So I have this application that only allow access to its resource when a valid oauth token is provided. I already have an #EnableResourceServer class that handles role based access to different endpoints. But what is the purpose of the block of code below? My app would not start unless I put in this generic block with some generic user name/password. The user/role/password here has no bearing on accessing the resource whatsoever. As long as the role in the oauth token matches the role specified in the #EnableResourcesServer, the caller will get proper response back from the app.
#EnableWebSecurity(debug = true)
public class SecurityConfig extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {
...
#Override
protected void configure(AuthenticationManagerBuilder auth) throws Exception
{
auth.inMemoryAuthentication() // creating user in memory
.withUser("user")
.password("password").roles("USER")
.and().withUser("admin")
.password("password").authorities("ROLE_ADMIN");
}
}
I found the issue, it was because I separated the access of resources in 2 classes, an #EnableResourceServer and an #EnableWebsecurity. The issue is resolved after removing the #EnableWebSecurity class and moving all access control to #EnableResourceServer.
Related
I am pretty new in Spring Security and I am working on a Spring Boot project that uses Basic Authentication in order to protect some APIs. I am starting from an existing tutorial code (a Udemy course) trying to adapt it to my own use cases.
In this project I have this SecurityConfiguration used to configure the basic authentication.
#Configuration
#EnableWebSecurity
public class SecurityConfiguration extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter
{
private static String REALM = "REAME";
private static final String[] USER_MATCHER = { "/api/utenti/cerca/**"};
private static final String[] ADMIN_MATCHER = { "/api/utenti/inserisci/**", "/api/utenti/elimina/**" };
#Override
protected void configure(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception
{
http.csrf().disable()
.authorizeRequests()
.antMatchers(USER_MATCHER).hasAnyRole("USER")
.antMatchers(ADMIN_MATCHER).hasAnyRole("ADMIN")
.anyRequest().authenticated()
.and()
.httpBasic().realmName(REALM).authenticationEntryPoint(getBasicAuthEntryPoint()).and()
.sessionManagement().sessionCreationPolicy(SessionCreationPolicy.STATELESS);
}
#Bean
public AuthEntryPoint getBasicAuthEntryPoint()
{
return new AuthEntryPoint();
}
/* To allow Pre-flight [OPTIONS] request from browser */
#Override
public void configure(WebSecurity web)
{
web.ignoring().antMatchers(HttpMethod.OPTIONS, "/**");
}
#Bean
public BCryptPasswordEncoder passwordEncoder()
{
return new BCryptPasswordEncoder();
};
#Bean
#Override
public UserDetailsService userDetailsService()
{
UserBuilder users = User.builder();
InMemoryUserDetailsManager manager = new InMemoryUserDetailsManager();
manager.createUser(users
.username("ReadUser")
.password(new BCryptPasswordEncoder().encode("BimBumBam_2018"))
.roles("USER").build());
manager.createUser(users
.username("Admin")
.password(new BCryptPasswordEncoder().encode("MagicaBula_2018"))
.roles("USER", "ADMIN").build());
return manager;
}
}
So from what I have understand:
Here it id defined the list of API that can be accessed by a nornmal user and the list of API that can be accessed by and admin user:
private static final String[] USER_MATCHER = { "/api/utenti/cerca/**"};
private static final String[] ADMIN_MATCHER = { "/api/utenti/inserisci/**", "/api/utenti/elimina/**" };
Into the previous configure() method basically it is stating that the API URL matching with the USER_MATCHER are accessible by logged user having role USER while API having URL matching ADMIN_MATCHER are accessible by logged user having role ADMIN. Is this interpretation correct?
Finnally the UserDetailsService bean simply define two users: one belonging to the USER "group" and the other one belonging to both the USER and ADMIN "group".
So, if I well understood, the first one will be aple only to access to the API having enpoint URL /api/utenti/cerca/** while the second one will be able to access also to the APIs having endpoint URLs /api/utenti/inserisci/** and /api/utenti/elimina/**
Is it my reasoning correct?
And now my doubt: into a controller class of this project I defined this method:
#RestController
#RequestMapping("api/users")
#Log
public class UserController {
#Autowired
UserService userService;
//#Autowired
//private BCryptPasswordEncoder passwordEncoder;
//#Autowired
//private ResourceBundleMessageSource errMessage;
#GetMapping(value = "/test", produces = "application/json")
public ResponseEntity<String> getTest() throws NotFoundException {
log.info(String.format("****** getTest() START *******"));
return new ResponseEntity<String>("TEST", HttpStatus.OK);
}
..............................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................
