controller specific iis logging with ASP.NET MVC in IIS - c#

I want to log visits only for some controllers (or routes) as it was possible with classic ASP.NET pages by checking/unchecking the 'log visits' checkbox in IIS.
Does anyone know if this is possible somehow? A solution without a custom logging component would be fantastic! Please share your knowledge, if you know how ;)
Thanks in advance

Create a BaseController which the controllers that you want to record data for inherit from. Then create an ActionFilter which overrides the OnActionExecuted method and apply it to the base controller. Something like this..
public class ActionExecutedFilter : System.Web.Mvc.ActionFilterAttribute
{
UnitOfWork unitOfWork= new UnitOfWork();
public override void OnActionExecuted(ActionExecutedContext filter)
{
Transaction tran = new Transaction();
tran.Controller = filter.ActionDescriptor.ControllerDescriptor.ControllerName;
tran.ActionName = filter.ActionDescriptor.ActionName;
tran.User = HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name;
tran.Date = DateTime.Now;
unitOfWork.TransactionRepository.Insert(tran);
unitOfWork.Save();
}
}
This will save to a database table called Transactions information for every time a action method is called on that controller, recording the user, controller and action method name. Obviously I just typed in the UnitOfWork method of saving to the database, you can just plug in whichever method you like. I usually keep these methods in a filters folder, add a using statement then add it to the controller like so;
[ActionExecutedFilter]
public class BaseController : Controller
{
}
Again, just make all the controller you wish to record data from inherit the BaseController.
You could also use something like Log4Net, but I find just doing it this way gets what I need. Whatever you think yourself.
http://dotnetdarren.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/logging-in-mvc-part-4-log4net/

A solution without a custom logging component would be fantastic!
Apart from basic IIS diagnostic logs, I cannot think of any ASP.Net MVC specific Logging features in IIS.
One simple solution what I want to offer is to write a HttpModule. In the HttpModule you can log the requests. Also if you want to have control on what to log and what not to, then based on Routes you can make that happen in HttpModule. Advantage with HttpModule is it is easy to plug in and also easy to remove.
Make HttpModule work only on certain routes
When it comes to logging itself, you can have your own custom logic to database or to log file. But you can opt for ELMAH or Log4Net or Enterprise Logging Application Block

Related

Insert a routing parameter before {controller}

I have a working API with a bunch of controllers, with a single database specified in config file.
Now I want to make the the API multi database and make the target database a part of the url.
I use attributes on controllers now and default routing.
Startup.cs:
app.UseMVC();
FolderController.cs:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class FoldersController : ControllerBase { ...
and action on controller:
[HttpGet("{Parent:Guid}", Name = "Get")]
public IActionResult Get(Guid Parent) {...
So what that gives me is the standard overall template that looks like this:
https://api.example.com/api/{controller}/{action}
What I'd want is to make the database a part of the url, the intuitive place being in front of the controller. I can also skip the second api bit as I'm not running anything else on that base address.
https://api.example.com/{database}/{controller}/{action}
I've been able to extract the database name by changing the controller attribute to:
[Route("{database}/[controller]")]
But then I'd have to insert code in every action method to check for route etc, with the risk of not implementing it consitently (beside the extra typing).
Ideally I'd like to add this to the default route in startup.cs, and add a service to the middleware that would check the privileges for the authenticated user on the requested database and continue as appropriate. That way I'd have my security in one place and no way to forget it in a controller.
I havent been able to figure out how to mix that with the attributes, they seem to conflict with each other.
Can this be done? Does anyone have some pointers for me get out of this?
By understand I know we can do it. You need to implement IHttpHandler.
You can refer to the following example https://www.c-sharpcorner.com/article/dynamic-and-friendly-url-using-mvc/

Proper way to route to controllers in Umbraco ASP.NET / IApplicationEventHander vs ApplicationEventHandler vs RouteConfig.cs, RenderMvcController etc

