I want to make a connection between an external LDAP server (e.g. Active Directory server) and my webservice. I want to make sure that a certain group of users from the LDAP server stays in sync with my webservice, e.g. when a user gets deleted from the LDAP server, the LDAP server should push this change to my webservice so the user can be deleted from my webservice as well.
Any suggestions on how to achieve this?
The comments to your question indicate that you should retrieve data as required from the directory server instead of trying to maintain synchronization, with which I agree.
If synchronization is still your desire, you may be able to use persistent search, which notifies the connected client of changes in the database according to search parameters. Not all server support this mechanism, however.
see also
Persistent search in Java
LDAP: Persistent search
Related
I'm currently trying to make an account signup page for a small project I'm working on and I don't know how to send data back to the server (I'm using the Flask framework) without also allowing everyone to send data. Let's say that I've set up an API endpoint on /createAccount. I can then send POST requests to that endpoint: {"username": "test", "password": "test"}. The web server will then handle that request by inserting that data into a database and responding with 201. The problem is, anybody would be able to send these requests, and I only want users to be able to register through the login page, and not by making an API call. Is there any way of doing this?
Edit: I've given this problem a bit more thought and I think that the only API that is difficult to secure is the signup API. When a user has created an account, I can just assign them an API key, which they will send to the API every time they want to make a request, which means that an account is required to make API calls. If a certain key is making too many requests, they can be rate limited or temporarily banned from making further requests. The problem with the signup API however, is that there is no information by witch a request sender could be identified. I could use the IP address, but that can be changed and wouldn't really help if multiple IPs are spamming the API at the same time. Is there a way I can identify non-registered users?
Short answer: no.
You have to check data to make sure the account being created is something legit and not trash data to fill your database or any other malicious intents.
This is the reason you usually have to confirm an account clicking on a confirmation link sent to your mail: this way the app is sure that your account is legit.
You could also check info on the front end, but that is never as secure as back end checking, because of your concern in the question: in the end, anyone who gets to know your endpoints could potentially send direct requests to your server with whatever data they wanted.
Assuming you have a trusted source of registrations, an if that source can make an ssh connection to the server where your Flask app is running, an alternative to trying to lock down a registration API is to provide a command line script to do the registration.
The trusted source does something like
ssh someuser#youripaddress /path/to/register.py "username" "password" "other info"
If you use a Flask custom command you can share model definitions db configuration.
I am right now writing web service for a system. There is 3 web service namely wsA, wsB, and wsC. The system is for registration system. First user provide information such as username and password, and then in wsA the information is being checked through internal server. if there isn't any information recorded, the parameter is passed to wsB, where wsB is a commercial data server. after getting the information from wsB, the details are then passed to wsC where here the details are saved into internal server. i must avoid or have minimal contact to wsB because though it has data about anything, it is also a pay-per-use system. with all this web service / web service client, i become loss and blank. Help me guys. i need the logic.
You can try to save all data that you ever receive from wsB and include them in search at wsA. That way you are not "wasting" any data, if you receive something once, you have it for good.
I need to create an application for a company and they would like to have people login to the application to have different permissions to perform different tasks.
My initial idea was to create a MySQL database, hardcode the credentials into the application and have the application connect to the MySQL database. The MySQL database would then have a table called "users" which would store usernames, passwords and permissions. The application would then query the server and perform the authentication.
The biggest problem with this is having the MySQL credentials hard coded into the application. If the application gets into the wrong hands, they could do lots of damage to the MySQL database if they snoop around to find the credentials and start dropping tables.
So I thought of developing a server that acts as an interface for the MySQL Database. For example, the client application would connect to the Server via TCP, and the server connects to a MySQL database. That way the MySQL credentials are never exposed to end-users. However, this means I have to develop a server application which a) will be harder to maintain and deploy for my customer (as opposed to just setting up a MySQL Server) and b)Has potential to introduce more bugs since I have an additional system I need to make (which relates back to point a for deploying bug fixes, etc)
So I was thinking instead of having a table of users in the database and having the application connect directly to the MySQL server with hardcoded credentials, the end-user would be given actual MySQL user credentials in which they would enter into the application to connect to the MySQL server. This means if someone gets their hands on the application, they can't do any damage to the MySQL database, but there still remains the risk of an end-user giving their credentials to the wrong person.
What are the best ways to have a desktop application connect to a MySQL database? Are there any other solutions other than the 3 I have thought of, or do you have any thoughts on my solutions?
As #Perception noted. Your best bet here is to implement a web service in front of MySQL. You don't want unknown numbers of clients from unknown IP addresses all having access to your database.
It would be really easy to DOS attack you by tying up MySQL connections. Not to mention that you would very severely limit your ability to scale your backend service to meet the demands of an increased client base without having a web service in between.
The web service could also offer you the ability to control user authentication and authorization in any number of ways (user/pass combination, token-based access, OAuth access, etc.).
Where I work there are two practices I have seen:
Each entity (person, thing, or business (depending on level of granularity needed) accessing the database) has their very own credentials. This was used on an MSSQL and on a Rocket Universe database. This is mostly the retail and legacy software.
We host the application ourselves and use a separate authentication system for users. The database credentials are stored on our server where the application is hosted. The client knows nothing of the backing database. These are usually web apps and web services.
