I have a class in my MVC5 application that deals with some user related functionality and has a dependency on HttpContext.Current.User as shown below
public interface IUser
{
// return roles of currently logged in user
string[] GetRoles;
}
public Class User : IUser
{
private HttpContext context;
// constructor
public User(HttpContext user)
{
this.context = user
}
// get roles
public string[] GetRoles()
{
string username = this.context.User.Identity.Name;
// get roles through some DB calls
string[] roles = someDbCalls();
return roles;
}
}
I have it setup for dependency injection using Ninject in NinjectWebCommon.cs as
kernel.Bind<IUser>().To<User>().WithConstructorArgument("user", x => HttpContext.Current);
This works fine if called from anywhere in my code except in my custom RolesProvider which is setup as shown below
public class CustomRoleProvider : RoleProvider
{
[Inject]
public IUser user {get; set;}
public override string[] GetRolesForUser(string username)
{
return this.user.GetRoles();
}
}
The call to GetRoles() from my custom role provider fails because HttpContext.Current.User injected by Ninject under this case is null. Any idea on what I may be doing wrong?
Edit:
On further testing, it appears that the problem is with the way I am using Ninject in my custom Roles provider. Using the attribute injection as shown below
[Inject]
public IUser user {get; set;}
works only the first time and subsequent calls fail with HttpContext.Current.User is null error. I have fixed it in a hacky way by forcing the injection to happen each time I call the GetRoles method as shown below
public class CustomRoleProvider : RoleProvider
{
private IUser user;
public override string[] GetRolesForUser(string username)
{
// force ninject to inject a new instance of my interface
var user = DependencyResolver.Current.GetService<IUser>();
return user.GetRoles();
}
}
Not sure why this works and so I am leaving this question open if someone can provide an explanation.
It appears that by the time the role provider is called, the HTTPContext.Current is not yet set. This leads to other issues with custom RolesProvider (like the Null Reference Exception due to EtwTracing bug see: SqlRoleProvider on IIS8 Express
).
If you really need the HTTPContext.Current instead of using the Thread's PrincipalIdentity, you can setup your app to use compatibility mode. This appears to resolve the problem by setting up the HttpContext.Current sooner:
https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/8ee88c92-5e8a-4c66-ace7-887eb500e1cb/httpcontextcurrent-always-been-null
Related
We have a ServiceStack host, in which we have modularised the services. In addition we have a custom authentication solution based on the Basic Authentication. But what we would like to do is have different authentication methods for different services, maybe based on routes? Is this possible?
Secondly, is it possible to assign a common route prefix based on the service? As I said we have modularised our services, and in the AppHost definition we enter the assemblies of the different services, but is it possible to change the route prefix, i.e. Service1 to localhost/api1/servicemethods, Service2 to localhost/api2/servicemethods etc.?
You can limit that a Service should only authenticate with a specific provider by specifying the provider name in the [Authenticate] attribute, e.g:
[Authenticate(AuthenticateService.ApiKeyProvider)]
public class ApiKeyAuthServices : Service
{
public object Any(ApiKeyOnly request) => ...;
}
[Authenticate(AuthenticateService.JwtProvider)]
public class JwtAuthServices : Service
{
public object Any(JwtOnly request) => ...;
}
Otherwise inside your Service you can inspect how the request was authenticated by looking at base.SessionAs<AuthUserSession>().AuthProvider.
For defining dynamic routes have a look at:
Auto Route Generation Strategies
Dynamically adding Route Attributes
Customizing Defined Routes
Although ServiceStack isn't designed to define different sets of Apps within the same AppHost so if that's what you're trying to do I'd recommend instead having different AppHosts and using the Service Gateway for any Service-to-Service communication.
Many thanks for your reply. I must be doing something fundamentally wrong, even though I have registered two custom authproviders, both based on the BasicAuthProvider, using AuthenticateService.GetAuthProviders() returns an empty array.
This is the code I use to register the AuthProviders, and they both allow me to login, so I know they are working.
Plugins.Add(new AuthFeature(() => new CustomUserSession(),
new IAuthProvider[] {
new RMCredentialsAuthProvider(),
new RMKOTAuthProvider()
}));
The code from one of the custom providers is
public class RMKOTAuthProvider : BasicAuthProvider
{
#region Public Constructors
public RMKOTAuthProvider() : base()
{
}
#endregion Public Constructors
#region Public Methods
public override Task<IHttpResult> OnAuthenticatedAsync(IServiceBase authService, IAuthSession session, IAuthTokens tokens, Dictionary<string, string> authInfo, CancellationToken token = default)
{
session.FirstName = session.UserAuthName;
session.Roles = new List<string>
{
"KOT"
};
authService.SaveSessionAsync(session, SessionExpiry);
return base.OnAuthenticatedAsync(authService, session, tokens, authInfo, token);
}
public override Task<bool> TryAuthenticateAsync(IServiceBase authService, string userName, string password, CancellationToken token = default)
{
try
{
if (userName.IsNullOrEmpty() || password.IsNullOrEmpty())
return Task.FromResult(false);
var result = VerifyUser(username, password);
return Task.FromResult(result);
}
catch (InvalidCastException)
{
return Task.FromResult(false);
}
}
#endregion Public Methods
}
Can you please explain what step I am missing such that GetAuthProviders() can list the providers, and I can use the metadata you described earlier.
