Search Results

Search found 31 results on 2 pages for 'actionfilter'.

Page 1/2 | 1 2  | Next Page >

  • Model availability inside ActionFilter

    - by Sayed Ibrahim Hashimi
    I have created a new ActionFilter for an ASP.NET MVC application that I'm creating. I have an action which accepts an Http Post and the argument of the action method accepts an object, for which I have created and registered a custom model binder. I noticed that inside the IActionFilter.OnActionExecuting the value for filterContext.Controller.ViewData.Model is always null despite the fact that it looks like the model binder is always invoked before the action filter OnActionExecuting method. In contrast to this inside the IActionFilter.OnActionExecuted method of the same action filter the value for filterContext.Controller.ViewData.Model is not null. Do you guys know if this is by design or a bug? If by design are their any links which describe why this is? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Response.Redirect not working inside an custom ActionFilter

    - by mitch
    My code is the following public class SessionCheckAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute { public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { if (/*condition*/) { filterContext.HttpContext.Response.Redirect("http://www.someurl.com",true); } base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext); } } Now, the question is WHY does the action that is has [SessionCheck] applied to it STILL executes. Any ideas? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • MvcExtensions - ActionFilter

    - by kazimanzurrashid
    One of the thing that people often complains is dependency injection in Action Filters. Since the standard way of applying action filters is to either decorate the Controller or the Action methods, there is no way you can inject dependencies in the action filter constructors. There are quite a few posts on this subject, which shows the property injection with a custom action invoker, but all of them suffers from the same small bug (you will find the BuildUp is called more than once if the filter implements multiple interface e.g. both IActionFilter and IResultFilter). The MvcExtensions supports both property injection as well as fluent filter configuration api. There are a number of benefits of this fluent filter configuration api over the regular attribute based filter decoration. You can pass your dependencies in the constructor rather than property. Lets say, you want to create an action filter which will update the User Last Activity Date, you can create a filter like the following: public class UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute : FilterAttribute, IResultFilter { public UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute(IUserService userService) { Check.Argument.IsNotNull(userService, "userService"); UserService = userService; } public IUserService UserService { get; private set; } public void OnResultExecuting(ResultExecutingContext filterContext) { // Do nothing, just sleep. } public void OnResultExecuted(ResultExecutedContext filterContext) { Check.Argument.IsNotNull(filterContext, "filterContext"); string userName = filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated ? filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.Name : null; if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(userName)) { UserService.UpdateLastActivity(userName); } } } As you can see, it is nothing different than a regular filter except that we are passing the dependency in the constructor. Next, we have to configure this filter for which Controller/Action methods will execute: public class ConfigureFilters : ConfigureFiltersBase { protected override void Configure(IFilterRegistry registry) { registry.Register<HomeController, UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute>(); } } You can register more than one filter for the same Controller/Action Methods: registry.Register<HomeController, UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute, CompressAttribute>(); You can register the filters for a specific Action method instead of the whole controller: registry.Register<HomeController, UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute, CompressAttribute>(c => c.Index()); You can even set various properties of the filter: registry.Register<ControlPanelController, CustomAuthorizeAttribute>( attribute => { attribute.AllowedRole = Role.Administrator; }); The Fluent Filter registration also reduces the number of base controllers in your application. It is very common that we create a base controller and decorate it with action filters and then we create concrete controller(s) so that the base controllers action filters are also executed in the concrete controller. You can do the  same with a single line statement with the fluent filter registration: Registering the Filters for All Controllers: registry.Register<ElmahHandleErrorAttribute>(new TypeCatalogBuilder().Add(GetType().Assembly).Include(type => typeof(Controller).IsAssignableFrom(type))); Registering Filters for selected Controllers: registry.Register<ElmahHandleErrorAttribute>(new TypeCatalogBuilder().Add(GetType().Assembly).Include(type => typeof(Controller).IsAssignableFrom(type) && (type.Name.StartsWith("Home") || type.Name.StartsWith("Post")))); You can also use the built-in filters in the fluent registration, for example: registry.Register<HomeController, OutputCacheAttribute>(attribute => { attribute.Duration = 60; }); With the fluent filter configuration you can even apply filters to controllers that source code is not available to you (may be the controller is a part of a third part component). That’s it for today, in the next post we will discuss about the Model binding support in MvcExtensions. So stay tuned.