I have a Solution structure like this:
MyApp.Core
--Properties
--References
--bin
--Events
|EventHandlers.cs
--Directory
--Controllers
|DirectoryController.cs
--Helpers
|ContextHelpers.cs
--Models
|DirectoryModel.cs
--AnotherSite
--Controllers
--Helpers
--Models
--Services
--Shared
--Controllers
|HomePageController.cs
--Helpers
|Extensions.cs
|app.config
|packages.config
MyApp.Umbraco
--Properties
--References
--bin
etc........
--Views
--Directory
--Partials
|DirectoryFilters.cshtml
|DirectoryBase.cshtml
|DirectoryHome.cshtml
|FDirectory.cshtml
|SDirectory.cshtml
--Partials
--Shared
|Base.cshtml
|Web.config
etc........
My Umbraco instance uses the models and controllers from my "Core" project. There is nested directory structure, because of multiple websites in one installation, in the "Core", and also in the "Views" directory in the Umbraco instance.
I am still fairly noob to .NET MVC, and I understand route hijacking, but the documentation for Umbraco's routing is slim. I have the following:
EventHandlers.cs
namespace MyApp.Core.Events
{
/// <summary>
/// Registers site specific Umbraco application event handlers
/// </summary>
public class MyAppStartupHandler : IApplicationEventHandler
{
public void OnApplicationInitialized(UmbracoApplicationBase umbracoApplication, ApplicationContext applicationContext)
{
}
public void OnApplicationStarted(UmbracoApplicationBase umbracoApplication, ApplicationContext applicationContext)
{
RegisterCustomRoutes();
}
public void OnApplicationStarting(UmbracoApplicationBase umbracoApplication, ApplicationContext applicationContext)
{
}
private static void RegisterCustomRoutes()
{
// Custom Routes
RouteTable.Routes.MapUmbracoRoute(
"FDirectory",
"fdirectory/{id}",
new
{
controller = "Directory",
action = "FDirectory",
id = UrlParameter.Optional
},
new PublishedPageRouteHandler(1000));
RouteTable.Routes.MapUmbracoRoute(
"SDirectory",
"sdirectory/{id}",
new
{
controller = "Directory",
action = "SDirectory",
id = UrlParameter.Optional
},
new PublishedPageRouteHandler(1001));
RouteTable.Routes.MapUmbracoRoute(
"HomePage",
"",
new
{
controller = "HomePage",
action = "Index",
id = UrlParameter.Optional
},
new PublishedPageRouteHandler(1002));
}
}
public class PublishedPageRouteHandler : UmbracoVirtualNodeRouteHandler
{
private readonly int _pageId;
public PublishedPageRouteHandler(int pageId)
{
_pageId = pageId;
}
protected override IPublishedContent FindContent(RequestContext requestContext, UmbracoContext umbracoContext)
{
if (umbracoContext != null)
{
umbracoContext = ContextHelpers.EnsureUmbracoContext();
}
var helper = new UmbracoHelper(UmbracoContext.Current);
return helper.TypedContent(_pageId);
}
}
}
DirectoryController.cs
namespace MyApp.Core.Directory.Controllers
{
public class DirectoryController : RenderMvcController
{
public DirectoryController() : this(UmbracoContext.Current) { }
public DirectoryController(UmbracoContext umbracoContext) : base(umbracoContext) { }
public ActionResult FDirectory(RenderModel model)
{
return CurrentTemplate(new DirectoryModel(model.Content));
}
public ActionResult SDirectory(RenderModel model)
{
return CurrentTemplate(new DirectoryModel(model.Content));
}
}
}
So Umbraco does not install with an App_Start folder. I would like to know what the best approach is for a multi-site installation of Umbraco for registering the routes to the controllers. My implementation works, but it seems like I shouldn't have to create actions for every single page I am going to have in a site, in every controller. I know Umbraco has its own routing, so using Umbraco concepts, ASP.NET MVC concepts, and whatever else is available, what is the best way to implement this type of solution structure? Should I even worry about using a RouteConfig.cs and create a App_Start directory? Or is what I am doing the best approach? Should I use IApplicationEventHandler or ApplicationEventHandler?
Also, I have to hard code the node ID's. I've read that there is a way to Dynamically? And example of this would be great.
Examples of the best way to implement a structured multi-site Umbraco MVC solution is what I am asking for I guess, in regards to routing the controllers, with some detail, or links to strong examples. I have searched and researched, and there are bits and pieces out there, but not really a good example like what I am working with. I am going to have to create a RouteMap for every single page I create at this point, and I don't know if this is the most efficient way of doing this. I even tried implementing a DefaultController, but didn't see the point of that when your solution is going to have multiple controllers.
I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to achieve with this, but I'll try to explain how it works and maybe you can clarify afterwards.
I assume you have the basics of Umbraco figured out (creating document types + documents based on the document types). This is how Umbraco is normally used and it will automatically do routing for you for each of these "content nodes" (documents) you create in a site.
So create a document named document1 and it will be automatically routed in your site at URL: http://localhost/document1. By default this document will be served through a default MVC controller and it will all take place behind the scenes without you having to do anything.
Route hijacking allows you to override this default behavior and "shove in" a controller that lets you interfere with how the request is handled. To use hijacking you create a RenderMvcController with the alias of your document type. That could be HomePageController : RenderMvcController.
This controller should have an action with the following signature:
public override ActionResult Index(RenderModel model)
In this action you are able to modify the model being sent to the view in any way you like. That could be - getting some external data to add on to the model or triggering some logic or whatever you need to do.
This is all automatically hooked up by naming convention and you will not have to register any routes manually for this to work.
The other type of Umbraco MVC controller you can create is a SurfaceController. This one is usually used for handling rendering of child actions and form submissions (HttpPost). The SurfaceController is also automatically routed by Umbraco and will be located on a "not so pretty" URL. However since it is usually really not used for anything but rendering child actions and taking form submits, it doesn't really matter what URL it is located at.
Besides these auto-routed controllers you are of course able to register your own MVC controllers like in any standard MVC website. The one difference though is that unlike a normal ASP.NET MVC website, an Umbraco site does not have the automagical default registration of controllers allowing the routing to "just work" when creating a new controller.
So if you want to have a plain old MVC controller render in an Umbraco site without it being related to a document/node in Umbraco, you would have to register a route for it like you would do in any other MVC site. The best way of doing that is to hook in and add it to the Routes using an ApplicationEventHandler class. That will automatically be triggered during application startup - essentially allowing you to do what you would normally do in App_Start.
Just to be clear though - if you plan on using data from Umbraco, you should not be using normal MVC controllers and should not require any manual route registration to be done. You usually want to render a template/view in context of a document/node created in Umbraco (where you can modify data/properties of the document) and then the route hijacking is the way to go.
From what it looks like, it could seem that the correct way to do what you are trying to do is to simply create two document types:
FDirectory and SDirectory
You click to allow both of these to be created in root and then you create documents called FDirectory and SDirectory and they will be automatically routed on these URLs. Creating a RenderMvcController's called FDirectoryController : RenderMvcController will then make sure it is used to hijack the routing whenever that page is requested.
If you're simply trying to set up a multi-site solution I would suggest you create a Website document type and create a node for each site you want, in the root of your Umbraco content tree. Right click each of these nodes and edit the hostname to be whatever you need it to be. This can also be some "child url" like /fdirectory or /sdirectory in case you need to test this on localhost without using multiple hostnames.
Hope this gives you the pointers needed, otherwise try to explain what you are trying to do and I'll see if I can refine my answer a bit!

