HTTP 407 Proxy Authentication Required while accessing Amazon S3 - amazon-web-services

I have tried everything but I cant seem to fix this issue that is happening for only one client behind a corporate proxy/firewall. Our Silverlight application connects to Amazon S3 for downloading/Uploading some documents. On one client and one client only it returns a 407 error and after that the application fails to save anything.
Inner Exception:
System.ServiceModel.ProtocolException: [UnexpectedHttpResponseCode]
Arguments: 407,Proxy Authentication Required
We had something similar at a different client but there was more of a CORS issue. to resolve this I used cloud-front to fake a sub-domain that then accesses the S3 bucket and it solved the issue. I was hoping it would fix it with this client as well but it didnt.
I have tried adding this code to web.config as suggested by a lot of answers
<system.net>
<defaultProxy useDefaultCredentials="true" >
</defaultProxy>
</system.net>
I have read articles about passing a proxy headers with basis authentication using username and password but I am not sure how this would help us. The Proxy server is used by client and any authentication it requires is outside our domain.
**Additional Information**
The Silverlight code references 2 services. One is our wcf service that retrieves all the data for the application. One is The Amazon S3 service that uses the amazon Soap api, the endpoint for which is at http://s3.amazonaws.com/doc/2006-03-01/AmazonS3.wsdl?
If I go into our app and only use part of the system that dont make any calls to the Amazon S3 api the application works fine. As soon as I go to a part of the system that makes a call to the S3, the problem starts. funny enough the call to S3 goes fine and I can retrieve the doc fine but then any calls to our wcf service return 407.
Any ideas?
**Update 2**
Based on comments from Elliot Nelson I check the stack we were using for making http requests in our application. Turns out we are using client http for both http and https requests by default. Here is the code we have in the App.xaml constructor
public App()
{
Startup += Application_Startup;
UnhandledException += Application_UnhandledException;
InitializeComponent();
WebRequest.RegisterPrefix("http://", WebRequestCreator.ClientHttp);
WebRequest.RegisterPrefix("https://", WebRequestCreator.ClientHttp);
}
Now, to understand the differences between clienthttp and browserhttp and when to use them. Also, the potential impacts/issues of switching to browserhttp.
**Update 3**
Is there a way to request browsers to run your in-browser Silverlight application in trusted mode and would it help bypass this issue?

(Answer #2)
So, most likely (for corporate environments like this network), almost nothing can be done without whatever custom proxy settings are set in IE, usually pushed by corporate policy. To take advantage of these proxy settings, you want to use WebRequestCreator.BrowserHttp, which automatically uses the browser's default settings when making requests.
There's a table of the differences between these two clients available in the Microsoft docs. I'm guessing you were using something (maybe setting custom headers or reading the raw response body) that wasn't supported in BrowserHttp.
For security reasons, you can't "ask" the browser what its proxy settings are and use them, so this is a tricky situation. You can specify Browser vs Client handling by domain, or even for a specific request (the same page above describes how); you may be able in this case to get away with just using ClientHttp for your service calls and BrowserHttp for your S3 calls, and avoid the problem altogether!
For next steps, I'd try that approach; if it doesn't work, I'd try switching wholesale to BrowserHttp just to see if it bypasses the proxy issue (there's almost no chance the application will actually work, since you're probably using ClientHttp-only options).
Long term, you may want to consider making changes to your services so they are usable by a BrowserHttp-only application (this would require you to be pretty basic in your requests/responses, but using only BrowserHttp would be a guarantee you'd work in pretty much any corp network).

Running in trusted mode is probably a group policy thing which would require their AD admins to approve / whitelist your app.
I think the underlying issue you are facing is that the proxy requires NTLM authentication and for whatever reason the browser declines to provide your app with that context.
One way to prove that it's an NTLM auth issue is to test with curl - get it to make a req through the proxy, then it should be a bit easier to code to. EG the following curl will get you through 99% of Windows corporate proxies (assuming the proxy is at proxy-host.corp:3128):
C:\> curl.exe -v --proxy proxy-host:3128 --proxy-user : --proxy-ntlm https://www.google.com
NOTE The --proxy-user : tells curl to use the current user session to perform the NTLM challenge.
So if you can get the client to run that, you can at least identify that NTLM works, then it's a just a matter of getting the app to perform the NTLM challenge using the default credentials (which may or may not be provided by the browser session)

