I've been reading a lot recently about how to secure a REST API properly and am still not sure I'm doing the right design choice.
I have an API exposed by a Nodejs Web Server. Events are organized (basically people can answer questions), thus users can use the API if they possess a specific code that they type through a client-side interface to authenticate themselves.
There might be thousands of users authenticated for one event and thousands of events running at the same time, using the same API. Therefore I would like to not store any session information on the server side.
My identification flow is the following
Client sends the event-specific code to the /login service of the API.
Webserver checks the code, retrieves the corresponding event, and generates a token that encapsulates the event ID (that user is participating to), an timestamp-based generated userID and the expiration date of the stateless session -> this results in a encrypted token containing a small payload. (using SH256 and a secret hardcoded on the server) and is sent back to the client
Token is stored on the client side for future API calls.
User starts answering questions, using the Token in the Authorization http header
Server checks the token using nodejs module passport-http-token, and decrypts the user ID, event ID and checks the expiration date. It saves the user's answer along with the userID.
So basically no session store, although I had the feeling that in most of the OAuth2 solutions I found, people were storing tokens in a server-side database.
Assuming that the first API call to /login (that sends the event code) is secured using https, what are the flaws ? Can the SH 256 token be reverse engineered ?
Thanks for your help
Related
I’m having trouble figuring out how to get Node.js backend tokens into React.js frontend local storage. To login a user will use their credentials though an external websites API using the Oauth2 flow, this will be the only way to login into the application.
Currently, the user clicks a button which opens a new window in the authorization URL where the user will grant privilege. Once granted, the user is redirected to the backend endpoint which goes through passport.js and gets the required access and refresh tokens sent from the external API. This is then stored in a session on the backend database. What I want, instead, is to not store a session on a database but instead implement JWT and store the user’s data in local storage. With the current flow, its just not possible to do this and I haven’t found the right documentation to work it out.
There are many websites that implement it the exact way I want but tracking down the way they do it has appeared to be a challenge in on itself.
So instead of using passport.js, which was causing a plethora of issues, I decided to implement the Oauth2 flow myself. Instead of doing ALL the work in the backend, I broke the flow into different parts.
Originally, I sent the user to the backend where they would recieve an authorization token there. This turned out to be troublesome, instead, request an authorization code on the front end. For example, send the user to the Auth path and redirect the user back the the front end once privileges have been granted. Wait at the frontend callback for a code, once obtained, send a post request to the backend with that code and any other data in the body.
When obtained at the backend, trade that code for the access token and respond to the post requst with the neccassary token and any other data that needs to be sent back e.g. profile name, picture, date of birth. You can the implementn the JWT flow and no database is required to store any session or tokens, all can be stored client side securely.
I may be a little confused about how backend servers work. Let's say I have a frontend React app with a login. The login information is stored in a database (i.e. MSSQL, MySQL, MongoDB) and I have a Node backend with routes for my app to fetch that information when a user is logging in or doing anything. When both my React app and server are hosted, I would make calls to the api and no confidential information (such as passwords) would be sent back to the client (just maybe a "success" message if the login information appears to be correct on the backend). My question is, what is stopping someone from finding the backend route and putting it into Insomnia to get the password or other sensitive information?
My first thought was to use express-session and auth on the backend to require a user to be logged in to an account to make such requests, but I think there are two issues with that:
How will that work when multiple users are logging in at once? Since the users are not technically physically visiting the api routes themselves, does session still know who is signing in to what account on the frontend? Will the second person logging in override the first person's session even though the first hasn't logged out yet?
If the auth doesn't kick in until a person is logged in, wouldn't someone be able to get the response password data from the login route itself?
Sorry if the question sounds dumb I'm just having a little trouble understanding the security aspect.
It sounds like there's a bit of a misunderstanding of how auth sessions work. There are two primary way sessions can work - either storing the sessions on the backend (older way), or storing session data in a cookie, typically a JWT (JSON Web Token). Cookies are bits of data that are passed from the server to the browser and anytime the browser makes a subsequent request to your server, it passes the cookie back too, so your server will always be able to get that data. The way this works for auth is the following:
A user signs into your application with credentials (username and password).