}
As you can see this method handling a GET request toward the localhost:8019/api/users/test endpoint.
This endpoint URL is not in any of the previous two list related the protected endpoint (it is not into the USER_MATCHER list neither into the ADMIN_MATCHER list. So I expected that simply this endpoint was not protected and accessible to everyone. But performing the previous request using PostMan, I obtain this error message:
HTTP Status 401 : Full authentication is required to access this resource
So basically it seems to me that also if this endpoint not belong to any protected endpoint list it is in some way protected anyway (it seems to me that at least the user must be authenticated (infact trying both the previous user I can obtain the expected output, so it should mean that the endpoint is not protected by the user rule but it is protected againts not authenticated access).
Why? Maybe it depende by the previous configure() method settings, in particular this line?
.anyRequest().authenticated()
In case is it possible to disable in some way to implement something like this:
If a called endpoint belong to one of the previous two lists (USER_MATCHER and ADMIN_MATCHER) --> the user must be authenticated and need to have the correct role.
If a called endpoint not belong to one of the previous lists --> everybody can access, also not authenticated user.
This approach make sense or am I loosing something?
I take this occasion to ask you also another information: do you think that it is possible to configure Spring security of this specific project in order to protect some specific endpoints using the basic authentication and some other specific endpoints using the JWT authentication.
Sone further notes to explain why this last question. This project is a microservice that at the moment is used by another microservice (used to generate JWT token) in order to obtain user information. (the other microservice call an API of this project in order to receive user information so it can generate a JWT token that will be used in my application. The comunication between these 2 microservice must use basic authentication).
Since this project contains all the entity classes used to map the tables related to the users on my DB, my idea was to use this project also for generic user management, so it could include functionality like: add a brand new user, changes information of an existing user, obtain the list of all the users, search a specific user, and so on.
These new APIs will be protected by JWT token because each API can be called from a specific user type having different privileges on the system.
So I am asking if in a situation like this I can add without problem 2 different types of authentication (basic authentication for the API that retrieve a user so the other microservice can obtain this info) and JWT authentication for all the other APIs. It make sense or is it better to create a brand new project for a new user management microservice?
So, if I well understood, the first one will be aple only to access to the API having enpoint URL /api/utenti/cerca/** while the second one will be able to access also to the APIs having endpoint URLs /api/utenti/inserisci/** and /api/utenti/elimina/**
Yes.
Why? Maybe it depende by the previous configure() method settings, in particular this line?
Yes, when using .anyRequest().authenticated(), any requests that have not been matched will have to be authenticated.
If a called endpoint not belong to one of the previous lists --> everybody can access, also not authenticated user.
You can achieve this by doing anyRequest().permitAll(). But this is not so secure because you are allowing access to every other endpoints, instead you should stay with anyRequest().authenticated() and allow access to specific endpoints manually, like so:
http
.authorizeRequests()
.antMatchers(USER_MATCHER).hasAnyRole("USER")
.antMatchers(ADMIN_MATCHER).hasAnyRole("ADMIN")
.antMatchers("/api/users/test").permitAll()
.anyRequest().authenticated()
...
While configuring the security of my Spring Boot application, I wanted to secure parts of the API depending on the PathVariable that is entered there. My current configuration is as follows:
#EnableWebSecurity
public class SecurityConfig extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {
//not important
#Override
public void configure(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
http.cors();
http.authorizeRequests()
.mvcMatchers("/api").authenticated()
.mvcMatchers("/api/TEST").hasAuthority("SCOPE_dep:TEST")
.and().oauth2ResourceServer().jwt();
}
}
In the the 'api/{PathVariable}' endpoint is the one I want to have customized, making sure that someone with the authority 'SCOPE_dep:TEST' can access the 'api/TEST' endpoint, someone with 'SCOPE_dep:TEST2' authority can access the 'api/TEST2' endpoint, even allowing more then one such endpoint for a user which has multiple of these authorities.
Is there a way to do this by using a type of wildcard/matcher that I'm unaware of, or is the only possiblity hardcoding all these different authorities?
I'm creating a new Spring REST application with some basic services and entities.
I added Spring Security and without overriding any class, i just added to application.properties a user and password.
So far so good, i opened Postman to try out a endpoint and it always return 401 to my requests.
I tried in postman set the authorization via "Basic Auth" (is what header WWW-Authenticate asks), tried "Digest auth" using the "Realm" value from the header. But none of it works.
