Manually validate flask-extended-jwt's access token - flask

I have a SPA app that contains an form with an upload file field. I have a rest API whose endpoints are protected via flask-extended-jwt JWT. To authenticate the REST endpoints I use #jwt_required. I want to authenticate the upload request as well.
Because of the client side I can't add an Authorization Bearer header so I thought to add the access token as a hidden field when submitting the form.
What is the best way to manually validate the JWT access token after I read it from the form?
class Upload(Resource):
def post(self):
#TODO: check for access token
access_token = None
if 'access_token' in request.form and request.form['access_token']:
access_token = request.form['access_token']
else:
message = json.dumps({'message': 'Invalid or missing token', 'success': False})
return Response(response=message, status=401, mimetype='text/plain')
if access_token:
#TODO: validate_token(access_token)
Thank you

Author of flask-jwt-extended here. That's a great question. There is currently no supported way to do that in the extension, the grabbing the token from the request and decoding it are tightly coupled together. This would be hard to de-couple because there is a lot of conditional things that are going on when the full decode chain runs. For example, checking the CSRF value only if the request is sent in via a cookie, or differentiating between an access and refresh token for the sake of the blacklisting feature.
A generalized function could be created, it's signature would look something like decode_and_verify_jwt(encoded_token, is_access_token=True, check_csrf=False). However, this would complicate the rest of the code in flask_jwt_extended and be a rather confusing function to use for the general case.
I think in this case it would be easier just to add a fourth lookup in the extension, so you could use something like:
app.config['JWT_TOKEN_LOCATION'] = ['headers', 'forms']
app.config['JWT_FORM_KEY'] = 'access_token'
# Use the rest of the application normally
If you want to make a ticket on the github page so I can track this, I would be happy to work on it.

Related

How to blacklist a JWT token with Simple JWT (django rest)?

I'm using Simple JWT to use JWT tokens in my Django rest API. It works great but I would like to be able to blacklist a token when a user logs out. In the documentation, it is said:
If the blacklist app is detected in INSTALLED_APPS, Simple JWT will add any generated refresh or sliding tokens to a list of outstanding tokens. It will also check that any refresh or sliding token does not appear in a blacklist of tokens before it considers it as valid. The Simple JWT blacklist app implements its outstanding and blacklisted token lists using two models: OutstandingToken and BlacklistedToken. Model admins are defined for both of these models. To add a token to the blacklist, find its corresponding OutstandingToken record in the admin and use the admin again to create a BlacklistedToken record that points to the OutstandingToken record.
However, I didn't find any code example and I'm not sure how this should be implemented. An example would be greatly appreciated.
Simple JWT only blacklists refresh tokens. This can be done by setting:
INSTALLED_APPS = (
...
'rest_framework_simplejwt.token_blacklist',
...
}
and then running migrate.
So, i would suggest, inorder to logout user:
Delete both, refresh & access tokens from the client. Also, keep access token expiry as short as possible.
Black-list the refresh token by creating an api end-point.
urls.py
path('/api/logout', views.BlacklistRefreshView.as_view(), name="logout"),
views.py
from rest_framework_simplejwt.tokens import RefreshToken
class BlacklistRefreshView(APIView):
def post(self, request)
token = RefreshToken(request.data.get('refresh'))
token.blacklist()
return Response("Success")
This will make sure that the refresh token cannot be used again to generate a new token (if at all someone has acquired it). Also, since access token has short life, it will be invalidated soon hopefully.
Not sure about this, but it's works for me to use token.blacklist().
make tokens.py
from rest_framework_simplejwt.tokens import AccessToken, BlacklistMixin
class JWTAccessToken(BlacklistMixin, AccessToken):
pass
in settings.py
SIMPLE_JWT = {
...
'AUTH_TOKEN_CLASSES': ('path_to_tokens_py.tokens.JWTAccessToken',),
...
}
I was getting the same error:
TokenError(_('Token is invalid or expired'))
because of passing the access token in:
token = RefreshToken(access_token)
while I should pass in the refresh token.
We can blacklist refresh tokens I would use redis with key pair token[refresh]=access and check for refresh token with blacklist endpoint
path('token/blacklist/', TokenBlacklistView.as_view(), name='token_blacklist'),
Send a refresh token
path('token/verify/', TokenVerifyView.as_view(), name='token_verify'),
verify your token you would send refresh token.
Use an in-memory database to check blacklist refreshed token
now you can make your end point to check the access list token dont forget to add the following lines in settings.py
'ROTATE_REFRESH_TOKENS': True,
'BLACKLIST_AFTER_ROTATION': True,