Front Controller in MVC c#

Could someone tell me which is the front controller in MVC 4 c# visual studio please?
I mean, i have to do a big application and i want add security to restrict the access to the controllers and actions. I used to do this in the Logistic of the Front Controller in CodeIgniter, adding a token to the session, so if someone wanted to write the route manually on the browser he couldnt access.
I've been reading about [Authorize(Roles="Admin")] and i have to admit that is a solution, but that means i have to write in every method of the all controllers, and i want to have that centralized in the front-controller with IF/ELSE.
PD: If you don't know how to do this, at least try to tell me where can i find the front controller in MVC c# visual studio please.
Thanks for all.
There is no front controller in MVC. You need to create a base controller , And your every controller will inherit Base controller.
public class BaseController : Controller
{
protected override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext)
{
var getControllerName = filterContext.ActionDescriptor.ControllerDescriptor.ControllerName;
var getActionName = filterContext.ActionDescriptor.ActionName;
//Write your code here
}
}
Now Inherit your controller with Base controller.
public class AccountController : BaseController
{
//Your action goes here.
}
There is no such thing as a front controller in ASP MVC. I think the thing you're looking for is some sort of base controller where all of the other controllers inherit from.
You can add this Authorize attribute to methods or classes (whole controllers). If every action needs this attribute I suggest to create a master controller and let every controller inherit from this controller.
Consider using action filters.
http://www.asp.net/mvc/overview/older-versions-1/controllers-and-routing/understanding-action-filters-cs