Your server validates the credentials by checking your database or wherever you're storing them and rejects the request if it fails. (Check out Auth0, Firebase Auth, or other auth services as doing this yourself can be a pain and open yourself up to potential vulnerabilities)
If the credentials are valid, the server generates a signed JWT token that includes data, like the username of the user.
The server responds with the body as well as a cookie containing the JWT, which the browser then stores.
The user requests some user-specific data from your server, and the browser sends the cookie with the JWT back to your server.
Your server validates that the JWT is valid by checking the signature. If it is valid, it uses the username from the token to get the user-specific data. If it is not valid, it rejects the request.
Because the signature occurs entirely on the server side (typically with some hashing algorithm and a secret key that you don't vend publicly), it would be nearly impossible for someone to spoof a JWT token signature. Therefor, your server is able to 1. trust that the JWT token is indeed valid if the signature is correct, and 2. find out what user is requesting data.
Here's a video that helps explain and visualize this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soGRyl9ztjI
And here's a library for creating and validating JWTs in Node: https://www.npmjs.com/package/jsonwebtoken
Hopefully that answers your question!
This may seem like a pretty noobish question, but I just recently got into Node.js and am needed to make sure that the same kind of Authentication that occurs in my Laravel App happens in Node.js.
Clearly, I need to use an API, but I am confused about how to do it in a manner that is secure. I have looked into this article:
https://www.ida.liu.se/~TDP024/labs/hmacarticle.pdf
And have looked through their algorithm into building an API. But I do not understand how it would be secure.
According to the post, you store a public and private key in a Database. The public key can be seen by everyone but the private key is, well, private. However, when sending it to the server, you send a hashed version along with other data, of the private to the server.
This sounds all well and fine. However, does that not mean that the public key and the hash is public, thus the private key is exposed as well?
For example lets say I try to establish the following connection
ws://example.com/pull?public=A89-3NJ2-KAN-NKSN1&hash=QmFzZTY0IHRoZSBoZWxsIG91dCBvZiBtZSBiYWJ5Li4uLi4u
What stops another user from just sharing this link giving an unrelated user access to it?
The article you linked to describes how to authenticate one single request, not an entire session. That is, the user sends the public api_key along with some request data that describes the specific request for the API (like, { "action":"latest_price", "symbol":"GOOG"} for a stock market API).
To authenticate, the user also uses a shared API-access secret key as an HMAC key to compute HMAC(secret, api_key+request). No one else can compute this if they don't know the secret. Only the user and the server should know secret, because it's basically the user's password to use the API.
The situation you describe is very different: you're using a WebSocket, so I assume you'll be sending requests interactively. If you want to authenticate the entire socket session, this approach doesn't make sense, since it's designed to authenticate a single request. You can apply this approach to individual requests inside the WebSocket connection.
For authenticating a new connection (i.e., "what logged-in user is opening this connection?") using auth cookies is appropriate, just as you would for a traditional HTTP connection.
Below, I'll assume that the purpose of the Web Socket is to send only one request (which really makes me wonder why it's a WebSocket), so that the request-level authentication makes sense.
What stops another user from just sharing this link giving an unrelated user access to it?
Nothing. Do you want someone else to submit a specifc request, while impersonating you? Then by all means, give them that link and tell them to use it.
The credentials in the link include an HMAC of the API request (plus your identity) that only you can generate, as the sole owner on your API secret key. If you give that HMAC to someone else, they can submit it and impersonate you for that specific request. However, they cannot create more requests, because they don't have your API secret to make more HMAC values for different requests.
In fact, if you didn't want that request to be submitted, you should not have used your secret to create the authenticating HMAC in the first place! Why did your authenticate a request that you didn't intend to be submitted?