How to implement flask restplus authorizations

I am trying to setup authentication in flask-restplus application. I want to add authentication to all endpoints in the application but don't want to write decorator on each route.
I am looking for apikey based authentication. The problem is, I am unable to identify how to intercept all requests and check for authentication token in the header.
Current Code:
authorization = {
'apikey': {
'type': 'apiKey',
'in': 'header',
'name': 'x-auth'
}
}
api = Api(
title='title',
version='1.0',
description="List of API's ",
validate=True,
authorizations=authorization,
security='apikey'
)
After doing the above steps, when I open swagger I can add token using the authorize button. But once the token is passed I am unable to intercept request & verify if token is correct or not.
Currently all the examples I could find, added another decorator on each route which I don't want as it leads to poor design & duplicate code.
Currently the closest example I got is :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xF30i_A6cRw&list=LLpaDwEA6bAAPZU5lz0ZRsuw&index=1
but it also uses decorator on each route.
So the problem statement is:
How to intercept all requests & check for correct token in there header without adding decorator on all routes
Very recently, I ran into a similar problem. But luckily we do have the Namespace that accepts a list of decorators, where in you can pass the custom decorator at Resource level, and it will be implemented by default to each method of that resource.
api = Namespace(
'some Name here',
description='some description',
security='apiKey',
authorizations = authorizations,
decorators= [token_required]
)
One point to note however, I had to just specify the security with each doc in the method, as under:
#api.doc('some operation', security = 'apiKey')
The beauty with this is that one click authorization flows to each method in the resource.

Flask helper method to find user from header

I am playing around with Flask. I like that it is fairly thin and works for most of my requirements.
I would like to know what is your recommended way of retrieving the current logged in user. I would like every HTTP request, which is made, to pass/carry a token in the header, which is first retrieved by the login api
/user/login (params: username, password)
# returns {success: True, token: "<some-unique-string>"
Now is the subsequent APIs I would like to get the user object from the from passed token, like so
#app.route("/user/info", methods = ["GET"])
#apify
def user_get_info():
return {"name": current_user().name}
How could I have current_user read from the header without having to pass the request object every time ?
Any thoughts?
Every token is stored against a user. So you can make a query to get a user against a given token. Something like:
token = Token.query.get(token='token_value')
return jsonify({'name: User.query.get(id=token.user_id).name})
This can be done in one line as well but it totally depends upon your models and relationships.
Hope that helps. If I haven't understood your question correctly, do elaborate a little.

How does timed JSON web signature serializer work?

Can I restrict actions of my API to specific users if I generate a token like this:
from itsdangerous import TimedJSONWebSignatureSerializer as Serializer
expiration = 600
s = Serializer(current_app.config['SECRET_KEY'], expires_in = expiration)
return s.dumps({ 'id': kwargs.get('user_id') })
And the verification
#staticmethod
def verify_auth_token(token):
s = Serializer(app.config['SECRET_KEY'])
try:
data = s.loads(token)
except SignatureExpired:
return None # valid token, but expired
except BadSignature:
return None # invalid token
user = User.query.get(data['id'])
return user
I don't understand how this works and achieves security. The way I'm used to securing an API for example, a user wants to do HTTP PUT to /posts/10 I'd usually get the post's author ie user_id then query the database get the token for that user_id, if the request token matches the queried token then it is safe for the PUT. I've read this article and don't fully understand how it achieves security without storing anything in a database. Could someone explain how it works?
By signing and sending the original token upon login the server basically gives the front end an all access ticket to the data the user would have access to, and the front end uses that token (golden ticket) on all future requests for as long as the token is not expired (tokens can be made to have expiration or not). The server in turn knows the token has not been tampered with, because the signature is basically the encrypted hash of the users recognizable data (user_id, username, etc). So, if you change the token information from something like:
{"user_id": 1}
to something like:
{"user_id": 2}
then the signature would be different and the server immediately knows this token is invalid.
This provides an authentication method that exempts the server from having to have a session, because it validates the token every time.
Here is an example of what a token could look like (itsdangerous can use this format of JSON web tokens)

Django-social-auth google oauth token usage

I'm using Django-socila-auth plugin. It uses google API for Oauth 1.0 Authentication. Question is have anybody used it with google python API (gdata). I mean how to apply auth session_token, stored in django-social-auth model to my api call.
Can you help me with code to get this token from model and apply to gdata.PhotoService() instance. For now it is like this:
#getting model instance from django-social-auth model
association = Association.objects.get(user=request.user)
google_session_token=association.handle
google_secret=association.secret
#token string from django-social-auth
#model Association field "handle" looks like:
#google_session_token = '.......XG84PjwytqJkvr8WQhDxm1w-JplWK5zPndSHB13f.........'
gd_client = gdata.photos.service.PhotosService()
gd_client.debug = 'true'
gd_client.auth_token = google_session_token
#image.image is a file field, but problem not in this.
#it tries to send file in debug text.
#It just recieves 403 unauthorised callback.
photo = gd_client.InsertPhotoSimple(
'/data/feed/api/user/default/albumid/default', 'New Photo',
'Uploaded using the API', image.image, content_type='image/jpeg')
I'm recieving error
403 Invalid token string.
I understand that it needs secret too but how to apply it to API for auth?(To receive authorization to post photos.). BTW I added Picassa feed URL, as an option string for social-auth to ask permissions, so token I have asks for Picassa feed permissions when authorizing with google.
BTW. Google tutorial I've used is: here
I understand it's Oauth 1.0 rather than AusSub, but question is:
how to authenticate with token and secret I have and post a photo with this permission?
Just to answer my own problem. I used wrong way to do it, because problem in 'gd_client' and AuthSub.
It must check token on server. And it can not do it on localhost. You need to look ahead to Oauth/Oauth2 for better debugging and so on... No matter that it is much complex than AuthSub