Many thanks in advance for your help with this.
Building a custom IUserPasswordStore to connect to a legacy system's username/password table. The password is hashed with custom code in the table so I need to write custom code for PasswordSignInAsync.
Do I need to override PasswordSignInAsync or is there a method I can provide that just does the hashing of the password? If I do override the entire PasswordSignInAsync is there sample code somewhere showing me what needs to be done in the method?
That was easier than I thought.
Override CheckPasswordAsync in UserManager.
For someone who wants to see the complete setup in .NET 6, this is how it looks like:
Step 1:
Add CustomUserManager to override CheckPasswordAsync:
using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Identity;
using Microsoft.Extensions.Options;
public class CustomUserManager<TUser> : UserManager<TUser> where TUser : IdentityUser
{
public CustomUserManager(IUserStore<TUser> store, IOptions<IdentityOptions> optionsAccessor,
IPasswordHasher<TUser> passwordHasher, IEnumerable<IUserValidator<TUser>> userValidators,
IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<TUser>> passwordValidators, ILookupNormalizer keyNormalizer,
IdentityErrorDescriber errors, IServiceProvider services, ILogger<UserManager<TUser>> logger)
: base(store, optionsAccessor, passwordHasher, userValidators, passwordValidators, keyNormalizer,
errors, services, logger)
{
}
// THIS IS ONLY CALLED FOR USERS STORED IN YOUR IDENTITY DATABASE
public override Task<bool> CheckPasswordAsync(TUser user, string password)
{
// Add custom check using user.UserName and password
return Task.FromResult(true); // Replace this with your custom check
}
}
Step 2:
Register it in your Program.cs
builder.Services
.AddDefaultIdentity<ApplicationUser>(options =>
{
options.SignIn.RequireConfirmedAccount = false;
})
.AddUserManager<CustomUserManager<ApplicationUser>>() <----- THIS GUY
.AddEntityFrameworkStores<ApplicationDbContext>();
ApplicationUser and ApplicationDbContext look like this:
public class ApplicationUser : IdentityUser
{
}
public class ApplicationDbContext : IdentityDbContext<ApplicationUser>
{
public ApplicationDbContext(DbContextOptions<ApplicationDbContext> options)
: base(options)
{
}
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder builder)
{
base.OnModelCreating(builder);
// Customize the ASP.NET Identity model and override the defaults if needed.
// For example, you can rename the ASP.NET Identity table names and more.
// Add your customizations after calling base.OnModelCreating(builder);
}
}
Step 3:
Try to Login using this:
var result = await _signInManager.PasswordSignInAsync("SomeUserNameInYourIdentityDatabase", "SomePassword", isPersistent: true, lockoutOnFailure: false);
Using asp.net identity RTW version.
I need to perform several actions in a transaction, including both UserMananger function calls and other operations on my DbContext (example: create new user, add it to group and perform some business-logic operations).
How should I do this?
My thoughts follow.
TransactionScope
using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required))
{
// Do what I need
if (everythingIsOk) scope.Complete();
}
The problem is: UserManager functions are all async, and TransactionScope was not designed to work with async/await. It seems to be solved in .Net Framework 4.5.1. But I use Azure Web Sites to host my project builds, so I cannot target 4.5.1 yet.
Database transaction
public class SomeController : Controller
{
private MyDbContext DbContext { get; set; }
private UserManager<User> UserManager { get; set; }
public AccountController()
{
DbContext = new MyDbContext()
var userStore = new UserStore<IdentityUser>(DbContext);
UserManager = new UserManager<IdentityUser>(userStore);
}
public async ActionResult SomeAction()
{
// UserManager uses the same db context, so they can share db transaction
using (var tran = DbContext.Database.BeginTransaction())
{
try
{
// Do what I need
if (everythingIsOk)
tran.Commit();
else
{
tran.Rollback();
}
}
catch (Exception)
{
tran.Rollback();
}
}
}
}
That seems to work, but how can I unit-test it?
