User management with ASP.NET MVC 4 - asp.net

I am trying to re-learn ASP.NET and building some application, however tutorial seems to be running shorts.
I understand ASP.NET comes now with built in membership which allows users to created and edit, login to users. However, is there a way for me to create a User Controller. From what I have read, its a big no, because it may conflict with the AccountController. Maybe this is wrong, but I would like to be sure first.
Also I understand that I can use the word [Authorize] in a controller ( action, or class ) to limit access to users. However if I provide [Authorize(Roles="Admin")] How can I define the roles to a users? Is there a field that already exists in the membership providing this or do i need to supply a second nuget packages. If its a field from the user, how does it know Roles is the value in the User tables?

You're confusing multiple things. Asp.net is the basic web technology, and there are three technologies that sit on top of that. Webforms, Web Pages, and MVC.
Membership has been a part of asp.net since Version 2, released in 2005. This is nothing new. There has been much written about it over the years.
If you're using MVC, which it seems you are, and you're using MVC4, then the default internet template uses SimpleMembership, which is not compatible with the built-in membership editor in Visual Studio (known as the Web Site Administration Tool or WSaT). This is only compatible with the old SqlMembership database tables, and SimpleMembership does not use those tables.
You can use SqlMembership with MVC4, but you have to configure it to use SqlMembership. Or, you can just not use WSaT and configure your user yourself.
Oh, and don't listen to people that tell you to create custom membership providers. This is the worst advice possible unless you know what you are doing, because it's non-trivial to create secure password hashing techniques. And 99% of people that try (even people that should know better) get it wrong unless they pay very close attention.
Use a provider from a reputable source unless you have VERY good reason not to. And then, check, double check, triple check your hashing code and then have an expert check it.

For Authentication and Authorization in asp.net, have a look at Forms Authentication and Membership Provider (and Role Provider for roles)
A quick search gives this article: Here
have a look at other searches for "Custom Membership Provider"
This also looks interesting: How do I create a custom membership provider for ASP.NET MVC 2?

Related

Microsoft Asp.Net Identity 2.0 - Entity Framework vs. Custom Provider

I am writing a new web site and am looking at Asp.Net Identity 2.0. Out of the box, it uses Entity Framework for all of its data access. For the rest of the site, we were creating middleware web services for data access. Our original plan for security sake was that the web servers would talk to middleware and middleware would talk to the database via Entity Framework. We had planned on blocking via firewall database access from the web server.
I see that I can create a custom provider for Identity 2.0 and it in turn could use middleware for it's data access.
Here are my questions:
Is it more secure to not allow the web servers to have direct database access?
If it is more secure, why would Microsoft not build it that way out of the box
If you were starting from scratch like we are, would you recommend using entity framework or writing a custom provider that goes through our middleware layer?
Thanks.
1.) It can be secure. I don't see it as a security issue but coupling issue. What if you want to upgrade or change from Entity Framework in the future? What if you want to change from Identity 2.0? What if you want to upgrade one but you can't because the other doesn't support it yet.
2.) Microsoft wanted to promote it products first and foremost. For simplicity sake if your ok with Entity Framework and Identity 2.0 and don't mind how coupled they are it could be perfectly fine solution.
3.) How much time/effort can you afford to spend on the custom provider? It might not be worth the effort to create your own provider.
Asp.NET Identity out-of-the-box is actually Asp.Net Identity on Entity Framework. It generates a database, connection string, the model files, the controllers and a context class for you, which you can redirect to your own database for it to generate the Identity tables within. Everything is very secure, and they've taken care of a lot of the authentication/password hashing for you. I wouldn't say it is worth it to create your own provider, but you can also create your own provider within Identity if you want. Identity 2.0 is great. Very easy to add custom table properties, etc.

How to setup RIA Services to use an existing ASP.Net membership base

I'd like to make an OOB Silverlight app based on the Silverlight Business Application template in Visual Studio. The template uses the default ASP.Net membership provider. I understand how to use that to add users and roles, etc. I've found plenty of tutorials on that. What I'd like to be able to do, is configure the Silverlight template so that it uses an existing ASP.Net membership base. We'd like this app to have a companion website (ASP.Net based).
To clarify: We've been able to setup an ASP.Net website and have created a SQL database with the required tables (aspnet_Users, aspnet_Membership, etc.). I'd like to configure a Silverlight app to access the same users and roles that are in those tables.
Can anyone help me out in terms of what I'd need to put in the Web.config? Do I just need a connection string? I'm new to ASP.Net authentication, but I'd rather use what ASP.Net gives me out of the box than have to write my own authentication service. I feel like this should be really easy, and is just a matter of pointing the Silverlight app in the right direction.
I'd like to use Silverlight 5 and .Net 4.5 if I can but I don't mind using an older version of either if it makes things easier.
You can just point the connection string to the existing database.
From this answer:
You can point your connection string for authentication to a database that all application can access.
So if you have the default database that .NET creates, you can point your other application to that as well for authentication.