Have a look at this
Essentially
make a "websocket preauth" request to the backend from the browser using the site's normal auth
backend returns a CSRF token in the response body and sets a "websocket auth" cookie with SameSite=Strict in the response headers
attempt to establish a websocket connection with the backend, with the addition of the CSRF token in a query parameter
the backend checks
that the websocket auth cookie and CSRF token are valid
that the value of the Origin header matches an approved domain
the backend sends a response and upgrades the connection to use websockets
I'm building a mobile app and a ServiceStack web service back-end. The Authentication stuff in ServiceStack looks great but easy to get lost in its flexibility - guidance much appreciated. I'll be using my own db tables for storing users etc within the web service. I'd like to have a registration process and subsequent authentication something like this:
the user initially provides just an email address, my web service then emails a registration key to the user
the user enters the key. The app sends to the web service for registration: email, key & a unique device identifier.
the web service verifies the key and stores the email & device id. It responds back with an auth token that the app will use for later authentication.
Then subsequent web service requests would provide the device id and auth token (or a hash created with it). The app is not very chatty so I'm tempted to send the authentication details on each web request.
Question 1: Should I hook into ServiceStack's registration API or just add a couple of custom web service calls? e.g. without using ServiceStack's registration I would:
post to a registration web service with the email address and device id. My web service would send the registration email with a key and add a record to the user db table.
when the user enters the key it would again post to the registration web service, this time also with the key. My web service would validate the key and update the user table marking the user as registered, creating and recording the auth token & returning it to the caller
subsequent requests would be sent using http basic auth with the device id as username and the auth token as password. The service is not very chatty so creds will be sent with each request.
I'll implement a CredentialsAuthProvider that'll get the creds with httpRequest.GetBasicAuthUserAndPassword() and validate them against the db data.
But it feels like I should use registration built in to ServiceStack.
Question 2: What's wrong with passing the authentication details with each request? This would make it easier for composing my app requests but it doesn't seem 'done' based on the ServiceStack examples. Presumably that's because it's inefficient if you have lots of requests to need to re-authenticate every call - any other reasons? My app will only make a single web request at most every few minutes so it seems simpler to avoid having sessions and just re-auth each request.
Question 3: Am I on the right track subclassing CredentialsAuthProvider?
Question 4: Is there any point using the auth token to generate a hash instead of sending the auth token each time? All communication will be over https.
Answer1: It will be OK. if you give multiple call as per requirement. Normally authentication works based on cookie, now you can store it on client and/or on server and match the user with it. Again here if you are using device you, can always use device instead of user to map and authenticate user. Based on your requirement.
I will prefer to use provider as it hides many details which you need to do manually instead. You are on right track. There are many blogs specifically for authentication and how to create custom authentication with service stack. If you like let me know I have book marked some will give it you. Best way to search latest one is checkout twitter account of Servicestack.
Answer2: This is again, I say as per requirement. Now if your user will be in WIFI zone only. (Mostly true for business users), then there is not limit for calls. Just give a API call and do the authentication in background. Simple JSON token will not hurt, It is few bytes only. But again if you have big user base who is not using good internet connection then it will be better to store authentication detail on device and check against that. Just to save a network call. In any case network call is resource heavy.
Answer3: Yes you are on a right track. Still check out blog entries for more details. I don't remember the code snippet and how it works with last update so I am not putting up code here.
Answer4: This is answer is little complicated. Passing data over https and saving user from Identity fraud is little different thing. Now, if you are not generating auth token (hash based value) then you can pass user also over the http or https. Now, this can be used by another user to mock first user and send data. Even data is being passed through https but still data is getting mocked. Hashed based value is used to avoid this situation. And also there are couple of other business use cases can be covered using auth token.
Please let me know if I have understand you questions correctly and answered them?? or If any further details is required??
I'm developing the restful web app that using some popular web framework on the backend, say (rails, sinatra, flask, express.js). Ideally, I want to develop client side with Backbone.js. How do I let only my javascript client side interact with those API calls? I don't want those API calls to be public and be called by curl or simply by entering the link on browser.
As a first principle, if your API is consumed by your JS client, you have to assume, that it is public: A simple JS debugger puts an attacker into a position, where he can send a byte-for-byte identical request from a tool of his choice.