Since you described this as a silverlight application, I'm going to assume you can't use classic browser-proxy troubleshooting like "move browser to public network" or "try a different browser", to isolate the problem.
You should try to isolate the proxy server, and have the customer use the required proxy-auth.
The application is making request, but it might be intercepted by a transparent proxy, or the result might be coming from what you consider a web server.
In the early days, the 401 error was pretty strictly associated with web-auth, and 407 was for proxy-auth.
Architecturally, the separation is a convenience, a web server can have both web server, proxy, and reverse-proxy behaviors.
What happens is your customer's environment is making a web connection to the destination, but it receives a HTTP 407 status from some host, probably their network, or sometimes the provider. Almost certainly the request is received not forwarded. The HTTP client your application lives in needs to provide the credentials that host requires. Companies have environments that are complex enough where often your customer will say this is the first time they have heard of this (some proxy-auth is also dynamic or destination specific).
Also, in some corporate environments, the operator will allow temporary or permanent white-listing from the proxy-auth service. You should see if they can do this, even temporarily, to confirm there aren't going to be other problems.
In the end, it sounds like your application might not robustly support proxy-auth, or the proxy-auth type they use in their environment.

Related

Keystone session cookie only working on localhost

Edit:
After investigating this further, it seems cookies are sent correctly on most API requests. However something happens in the specific request that checks if the user is logged in and it always returns null. When refreshing the browser a successful preflight request is sent and nothing else, even though there is a session and a valid session cookie.
Original question:
I have a NextJS frontend authenticating against a Keystone backend.
When running on localhost, I can log in and then refresh the browser without getting logged out, i.e. the browser reads the cookie correctly.
When the application is deployed on an external server, I can still log in, but when refreshing the browser it seems no cookie is found and it is as if I'm logged out. However if I then go to the Keystone admin UI, I am still logged in.
In the browser settings, I can see that for localhost there is a "keystonejs-session" cookie being created. This is not the case for the external server.
Here are the session settings from the Keystone config file.
The value of process.env.DOMAIN on the external server would be for example example.com when Keystone is deployed to admin.example.com. I have also tried .example.com, with a leading dot, with the same result. (I believe the leading dot is ignored in newer specifications.)
const sessionConfig = {
maxAge: 60 * 60 * 24 * 30,
secret: process.env.COOKIE_SECRET,
sameSite: 'lax',
secure: true,
domain: process.env.DOMAIN,
path: "/",
};
const session = statelessSessions(sessionConfig);
(The session object is then passed to the config function from #keystone-6/core.)
Current workaround:
I'm currently using a workaround which involves routing all API requests to '/api/graphql' and rewriting that request to the real URL using Next's own rewrites. Someone recommended this might work and it does, sort of. When refreshing the browser window the application is still in a logged-out state, but after a second or two the session is validated.
To use this workaround, add the following rewrite directive to next.config.js
rewrites: () => [
{
source: '/api/graphql',
destination:
process.env.NODE_ENV === 'development'
? `http://localhost:3000/api/graphql`
: process.env.NEXT_PUBLIC_BACKEND_ENDPOINT,
},
],
Then make sure you use this URL for queries. In my case that's the URL I feed to createUploadLink().
This workaround still means constant error messages in the logs since relative URLs are not supposed to work. I would love to see a proper solution!
It's hard to know what's happening for sure without knowing more about your setup. Inspecting the requests and responses your browser is making may help figure this out. Look in the "network" tab in your browser dev tools. When you make make the request to sign in, you should see the cookie being set in the headers of the response.
Some educated guesses:
Are you accessing your external server over HTTPS?
They Keystone docs for the session API mention that, when setting secure to true...
[...] the cookie is only sent to the server when a request is made with the https: scheme (except on localhost)
So, if you're running your deployed env over plain HTTP, the cookie is never set, creating the behaviour you're describing. Somewhat confusingly, in development the flag is ignored, allowing it to work.
A similar thing can happen if you're deploying behind a proxy, like nginx:
In this scenario, a lot of people choose to have the proxy terminate the TLS connection, so requests are forwarded to the backend over HTTP (but on a private network, so still relatively secure). In that case, you need to do two things:
Ensure the proxy is configured to forward the X-Forwarded-Proto header, which informs the backend which protocol was used originally request
Tell express to trust what the proxy is saying by configuring the trust proxy setting
I did a write up of this proxy issue a while back. It's for Keystone 5 (so some of the details are off) but, if you're using a reverse proxy, most of it's still relevant.
Update
From Simons comment, the above guesses missed the mark 😭 but I'll leave them here in case they help others.
Since posting about this issue a month ago I was actually able to work around it by routing API requests via a relative path like '/api/graphql' and then forwarding that request to the real API on a separate subdomain. For some mysterious reason it works this way.
This is starting to sound like a CORS or issue
If you want to serve your front end from a different origin (domain) than the API, the API needs to return a specific header to allow this. Read up on CORS and the Access-Control-Allow-Origin header. You can configure this setting the cors option in the Keystone server config which Keystone uses to configure the cors package.
Alternatively, the solution of proxying API requests via the Next app should also work. It's not obvious to me why your proxying "workaround" is experiencing problems.