UserManager<> constructor accepts IUserStore<>, so I can easily stub it.
UserStore<> constructor accepts DbContext, no idea how I can stub this.
You can implement your own test user store that can be stubbed out for your unit test.
If you want to use the actual EF UserStore in your tests, that also will work, but it will be creating a database using the DefaultConnection string by default. You could specify a DatabaseInitializer to always drop/recreate your tables in your tests if you wanted to ensure a clean db for every test.
I have created a plugin which inspects a param in the query string and loads up a user object based on this ID and populates
any request DTO with it. (All my request DTO's inherit from BaseRequest which has a CurrentUser property)
public class CurrentUserPlugin : IPlugin
{
public IAppHost CurrentAppHost { get; set; }
public void Register(IAppHost appHost)
{
CurrentAppHost = appHost;
appHost.RequestFilters.Add(ProcessRequest);
}
public void ProcessRequest(IHttpRequest request, IHttpResponse response, object obj)
{
var requestDto = obj as BaseRequest;
if (requestDto == null) return;
if (request.QueryString["userid"] == null)
{
throw new ArgumentNullException("No userid provided");
}
var dataContext = CurrentAppHost.TryResolve<IDataContext>();
requestDto.CurrentUser = dataContext.FindOne<User>(ObjectId.Parse(requestDto.uid));
if (requestDto.CurrentUser == null)
{
throw new ArgumentNullException(string.Format("User [userid:{0}] not found", requestDto.uid));
}
}
}
I need to have this User object available in my services but I don't want to inspect the DTO every time and extract from there. Is there a way to make data from plugins globally available to my services? I am also wondering if there is another way of instantiating this object as for my unit tests, the Plugin is not run - as I call my service directly.
So, my question is, instead of using Plugins can I inject a user instance to my services at run time? I am already using IoC to inject different Data base handlers depending on running in test mode or not but I can't see how to achieve this for User object which would need to be instantiated at the beginning of each request.
Below is an example of how I inject my DataContext in appHost.
container.Register(x => new MongoContext(x.Resolve<MongoDatabase>()));
container.RegisterAutoWiredAs<MongoContext, IDataContext>();
Here is an example of my BaseService. Ideally I would like to have a CurrentUser property on my service also.
public class BaseService : Service
{
public BaseService(IDataContext dataContext, User user)
{
DataContext = dataContext;
CurrentUser = user; // How can this be injected at runtime?
}
public IDataContext DataContext { get; private set; }
public User CurrentUser { get; set; }
}
Have you thought about trying to use the IHttpRequest Items Dictionary to store objects. You can access these Items from any filter or service or anywhere you can access IHttpRequest. See the src for IHttpRequest.
Just be mindful of the order that your attributes, services and plugins execute and when you store the item in the Items dictionary.
Adding:
We don't want to use HttpContext inside of the Service because we want use Service in our tests directly.
Advantages for living without it
If you don't need to access the HTTP
Request context there is nothing stopping you from having your same
IService implementation processing requests from a message queue which
we've done for internal projects (which incidentally is the motivation
behind the asynconeway endpoint, to signal requests that are safe for
deferred execution).
http://www.servicestack.net/docs/framework/accessing-ihttprequest
And we don't use http calls to run tests.
So our solution is:
public class UserService
{
private readonly IDataContext _dataContext;
public UserService(IDataContext dataContext)
{
_dataContext = dataContext;
}
public User GetUser()
{
var uid = HttpContext.Current.Request.QueryString["userId"];
return _dataContext.Get<User>(uid);
}
}
and
container.Register(x => new UserService(x.Resolve<IDataContext>()).GetUser()).ReusedWithin(ReuseScope.Request);
This is service signature:
public SomeService(IDataContext dataContext, User user) { }
Any suggestions?
I need to have this User object available in my services but I don't want to inspect the DTO every time and extract from there
How will your application know about the user if you're not passing the 'userid' in the querystring? Could you store the user data in the Session? Using a Session assumes the client is connected to your app and persists a Session Id (ss-id or ss-pid cookie in ServiceStack) in the client that can be looked up on the Server to get the 'session data'. If you can use the Session you can retrieve the data from your service doing something like
base.Session["UserData"] or base.SessionAs<User>();
Note: you will need to save your User data to the Session
Is there a way to make data from plugins globally available to my services? but I can't see how to achieve this for User object which would need to be instantiated at the beginning of each request.
This sounds like you want a global request filter. You're kind of already doing this but you're wrapping it into a Plugin.
I wrote about this topic in another question.
