControllerFactory
{
protected override SessionStateBehavior GetControllerSessionBehavior(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType)
{
if (controllerType == null)
return SessionStateBehavior.Default;
var actionName = requestContext.RouteData.Values["action"].ToString();
Type typeOfRequest=requestContext.HttpContext.Request.RequestType.ToLower() =="get"?typeof(HttpGetAttribute):typeof(HttpPostAttribute);
// [Line1]
var cntMethods = controllerType.GetMethods()
.Where(m =>
m.Name == actionName &&
( ( typeOfRequest == typeof(HttpPostAttribute) &&
m.CustomAttributes.Where(a => a.AttributeType == typeOfRequest).Count()>0
)
||
( typeOfRequest == typeof(HttpGetAttribute) &&
m.CustomAttributes.Where(a => a.AttributeType == typeof(HttpPostAttribute)).Count() == 0
)
)
);
MethodInfo actionMethodInfo = actionMethodInfo = cntMethods != null && cntMethods.Count() == 1 ? cntMethods.ElementAt(0):null;
if (actionMethodInfo != null)
{
var sessionStateAttr = actionMethodInfo.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(ActionSessionStateAttribute), false)
.OfType<ActionSessionStateAttribute>()
.FirstOrDefault();
if (sessionStateAttr != null)
{
return sessionStateAttr.Behavior;
}
}
return base.GetControllerSessionBehavior(requestContext, controllerType);
}
3. Register class in Global.asax
public class MvcApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication
{
protected void Application_Start()
{
// --- other code ---
ControllerBuilder.Current.SetControllerFactory(typeof(SessionControllerFactory));
}
}
Try serving the images from another domain. So something like images.mysite.com.
This will provide you two benefits: One, sessions are tracked by a cookie, so images.mysite.com won't have the cookie. Two, it will give you an additional two concurrent requests to retrieve images.
Have you considered setting up a HttpHandler to serve up your images?
SessionState attribute is quite helpful if u use mvc3. How to achieve this with mvc2 needs a little more coding.
Idea is to tell the asp.net that specific request wont use session object.
So, Create a custom route handler for specific requests
public class CustomRouteHandler : IRouteHandler
{
public System.Web.IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext)
{
requestContext.HttpContext.SetSessionStateBehavior(System.Web.SessionState.SessionStateBehavior.ReadOnly);
return new MvcHandler(requestContext);
}
}
SessionStateBehavior enum has 4 members, you should use "disabled" or "readonly" modes to get async behavior.
After creating this custom route handler, be sure that your specific requests goes through this handler. This can be done via defining new routes at Global.asax
routes.Add("Default", new Route(
"{controller}/{action}",
new RouteValueDictionary(new { controller = "Home", action = "Index"}),
new CustomRouteHandler()
));
Adding this route makes all your requests to be handled by your custom route handler class. You can make it specific by defining different routes.
Change DefaultCOntrollerFactory to custom ControllerFactory class. Default Controller.TempDataProvider use SessionStateTempDataProvider. you can change it.
1.Set web.config/system.web/sessionState:mode="Off".
2.create DictionaryTempDataProvider class.
public class DictionaryTempDataProvider : ITempDataProvider
{
public IDictionary<string, object> LoadTempData(ControllerContext controllerContext)
{
return new Dictionary<string, object>();
}
public void SaveTempData(ControllerContext controllerContext, IDictionary<string, object> values)
{
}
}
3.Create DictionaryTempDataControllerFactory
public class DictionaryTempDataControllerFactory : DefaultControllerFactory
{
public override IController CreateController(System.Web.Routing.RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName)
{
var controller = base.CreateController(requestContext, controllerName) as Controller;
if (controller!=null)
controller.TempDataProvider = new DictionaryTempDataProvider();
return controller;
}
}
4.In global.asax.cs Apprication_Start event set DictionaryTempDataControllerFactory.
protected void Application_Start()
{
RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);
ControllerBuilder.Current.SetControllerFactory(
new DictionaryTempDataControllerFactory()
);
}
On our server, IIS doesn't even know about sessions - it's the ASP.NET stack that handles one request per session at a time. Static files, like images, are never affected.
Is it possible that your ASP.NET app is serving the files instead of IIS?
Create new Controller
Decorate controler with [SessionState(SessionStateBehavior.Disabled)]
Refactor code you want seesion stated disabled for to that controller
I would to share my solution for disable ASP.NET Session for an specific request (in my case, a WCF Service) using an HttpModule:
public class AspNetSessionFilterModule : IHttpModule
{
public void Init(HttpApplication context)
{
context.PostMapRequestHandler += OnPostMapRequestHandler;
}
private void OnPostMapRequestHandler(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
var context = (sender as HttpApplication).Context;
DisableSessionForSomeRequests(context);
}
private void DisableSessionForSomeRequests(HttpContext context)
{
if ("~/Services/MyService.svc".Equals(context.Request.AppRelativeCurrentExecutionFilePath, StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase))
{
context.SetSessionStateBehavior(System.Web.SessionState.SessionStateBehavior.Disabled);
}
}
public void Dispose()
{ }
}

Resources