That said, if I read your question correctly, this is not, what you want to avoid: What you really don't want to happen is, that your API is consumed (on a regular basis) without your JS client being involved. Here are some ideas on how to if not enforce, then at least encourage using your client:
I am sure, your API has some sort of authentication field (e.g. Hash computed on the client). If not, take a look at This SO question. Make sure you use a salt (or even API key) that is given to your JS client on a session basis (a.o.t. hardcoded). This way, an unauthorized consumer of your API is forced into much more work.
On loading the JS client, remember some HTTP headers (user agent comes to mind) and the IP address and ask for reauthentication if they change, employing blacklists for the usual suspects. This forces an attacker to do his homework more thoroughly again.
On the server side, remember the last few API calls, and before allowing another one, check if business logic allows for the new one right now: This denies an attacker the ability to concentrate many of his sessions into one session with your server: In combination with the other measures, this will make an abuser easy detectable.
I might not have said that with the necessary clarity: I consider it impossible to make it completely impossible for an abuser to consume your service, but you can make it so hard, it might not be worth the hassle.
You should implement some sort of authentication system. One good way to handle this is to define some expected header variables. For example, you can have an auth/login API call that returns a session token. Subsequent calls to your API will expect a session token to be set in an HTTP header variable with a specific name like 'your-api-token'.
Alternatively many systems create access tokens or keys that are expected (like youtube, facebook or twitter) using some sort of api account system. In those cases, your client would have to store these in some manner in the client.
Then it's simply a matter of adding a check for the session into your REST framework and throwing an exception. If at all possible the status code (to be restful) would be a 401 error.
There's an open standard now called "JSON Web Token",
see https://jwt.io/ & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSON_Web_Token
JSON Web Token (JWT) is a JSON-based open standard (RFC 7519) for
creating tokens that assert some number of claims. For example, a
server could generate a token that has the claim "logged in as admin"
and provide that to a client. The client could then use that token to
prove that they are logged in as admin. The tokens are signed by the
server's key, so the server is able to verify that the token is
legitimate. The tokens are designed to be compact, URL-safe and usable
especially in web browser single sign-on (SSO) context. JWT claims can
be typically used to pass identity of authenticated users between an
identity provider and a service provider, or any other type of claims
as required by business processes.[1][2] The tokens can also be
authenticated and encrypted.[3][4]
Set a SESSION var on the server when the client first loads your index.html (or backbone.js etc.)
Check this var on the server-side on every API call.
P.S. this is not a "security" solution!!! This is just to ease the load on your server so people don't abuse it or "hotlink" your API from other websites and apps.
Excuse me #MarkAmery and Eugene, but that is incorrect.
Your js+html (client) app running in the browser CAN be set up to exclude unauthorized direct calls to the API as follows:
First step: Set up the API to require authentication. The client must first authenticate itself via the server (or some other security server) for example asking the human user to provide the correct password.
Before authentication the calls to the API are not accepted.
During authentication a "token" is returned.
After authentication only API calls with the authentication "token" will be accepted.
Of course at this stage only authorized users who have the password can access the API, although if they are programmers debugging the app, they can access it directly for testing purposes.
Second step: Now set up an extra security API, that is to be called within a short limit of time after the client js+html app was initially requested from the server. This "callback" will tell the server that the client was downloaded successfully. Restrict your REST API calls to work only if the client was requested recently and successfully.
Now in order to use your API they must first download the client and actually run it in a browser. Only after successfully receiving the callback, and then user entry within a short frame of time, will the API accept calls.
So you do not have to worry that this may be an unauthorized user without credentials.
(The title of the question, 'How do I secure REST API calls', and from most of what you say, that is your major concern, and not the literal question of HOW your API is called, but rather BY WHOM, correct?)
Here's what I do:
Secure the API with an HTTP Header with calls such as X-APITOKEN:
Use session variables in PHP. Have a login system in place and save the user token in session variables.
Call JS code with Ajax to PHP and use the session variable with curl to call the API. That way, if the session variable is not set, it won't call and the PHP code contains the Access Token to the API.