API Console Issue

I've been using WSO2 API Manager 1.9.1 for the past month on a static IP and we liked it enough to put it on Azure behind a full qualified domain name. As we are still only using for internal purposes, we shut the VM down during off hours to save money. Our Azure setup does not guarantee the same IP address each time the VM restarts. The FQDN allows us to always reach https://api.mydomain.com regardless of what happens with the VM IP.
I updated the appropriate config files to the FQDN and everything seems to be working well. However! The one issue I have and cannot seem to resolve is calling APIs from the API consoloe. No matter what I do, I get a response as below
Response Body
no content
Response Code
0
Response Headers
{
"error": "no response from server"
}
Mysteriously, I can successfully make the same calls from command line or SOAPUI. So it's something unique about the API Console. I can't seem to find anything useful in the logs or googling. I do see a recurring error but it's not very clear or even complete (seems to cut off).
[2015-11-17 21:33:21,768] ERROR - AsyncDataPublisher Reconnection failed for
Happy to provide further inputs / info. Any suggestions on root cause or where to look is appreciated. Thanks in advance for your help!
Edit#1 - adding screenshots from chrome
The API Console may not be giving you response due to following issues
If you are using https, you have to type the gateway url in browser and accept it before invoke the API from the API Console (This case there is no signed certificate in the gateway)
CORS issue which may due to your domain is not in access allow origins response of Options call
If you create a API which having https backend. You have to import endpoint SSL certificate to client-trustore.jks

Understanding CORS

I've been looking on the web regarding CORS, and I wanted to confirm if whatever I made of it is, what it actually is.
Mentioned below is a totally fictional scenario.
I'll take an example of a normal website. Say my html page has a form that takes a text field name. On submitting it, it sends the form data to myPage.php. Now, what happens internally is that, the server sends the request to www.mydomain.com/mydirectory/myPage.php along with the text fields. Now, the server sees that the request was fired off from the same domain/port/protocol
(Question 1. How does server know about all these details. Where does it extract all these details froms?)
Nonetheless, since the request is originated from same domain, it server the php script and returns whatever is required off it.
Now, for the sake of argument, let's say I don't want to manually fill the data in text field, but instead I want to do it programmatically. What I do is, I create a html page with javascript and fire off a POST request along with the parameters (i.e. values of textField). Now since my request is not from any domain as such, the server disregards the service to my request. and I get cross domain error?
Similarly, I could have written a Java program also, that makes use of HTTPClient/Post request and do the same thing.
Question 2 : Is this what the problem is?
Now, what CORS provide us is, that the server will say that 'anyone can access myPage.php'.
From enable cors.org it says that
For simple CORS requests, the server only needs to add the following header to its response:
Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *
Now, what exactly is the client going to do with this header. As in, the client anyway wanted to make call to the resources on server right? It should be upto server to just configure itself with whether it wants to accept or not, and act accordingly.
Question 3 : What's the use of sending a header back to client (who has already made a request to the server)?
And finally, what I don't get is that, say I am building some RESTful services for my android app. Now, say I have one POST service www.mydomain.com/rest/services/myPost. I've got my Tomcat server hosting these services on my local machine.
In my android app, I just call this service, and get the result back (if any). Where exactly did I use CORS in this case. Does this fall under a different category of server calls? If yes, then how exactly.
Furthermore, I checked Enable Cors for Tomcat and it says that I can add a filter in my web.xml of my dynamic web project, and then it will start accepting it.
Question 4 : Is that what is enabling the calls from my android device to my webservices?
Thanks
First of all, the cross domain check is performed by the browser, not the server. When the JavaScript makes an XmlHttpRequest to a server other than its origin, if the browser supports CORS it will initialize a CORS process. Or else, the request will result in an error (unless user has deliberately reduced browser security)
When the server encounters Origin HTTP header, server will decide if it is in the list of allowed domains. If it is not in the list, the request will fail (i.e. server will send an error response).
For number 3 and 4, I think you should ask separate questions. Otherwise this question will become too broad. And I think it will quickly get close if you do not remove it.
For an explanation of CORS, please see this answer from programmers: https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/a/253043/139479
NOTE: CORS is more of a convention. It does not guarantee security. You can write a malicious browser that disregards the same domain policy. And it will execute JavaScript fetched from any site. You can also create HTTP headers with arbitrary Origin headers, and get information from any third party server that implements CORS. CORS only works if you trust your browser.
For question 3, you need to understand the relationship between the two sites and the client's browser. As Krumia alluded to in their answer, it's more of a convention between the three participants in the request.
I recently posted an article which goes into a bit more detail about how CORS handshakes are designed to work.
Well I am not a security expert but I hope, I can answer this question in one line.
If CORS is enabled then server will just ask browser if you are calling the request from [xyz.com]? If browser say yes it will show the result and if browser says no it is from [abc.com] it will throw error.
So CORS is dependent on browser. And that's why browsers send a preflight request before actual request.
In my case I just added
.authorizeRequests().antMatchers(HttpMethod.OPTIONS, "/**").permitAll()
to my WebSecurityConfiguration file issue is resolved