Authorization in ASP.net5

I am trying to see if there is something "out of the box" in ASP.net5 for authorization for my application needs. I am using a group/permission based approach for authorization. Using Identity3 I am using Role as Group and then I have created permissions from this. Each permission has a resource that it links to and 1 or more values, like:
Resource = Page, Permissions = Add, Update, View, Delete
Another complication is that the groups have dynamic names, and dynamic permissions!!
I have started to read about authorization in ASP.net5 and it seems that I have found something called Policies, which sound good. It seems to force you to use Claims, which is possible if I use a ClaimsTransformer to get all my permissions and add them as claims from the Db. But am I right in thinking that I would have to create a policy for each Permission, on each resource? That seems like a lot of setup.
Is there anything that I do not know about is already built in ASP.net5 that I could use? Like an attribute like this
[Authorize("Page", "Delete")]
Which I could add to the PageController Delete method.
If I have to use some sort of service and DI that into the controller to implement this, then that would be fine as well.
There is a ClaimsPrincipalPermissionAttribute that can fit to your requirements.
Or you can implement your own AuthorizeAttribute.
I use AspNet.Security.OpenIdConnect.Server for authorization. But you can also have a look at OpenIddict
In any case you can add the Authorize attribute to any method you want like this
[Authorize(Roles = "Administrator,SimpleUser,AnOtherRole")]
public void MyMethod() {}
Resource based authorization might fulfill your needs, but I am a little confused with the page being the resource, rather than what the page acts upon.
Taking your Page/Delete combination, I would imagine that rather than the resource being Page, your Page Delete action takes a parameter, indicating the page that is to be deleted? (If this is not the case then this approach isn't going to work of course)
In this case you'd do something like
[Authorize]
public class PageController : Controller
{
IAuthorizationService _authorizationService;
public PageController(IAuthorizationService authorizationService)
{
_authorizationService = authorizationService;
}
public Delete(int pageId)
{
var page = pageRepo.GetPage(pageId);
if (await authorizationService.AuthorizeAsync(User, page, Operations.Delete))
{
return View(page);
}
else
{
return new ChallengeResult();
}
}
}
In order to enable this you're write a handler based on page and an Operations requirement (or any old requirement, but a parameterized operations requirement means you can write a single handler and branch accordingly).
We tried very hard to move away from putting data in the attribute, and move it into requirements, because data in attributes is, to be frank, a maintenance nightmare.
One other thing to note; as handlers are resolved through DI you could inject your user to permissions resolver into the handler, which would avoid using claims transformation.
ASP.NET provides authentication mechanism out of the box which is easy to use, example:
public class HomeController : Controller
{
[Authorize]
public ActionResult Index()
{
ViewBag.Message = "This can be viewed only by authenticated users only";
return View();
}
[Authorize(Roles="admin")]
public ActionResult AdminIndex()
{
ViewBag.Message = "This can be viewed only by users in Admin role only";
return View();
}
}
Check this tutorial
Or if you want more sophisticated mechanism you can implement your own memberhsip provider based on the ASP.NET Membership Provider

skip all Umbraco magic for single method

I was just assigned to implement one functionality in project that uses Umbraco. My job is to basically generate specific XML and return it to user. However i cannot get it to work, because when i create new controller (i've tried creating
Controller, RenderMvcController and SurfaceController
) and method in it (also if i just create new method in existing controller), i get error 404 after typing url into browser. Example: I create TestController and method Index in it. I've tried combinations where TestController was derived from RenderMvcController or SurfaceController or just Controller. After compiling, etc. when i run
http://my_address/Test
or
http://my_address/Test/Index
i get 404 error from umbraco. I looked at another pages in umbraco that were already in project and they all are also configured somehow in umbraco web panel:
http://my_address/umbraco
I aslo tried adding new methods to existings controllers, but no luck (again 404 errors). I've never worked with umbraco and i don't know how to configure it. I just want to know if there is any way to create method which will be accessible at:
http://my_address/MyMethod
or
http://my_address/MyController/MyMethod
and would return just exactly what i will program it to (without any Views, Partial Views, etc. - i can set Headers and ContentType manually and my content is pure text) in an existing Umbraco project without having to deal with umbraco admin panel?
Thanks for any help :)
//Edit
My mind is officially blown... My response is culture dependent (i mean i pull different data from db depending on country), but it's not as simple as
CurrentCulture.CultureInfo
Umbraco is configured to return different culture based on domain extension (Germany for .de, Great Britain for .co.uk, and Dennmark for .dk - it's just a manual configuration in umbraco admin panel assigning different culture info and views to different hostnames). Regular controllers get this modified culture from
RenderModel.CurrentCulture
passed as argument to controller's method. Is there a way to create umbraco controller/method/anthing that will not have layout/model assigned to it (so i can display pure XML data i receive from external service) and still have access to umbraco's RenderModel's culture? What i am trying to create is if user types url:
http://my_address.de/myController/myMethod
my controller will get current culture, call external service passing culture as parameter and display received data without wrapping it in any views. Example:
public class myController : SomeBaseUmbracoControllerOrsomething
{
public string/XmlDocument/ActionResult myMethod(RenderModel model)
{
int countryId = myFunctionToTranslateCultureToCountryId(model.CurrentCulture);
return MethodThatCallsExternalServiceAndReturnsXml(countryId);
}
}
Sorry for confusion, but i've learned about this whole mess with countries just now...
You don't want to use
controller, because this is not picked up by umbraco routing process
you don't want to use RenderMvcController, because this is overkill
you don't want to use Surfacecontroller because you are not using a Child action or form.
What you need is a UmbracoApiController (http://our.umbraco.org/documentation/Reference/WebApi/) or is your umbraco version is PRE 6.1 then use /Base extention (http://our.umbraco.org/documentation/Reference/Api/Base/Index)
Or if you really want to skip ALL umbraco magic for a certain route, add the path to the web.config/AppSettings/umbracoReservedUrls.

Categories

Resources