ASP.NET MVC: Best Way to Enable Different Modes of Authentication?

I'm currently working on an application that will likely be deployed amongst various organizations within my current workplace. I need to develop a testable and properly designed authentication framework so that for each implementation folks can choose to use either Windows Authentication, Forms Authentication, a home-grown Single-SignOn system OR OpenID.
So given ASP.NET MVC (and in particular I'm using the S#arp Architecture framework) how should I go about doing this?
Ideally it would be nice if folks can simply make changes to the web.config file in each case.
Thanks
ASP .NET MVC supports ASP .NET membership provider, making it easier for you to handle Windows/Forms Authentication without any hassle. As long as you specify the required information on the web.config. The default site comes with an example.
For other options of implementation, Kigg has an OpenID implementation which also includes the unit testing code.
I guess that after learning how those work you'll find a way to include your "home-grown Single-SignOn" authentication framework :P
Update:
In order to use the membership provider using your own users table, you must implement a custom provider. The configuration through the web.config will be available anyways, but you'll need to create a class which implements the MembershipProvider abstract class.
Here's a link to a video and some source code explaining how to achieve this.

Linking User to Profile with forms authentication

I am moving a legacy winform app to the web and would like some advice on forms authentication. Am I correct in assuming that forms authentication is better than rolling up my own user authentication functionality?
It would be easy enough to roll my own since the this is what the winform application did and the table structure already supports it, but forms authentication looks like it would do a much better job securing the site and the user authentication info.
I'm an old programmer, but pretty young in web dev and I have learned over the years that using MS built in tools sometimes looks better than it works...forms authentication isn't one of those cases is it?
Thanks!
I'd say that Forms Authentication is a case where you're likely to experience no "buyers remorse". You can opt in to use some pretty nice features. The model is very flexible because it allows you to implement your own Membership Providers.
Using forms authentication doesn't means you don't get to use those tables. You will do the check for username/password, and tell asp.net that the user is authenticated. Asp.net will continue from there, ensuring further requests from that user are identified and authenticated (based on an authentication ticket).
Update 1: Later on asp.net included membership providers, with some controls for it. Even then you can still implement your own membership provider, which in really simple cases you can do by implementing only 1 or 2 of the methods. If you have several features, and they don't map well with what the membership provider supports, I would stick to a custom implementation.

What to use for membership in ASP.NET

I'm not very experienced at using ASP.NET, but I've used built in membership providers for simple WebForms application, and I found them PITA when trying to extend the way they work (add/remove few fields and redo controls accordingly).
Now I'm preparing for MVC (ASP.NET MVC or Monorail based) project, and I'm thinking - is there a better way to handle users? Have them log in/log out, keep certain parts of the site available to certain users (like logged in users, or something similar to "share this with friends" feature of many social networking sites, where you can designate users that have access to certain things.
How best to acheave this in the way that will scale well?
I guess, I wasn't clear on that. To rephrase my question:
Would you use standard ASP.NET membership provider for a web-facing app, or something else (what)?
The Membership Provider in ASP.NET is very handy and extensible. It's simple to use the "off the shelf" features like Active Directory, SQL Server, and OpenLDAP. The main advantage is the ability to not reinvent the wheel. If your needs are more nuanced than that you can build your own provider by extending overriding the methods that the ASP.NET controls use.
I am building my own Custom Membership Provider for an e-commerce website. Below are some resources for more information on Membership Providers. I asked myself the same questions when I start that project.
These resources were useful to me for my decision:
Writing a Custom Membership Provider - DevX
How do I create a Customer Membership Provider - ASP.NET, Microsoft
Implementing a Membership Provider - MSDN
Examining ASP.NET 2.0's Membership, Roles, and Profile - 4GuysFromRolla
Create Custom Membership Provider for ASP.NET Website Security - David Hayden
Setting up a Custom Membership Provider - Channel 9
I personally don't think there is a need to use something other than the builtin stuff unless you either want to abuse yourself or your needs are impossible to satisfy by the builtin functionality.
Have you considered using ActiveDirectory for this? Or, perhaps, OpenLDAP? You can manage each user's groups, permissions, 'authority', and so on.
keep certain parts of the site available to certain users (like logged
in users, or something similar to "share this with friends" feature of
many social networking sites
I guess you must custom code your thing.
I also do not like the asp.net Membership and custom code my membership needs...
A nice membership provider is a really missing thing in asp.net side...
It depends.
If it's an internal application, Active Directory or OpenLDAP might be the way to go.
If it's a public application, I suggest to look at aspnet_regsql. You will be able to setup a database with Authentication in no time.

Resources