Using fineuploader, how can I use a HTTPS endpoint?

I am relatively new to javascript, and I got an uploader tool called fineuploader that I was considering to use. However locally (development machine) I got it to work (vb.net), but when I put it on my external server, I noticed that there is a post done in http and directly to the server's domain name (e/g/ mydomain.com), instead of mydomain.com/testproject. The site only allows for https traffic.
Is there an easy way to change this? (so it should point at https://mydomain.com/testproject/FileUpload.aspx
The code used by fineuploader shows a parameter called 'endpoint: '/FileUpload.aspx'
Do I have to make changes in the settings of IIS for this webservice?
If you need to enable CORS (cross-domain requests), Fine Uploader supports this. You should read my blog post on how CORS support is implemented in Fine Uploader and how you can support such requests in your server-side code.

Asp Mvc 3 - Restful web service for consuming on multiple platforms

I am wanting to expose a restful web service for posting and retrieving data, this may be consumed by mobile devices or a web site.
Now the actual creation of the service isn't a problem, what does seem to be a problem is communicating from a different domain.
I have made a simple example service deployed on the ASP.NET development server, which just exposes a simple POST action to send a request with JSON content. Then I have created a simple web page using jquery ajax to send some dummy data over, yet I believe I am getting stung with the same origin policy.
Is this a common thing, and how do you get around it? Some places have mentioned having a proxy on the domain that you always request a get to, but then you cannot use it in a restful manner...
So is this a common issue with a simple fix? As there seem to be plenty of restful services out there that allow 3rd parties to use their service...
How exactly are you "getting stung with the same origin policy"? From your description, I don't see how it could be relevant. If yourdomain.com/some-path/defined-request.json returns a certain JSON response, then it will return that response regardless of what is requesting the file, unless you have specifically defined required credentials that are not satisfied.
Here is an example of such a web service. It will return the same JSON object regardless of from where the request is made: http://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/geocode/json?address=1600+Amphitheatre+Parkway,+Mountain+View,+CA&sensor=true
Unless I am misunderstanding you (in which case you should clarify your actual problem), the same origin policy doesn't really seem to apply here.
Update Re: Comment
"I make a simple HTML page and load it as file://myhtmlfilelocation/myhtmlfile.html and try to make an ajax request"
The cause of your problem is that you are using the file:// URL scheme, instead of the http:// protocol scheme. You can find information about this scheme in Section 3.10 of RFC 1738. Here is an excerpt:
The file URL scheme is used to designate files accessible on a particular host computer. This scheme, unlike most other URL schemes, does not designate a resource that is universally accessible over the Internet.
You should be able to resolve your issue by using the http:// scheme instead of the file:// scheme when you make your asynchronous HTTP request.