How the process Authentication is differ from authorization? In my winforms application with c# and mySQL I have a login page for validating an user, then shows the admin page if the user is admin and user home if he is not an admin, Actually what we are doing through a process of login? whether it is authorizing or authenticating an user?
Authentication: The process of a user, authenticating(Log In) themselves to a system to use the features provided.
Authorization: Being authorized to, for instance, see a specific page of your application.
Quick example: If a user logged in to your system, and they are authenticated as a user with user permissions, you will not allow them to see your admin pages, since the user does not have the same authorization as a Admin in your application.
In your scenario, when the user logs in, it is the process of authentication.
in short
when you try to login is Authentication (verify user by his identity like login credential)
after successful login user have some authority(like admin can change everything and user can only view they can add or edit some thing depends on access) is called Authorization
The first process, the process of validating an user is called authentication where we check whether such an user with some user id and password is belongs to our database.
The second process, based on the type of user or the level of user in the hierarchy we are disable or enables some/few pages and/or redirecting to admin home/user home these processes are called Authorization.
Related
I have a WinForms application that uses custom authentication (username/password).
In addition to this, I would like to associate Windows/AD users to app users so that if a Windows/AD user is logged in, my app does not request login credentials.
In app user management I could associate the Windows/AD user SID to the app user, and then check it later: when app is launched, if an app user with the currently logged in SID associated is found, then this user is authenticated on the app without requesting password.
I wonder if there may be security issues with this approach.
While SSO is enabled for an organization, can an API account still use Legacy Authentication (username/password still being used for this account) on behalf of a user that has SSO enabled?
Our company wants to transition to using SSO for all user accounts (except possibly the API account). Currently, we use DocuSign's Legacy Authentication header (X-DocuSign-Authentication) to send envelopes on behalf of users and create sender views for them. Both of these actions involve using our API account's username and password for authentication on behalf of a user.
I've read this post that says:
If you're using Legacy Header authentication, your application won't
be able to authenticate as users who have SSO Login enforced. Until
you're able to implement one of the OAuth workflows, users who need to
use your API integration will need to have their Login Policy set to
allow them to login with a password.
Does this mean that any user account that will be sent on behalf of them will need to have SSO disabled while the Legacy Authentication header (and API account using username/password) is being used?
In addition, we are trying to avoid having every user separately authorize the application to act on their behalf. This post seems to mention there is a way to avoid that. Both the Authorization Code Grant and JWT Grant state that you must get your user's consent. We want to avoid this since we have 100's of members and staff additional staff added frequently.
Optimally, we would like to keep the API things as they are. If we can't or shouldn't, what changes do we have to make?
If SSO is enabled, a user can still authenticate via their DocuSign password, and thus Legacy Header auth will still work. If SSO Authentication is made mandatory via Login Policy settings, the user cannot authenticate with their DocuSign password, and Legacy Header auth will break.
If your authenticating "system sender" user has SSO optional, the SendOnBehalfOf header can be used to impersonate anyone on the account, regardless of the other user's Login Policy settings.
If you have a Claimed Domain, you can grant Admin consent so that all users with email addresses under that claimed domain (current and future) will not be required to grant individual consent for JWT impersonation. More information on that is available here: https://www.docusign.com/blog/developers/oauth-jwt-granting-consent
I'm working on a .Net application in which user can authenticate with a form using an Id or a Microsoft account (Azure Active Directory). The problem is that a user who doesn't yet have an account on my application can still connect via AD. After authentication, I would like to redirect him to a registration page for his account to be approved first. Since he is already authenticated, is there a way to prevent access to other pages?
I need some help, Thank you.
I have a web application which is largely a content system - that is, it displays help for another system. It doesn't matter who views it. However, there is a list of users I would like to display, and also provide a way to edit the list. On that one page I want to detect the user's Active Directory information, and if the user is in the list of users authorized to change the data, then display an edit icon button to provide a means of editing some element. I do not need nor want Windows Authentication determining whether the user can get to the page, only to discobver the user's logon creds.
In short, I want this:
// Get the user's creds
// Is user a page editor?
if (IsPageEditor(UserCreds))
{
// put icon buttons for editing
}
else
{
// don't put icon button there
}
First of course is, getting the user credentials. I should add that this will all be on a private company intranet, and every user will be signed into the network.
I do not need nor want Windows Authentication determining whether the user can get to the page, only to discobver the user's logon creds.
Why not? Windows Authentication is the obvious, secure way to discover the Windows identity of the connected user.
Any other mechanism is insecure, i.e. a user who is not authorized to edit could spoof an authorized user's identity. Using Windows Authentication doesn't preclude you from allowing any user to access the application.
My understanding of setting Windows.Authentication ON is that it will challenge the user to give user name and password before allowing to view the page
No, this isn't correct. If the server is in the same domain as the client, and the server is configured to allow all domain users to connect, there doesn't need to be a prompt to the end user.
Our trouble ticket system "knows" who we are when we access the page -- it must be getting this information from Active Directory, from the current logged in user.
Probably it is using Windows authentication. Try examining the HTTP flow between the browser and your trouble ticket system with a tool such as Fiddler: you'll probably see an authentication challenge/response.
To get the current logged in user you need to call WindowsIdentity.GetCurrent();
From there you can do a lot of things depending on your requirement, get users groups, get OU information etc. For a full AD wrapper I have a full article here
http://macaalay.com/2010/06/28/active-directory-c/
Is it possible to mix all these access controls in one site?
I have a requirement saying
a) Users from the AD must be allowed
access, using integrated security
b) Users from some other AD must be
allowed access; potentially by
logging in
c) Users not in the AD's
should be able to create a new
account on the site.
Now, ofcourse, i would like the site not to care about where a user was authenticated; just that he was.
What is the best way to achieve this?
I did something like this on a project a while ago, and it worked like this:
I set the application to use Forms Authentication, with anonymous access enabled in IIS.
I created a standard Forms Authentication login page that accepted a user ID and password to do non-integrated logins.
I also made a special .aspx page for integrated security login and set ONLY that one page to use integrated security (and not anonymous access) in IIS. This page manually created a Forms Authentication ticket based on the credentials from IIS.
In the main Forms Authentication login page, I looked at the incoming address on the request to see if it was from the LAN, and if so, redirected to the integrated security login page (so the user did not get prompted for user ID and password, it just logged them in with integrated security).
I also made the Forms Authentication login page smart enough to determine, based on your user ID, if you were an AD user, and do an LDAP lookup against the AD if so to check your password. This enabled users who had AD accounts to log using their AD credentials even when not on the LAN (and thus not using integrated security). For non-AD users, verification was done against a separate list of user IDs and password hashes maintained by the application.
I think that there is an answer from the man himself. Basically you should use the usual asp.net membership provider model. But create your own custom provider that wrap the active directory and the sql provider. Maybe two different active directory providers.