Something you could do that we have done is that many of our applications actually talk through a RESTful service that emulates the database in a way. The application itself has no access to the database. I would read the wikipedia article on restful services for more information. Our authentication is done using Nonce encoded HMAC requests where each user is given their very own key tied to their credentials.
Wrapping the database in a web service gives you a few possible advantages:
If you decide to change your database structure while keeping the same information, you might not even need to update the client applications, just the service.
Credentials never leave the server, your credentials remain safe so long as nobody gains access to your server. Security in general is increased.
If you do your service cleverly enough, you could even transfer much of the internal logic that would normally be client side onto the server, making updates and bugfixes virtually seamless to the client.
The disadvantages that I see:
It is one more thing to maintain
Your application is vulnerable to denial of service attacks, but since it is a database that's a possible problem anyway
If the server goes down, all the client applications go down, but again, still a problem anyway.
RESTful architecture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representational_state_transfer
HMAC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash-based_message_authentication_code
Our HMAC system works like so:
User logs in using username and password to their local application.
The local application communicates to our authentication service and gets a "Session Key" and shared secret for that username and password.
Using the Session Key (which expires in a short period of time), the application creates an API Key (which lasts a long time) and stores it to the computer. The session key could be used instead of an API Key if the user is required to log in each time. We mainly did it this way for convenience for some programs. If the computer is not secure, the Session Key should be used only and no API key is stored on the local machine. Each time the user logs in, they get a new Session Key.
Each request to the database service is accompanied by a HMAC-signed nonce which the application gets from the authorization service based on the API key. After getting the nonce, the application signs it using the shared secret. These signed requests can only be used once since the web service (which the user could know nothing about) authenticates the request. Once the signed nonce has been authenticated server-side by seeing if hashing the nonce with that particular API/Session Key's shared secret results in the same digest, the nonce is marked expired and the request is granted.
The above is vulnerable to man-in-the-middle attacks if HTTPS is not used, so often people make a message based on the nonce and the URL being requested along with a timestamp and compute the HMAC on that. The server then recreates the message based on the URL, checks to see if the timestamp is within some bounds (+/- 4mins or something), and then authorizes the user based on that information.
To further granulate operations, we also have a role system which checks to see if the user who owns the Session/API Key has been given permission to request the thing that they were requesting. If they have the appropriate role, the request is granted.
Summary: Credentials are done user-by-user, the end user has no knowledge of the database, a web service wraps the database in a RESTful API, and a role based system is used to make permissions granular.
This is just a suggestion and I am not saying this is the best or only way to do this. This just happens to be how we have ended up doing it where I work.
Let's look at two ways of dealing with database:
Client directly connects database, and manipulate database
Server connects to database and provide interface for client to use
Considering your use case:
valid valid serial number or to store/read information about certain user
it can be designed in the following way to provide security. (I'm no expert in this)
Client directly connects database, and manipulate database
You don't have to use your admin to visit database, instead you create a user for client only, and limit user's access privilege to only viewing (certain data). And you can enforce security policy at database by changing privilege for this user.
you can consult MySQL :: MySQL 5.1 Reference Manual :: 6 Security for more info.
6.2 The MySQL Access Privilege System
6.3 MySQL User Account Management
Server connects to database and provide interface for client to use
You can use HTTP and provide interface to client to use. And only the backend connects to the database.
Something like RESTful API, there are many easy to use framework that provides authentication and authorization.
I don't think it's good idea to let client have direct access to database in your case. So if possible, the second option is better.
Also note that password based authentication is not ideal.
I want to make few webservices, all of them will require login/pass authorization. I want to keep them all sync (one login, one password to all services), but also I want to share session between them.
If user is log in to service A, and open service B its automatically log in to this same account on service B like in service A.
How this is usually implemented?
I would consider a database to support the sessions.
You could have a database record that holds key session information. If the database supports BLOB fields you could even hold more complex session data.
The record would have a "cookie thing" that the web service requests would present, the service implementation code would take that "cookie thing" and look in the database table(s) to see if a login event had correctly occurred recently.
(I say "cookie thing" because if it is a webservice it may not actually be a browser coming in).
This is called a distributed session, implementations vary per webserver.
For Tomcat: http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-6.0-doc/cluster-howto.html
For WebSphere: http://pic.dhe.ibm.com/infocenter/wasinfo/v7r0/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.ibm.websphere.nd.iseries.doc%2Finfo%2Fiseriesnd%2Fae%2Fcprs_persistent_sessions.html
You can also store persisted variable in a database, which may be easier in your case.
I need to come up with a scheme for remote devices running linux to push data to a web service via https. I'm not sure how I want to handle authentication. Can anyone see any security risks by including some kind of authentication in the body of the request itself? I'm thinking of having the request body be JSON, and it would look like this:
{
'id':'some unique id',
'password':'my password',
'data':1234
}
If the id and password in the JSON don't match what is in my database, the request gets rejected.
Is there a problem with this? Is there a better way to ensure that only my clients can push data?
That scheme is primitive, but it works.
Usually a real session is preferred since it offers some advantages:
separation of authentication and request
history of requests in a session
credentials get sent only once for multiple requests
flexible change of authentication strategy
...