However, I've since refactored my code to get rid of configuration access, thus allowing the specs to pass. Or so I thought. They run fine from within Visual Studio using TestDriven.Net. However, when I run them during rake using the mspec.exe tool, they still fail with a serialization exception. So I've created a completely self-contained example that does basically nothing except setup fake security credentials on the thread. This test passes just fine in TD.Net, but blows up in mspec.exe. Does anybody have any suggestions?
Update: I've discovered a work-around. After researching the issue, it seems the cause is that the assembly containing my principal object is not in the same folder as the mspec.exe. When mspec creates a new AppDomain to run my specs, that new AppDomain has to load the assembly with the principal object in order to deserialize it. That assembly is not in the same folder as the mspec EXE, so it fails. If I copied my assembly into the same folder as mspec, it works fine.
What I still don't understand is why ReSharper and TD.Net can run the test just fine? Do they not use mspec.exe to actually run the tests?
using System;
using System.Security.Principal;
using System.Threading;
using Machine.Specifications;
namespace MSpecTest
{
[Subject(typeof(MyViewModel))]
public class When_security_credentials_are_faked
{
static MyViewModel SUT;
Establish context = SetupFakeSecurityCredentials;
Because of = () =>
SUT = new MyViewModel();
It should_be_initialized = () =>
SUT.Initialized.ShouldBeTrue();
static void SetupFakeSecurityCredentials()
{
Thread.CurrentPrincipal = CreatePrincipal(CreateIdentity());
}
static MyIdentity CreateIdentity()
{
return new MyIdentity(Environment.UserName, "None", true);
}
static MyPrincipal CreatePrincipal(MyIdentity identity)
{
return new MyPrincipal(identity);
}
}
public class MyViewModel
{
public MyViewModel()
{
Initialized = true;
}
public bool Initialized { get; set; }
}
[Serializable]
public class MyPrincipal : IPrincipal
{
private readonly MyIdentity _identity;
public MyPrincipal(MyIdentity identity)
{
_identity = identity;
}
public bool IsInRole(string role)
{
return true;
}
public IIdentity Identity
{
get { return _identity; }
}
}
[Serializable]
public class MyIdentity : IIdentity
{
private readonly string _name;
private readonly string _authenticationType;
private readonly bool _isAuthenticated;
public MyIdentity(string name, string authenticationType, bool isAuthenticated)
{
_name = name;
_isAuthenticated = isAuthenticated;
_authenticationType = authenticationType;
}
public string Name
{
get { return _name; }
}
public string AuthenticationType
{
get { return _authenticationType; }
}
public bool IsAuthenticated
{
get { return _isAuthenticated; }
}
}
}
Dan,
thank you for providing a reproduction.
First off, the console runner works differently than the TestDriven.NET and ReSharper runners. Basically, the console runner has to perform a lot more setup work in that it creates a new AppDomain (plus configuration) for every assembly that is run. This is required to load the .dll.config file for your spec assembly.
Per spec assembly, two AppDomains are created:
The first AppDomain (Console) is created
implicitly when mspec.exe is
executed,
a second AppDomain is created by mspec.exe for the assembly containing the specs (Spec).
Both AppDomains communicate with each other through .NET Remoting: For example, when a spec is executed in the Spec AppDomain, it notifies the Console AppDomain of that fact. When Console receives the notification it acts accordingly by writing the spec information to the console.
This communiciation between Spec and Console is realized transparently through .NET Remoting. One property of .NET Remoting is that some properties of the calling AppDomain (Spec) are automatically included when sending notifications to the target AppDomain (Console). Thread.CurrentPrincipal is such a property. You can read more about that here: http://sontek.vox.com/library/post/re-iprincipal-iidentity-ihttpmodule-serializable.html
The context you provide will run in the Spec AppDomain. You set Thread.CurrentPrincipal in the Because. After Because ran, a notification will be issued to the Console AppDomain. The notification will include your custom MyPrincipal that the receiving Console AppDomain tries to deserialize. It cannot do that since it doesn't know about your spec assembly (as it is not included in its private bin path).
This is why you had to put your spec assembly in the same folder as mspec.exe.
There are two possible workarounds:
Derive MyPrincipal and MyIdentity from MarshalByRefObject so that they can take part in cross-AppDomain communication through a proxy (instead of being serialized)
Set Thread.CurrentPrincipal transiently in the Because
(Text is required for formatting to work -- please ignore)
Because of = () =>
{
var previousPrincipal = Thread.CurrentPrincipal;
try
{
Thread.CurrentPrincipal = new MyPrincipal(...);
SUT = new MyViewModel();
}
finally
{
Thread.CurrentPrincipal = previousPrincipal;
}
}
ReSharper, for example, handles all the communication work for us. MSpec's ReSharper Runner can hook into the existing infrastructure (that, AFAIK, does not use .NET Remoting).