Here is what i have in my application.properties
spring.security.user.name=root
spring.security.user.password=root
This is my request
https://imgur.com/URM3TGD
(Sorry i can't embbed the image because of my reputation)
And here is the endpoint
#PostMapping("saveUsuario")
public Usuario saveUsuario(Usuario usuario) {
return usuarioRepository.save(usuario);
}
(If possible) i don't want to override any Spring Security class, just "use as it".
Thank you!
So here is what i found.
Thanks to #jzheaux we discover that the problem was with the csrf configuration (Using POST request).
So i was forced to override the class WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter to disable it.
#EnableWebSecurity
public class WebSecurityConfig extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {
#Override
protected void configure(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
http.csrf().disable();
}
}
But then, the endpoints could be called without authentication!
So, this is the final code:
#EnableWebSecurity
public class WebSecurityConfig extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {
#Override
protected void configure(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
http.csrf().disable();
http.cors();
http.authorizeRequests().anyRequest().fullyAuthenticated();
http.httpBasic();
http.sessionManagement().sessionCreationPolicy(SessionCreationPolicy.NEVER);
}
}
First disable the CSRF.
Then enable Cors.
I set that i want any request to be fully authenticated
The challenge type is HTTP basic
I disable the creation of cookies so it'll always ask for credentials.
So far so good, it's working!
Per https://docs.spring.io/spring-boot/docs/1.5.0.RELEASE/reference/htmlsingle/#boot-features-security
you should change your password with
security.user.password=root
instead of spring.security.user.password=root
similar security properties that are overridable are in the #ConfigurationProperties class: SecurityProperties.java
See https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-boot/blob/v1.5.0.RELEASE/spring-boot-autoconfigure/src/main/java/org/springframework/boot/autoconfigure/security/SecurityProperties.java
I am using Spring Security in my application and I have a REST API exposed. The API authenticates the user who is trying to access the API and also I am using Spring's ACL implementation(placed as annotations PreAuthorize, PostAuthorize etc).
The problem is that there are some resources that can be accessed by non-logged in users, and some of that resource's operations can be used by logged in users only. To provide access to non-logged-in users, I have added those urls to the SecurityConfiguration class:
#Configuration
#EnableWebSecurity
#EnableGlobalMethodSecurity(prePostEnabled = true, securedEnabled = true)
#ImportResource("classpath:acl-config.xml")
public class SecurityConfiguration extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {
#Override
public void configure(WebSecurity web) throws Exception {
web.ignoring()
.antMatchers("/api/v1/resource1")
.antMatchers("/api/v1/resource2")
....
Now the problem is that whenever anyone accesses resource1 or resource2, the SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication() returns null. This is causing problems as I am using Spring's ACL implementation and the implementation's source files use the SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication() method and gets null in return. So ACL has stopped working. In my own code, I can get the authentication instance as mentioned here but not in ACL's source files.
I would like to do something in the configuration as a one time thing, so that even if I provide urls in SecurityConfiguration, I can still get SecurityContextHolder.getContext().getAuthentication() instance.
I am having a difficult time figuring out how to wire up spring security without forcing authentication. My specific app does not require the user to authenticate but the user can authenticate if they want.
I currently have a WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter set up that you can see at the end of this post. With this setup I'm getting a 403 on all /api/* requests and /j_spring_security_check.
Could someone please help me either fix my existing config or point me to a working example that accomplishes this?
Every example I see out there seems to require the user to authenticate and if they don't it throws a 403. In my app, I'm just using it to establish a session and at this point all users should be able to access all end points regardless of if they are authenticated or not.
WebSecurityConfig
#EnableWebSecurity
#Configuration
public class WebSecurityConfig extends WebSecurityConfigurerAdapter {
#Autowired
private ItAuthenticationProvider customAuthenticationProvider;
#Autowired
public void configureGlobal(AuthenticationManagerBuilder auth) {
auth.authenticationProvider(customAuthenticationProvider);
}
#Override
public void configure(WebSecurity web) throws Exception {
web.ignoring().antMatchers("/resources/**");
}
#Override
protected void configure(HttpSecurity http) throws Exception {
http.csrf().disable().authorizeRequests().antMatchers("/**").permitAll()
.antMatchers("/j_spring_security_check").permitAll()
.and().formLogin()
.loginProcessingUrl("/j_spring_security_check")
.defaultSuccessUrl("/successful.html")
.loginPage("/#login")
.permitAll()
.and()
.logout()
.logoutSuccessUrl("/successful.html");
}
}
You can take a look at this sample Spring Security application we built with Stormpath support. In this example, the home screen does not require authentication. Furthermore, the information that is displayed there is dynamically calculated based on whether the user is authenticated or not.
If I understand your requirement, you can use the anonymous authentication.
The documentation can be found here