    Read the article

  • Asp.NET MVC ActionFilter cannot get Form Submit data

    - by Goden
    I want to use custom action filter to manipulate parameters to one action. User inputs: 2 names in a form ; Action: actually needs to take 2 ids; Action Filter (onExecuting, will verify the input names and if valid, convert them into 2 ids and replace in the routedata) because i don't want to put validation logic in Action Controller. here's part of the code: Routing Info routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{controller}/{action}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Home", action = "Index"} // Parameter defaults ); routes.MapRoute( "RelationshipResults", // Route Name "Relationship/{initPersonID}/{targetPersonID}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Relationship", action = "Results" }); Form to submit (Create 2 input box and submit via jquery) <% using (Html.BeginForm("Results", "Relationship", FormMethod.Post, new { id = "formSearch" })) {% ... <td align="left"><%: MvcWeibookWeb.Properties.Resource.Home_InitPersonName%></td> <td align="right"> <%= Html.TextBox("initPersonName")%></td> <td rowspan="3" valign="top"> <div id="sinaIntro"> <%: MvcWeibookWeb.Properties.Resource.Home_SinaIntro %> <br /> <%: MvcWeibookWeb.Properties.Resource.Genearl_PromotionSina %> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" width="90px"><%: MvcWeibookWeb.Properties.Resource.Home_TargetPersonName%></td> <td align="right"><%= Html.TextBox("targetPersonName")%></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" align="right"> <a href="#" class="btn-HomeSearch" onclick="$('#formSearch').submit();"><%: MvcWeibookWeb.Properties.Resource.Home_Search%></a> </td> Action Filter public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { Sina.Searcher searcher = new Sina.Searcher(Sina.Processor.UserNetwork); String initPersonName, targetPersonName; // form submit names, we need to process them and convert them to IDs before it enters the real controller. initPersonName = filterContext.RouteData.Values["initPersonName"] as String; targetPersonName = filterContext.RouteData.Values["targetPersonName"] as String; // do sth to convert it to ids and replace Action/Controller [ValidationActionFilter] [HandleError] public ActionResult Results( Int64 initPersonName, Int64 targetPersonName) { ... My problem is: in the actionFilter, it never gets the 2 parameter "initPersonName" and "targetPersonName", the RouteData.Values don't contain these 2 keys... :(

    Read the article

  • MVCContrib ActionFilter PassParametersDuringRedirect still passes reference type in querystring

    - by redsquare
    I am attempting to use the PRG pattern in an asp.net mvc 2 rc application. I found that the MVCContrib project has a custom action filter that will auto persist the parameters in TempData In an action I have the following return this.RedirectToAction(c => c.Requested(accountAnalysis)); however this is adding a querystring param to the request e.g http://mysite.com/account/add?model=MyProject.Models.AccountAnalysisViewModel Can anyone explain how I can use the PassParametersDuringRedirect filter attribute from MVCContrib to not pass the ViewModel type in the querystring. I see a patch was issued to fix this however in the latest MvcContrib that supports MVC 2 RC it is commented out as follows public static RedirectToRouteResult RedirectToAction<T>(this Controller controller, Expression<Action<T>> action) where T : Controller { /*var body = action.Body as MethodCallExpression; AddParameterValuesFromExpressionToTempData(controller, body); var routeValues = Microsoft.Web.Mvc.Internal.ExpressionHelper.GetRouteValuesFromExpression(action); RemoveReferenceTypesFromRouteValues(routeValues); return new RedirectToRouteResult(routeValues);*/ return new RedirectToRouteResult<T>(action); } Any help much appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Localize DisplayNameAttributes in ActionFilter?

    - by boris callens
    Is it possible to access the DisplayNameAttributes that are used on my ViewData.Model so I can Localize them before sending them to the view? Something like this: Public Void OnActionExecuted(ActionExecutedContext: filterContext) { foreach (DisplayNameAttribute attr in filterContext...) { attr.TheValue = AppMessages.GetLocazation(attr.TheValue); } } What I'm missing is how to access the attributes. Is this possible at all? P.S: We're using vb.net at my job and it's infiltrating my brain. So apologies if my C# is a tad off.

    Read the article

  • How do the httppost, httpput etc attributes in ASP.NET MVC 2 work?

    - by Tomas Lycken
    In ASP.NET MVC 2, a couple of new action filter attributes were introduced, as "shorthand" for attributes in ASP.NET MVC 1; for example, applying the HttpPostAttribute does the same thing as applying [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] to an action method. In addition, with the more verbose syntax, it is possible to combine different methods, in order to allow for example both Post and Delete. Now I'm wondering: how do the new attributes work? If I apply both [HttpPost] and [HttpDelete], will ASP.NET MVC 2 allow both or require both (thus allowing nothing)?

    Read the article

  • What is the order of execution in ASP.NET MVC Controller?

    - by Xinxua
    Say I have a controller called "HomeController" which inherits from Mvc.Controller. Also say I have written the constructor of the controller and some filters for some actions. Public Class ClientController Inherits System.Web.Mvc.Controller Public Sub New() ''Some code End Sub <SomeActionFilter()> _ Function Index() As ActionResult Return View() End Function End Class My questions are : What is the order of execution of constructor, filter, action? Can I have a filter for the Constructor, if I do not want to run the code in it by checking for some conditions?

    Read the article

  • How do I test ActionFilterAttributes that work with ModelState?

    - by Tomas Lycken
    As suggested by (among others) Kazi Manzur Rashid in this blog post, I am using ActionFilterAttributes to transfer model state from one request to another when redirecting. However, I find myself unable to write a unit test that test the behavior of these attributes. As an example, this what I want the test for the ImportModelStateAttribute to do: Setup the filterContext so that TempData[myKey] contains some fake "exported" ModelState (that is, a ModelStateDictionary I create myself, and add one error to) Make ModelState contain one model error. Call OnActionExecuting. Verify the two dictionaries are merged, and ModelState now contains both errors. I'm at a loss already on the second step.

    Read the article

  • Want to create a action filter to force Url to be using SSL

    - by Blankman
    I want to create a action filter that will check the url, and if its not using Ssl, redirect to the same page but with SSL. What is the best way of doing this? Should I just check the RawUrl, and scan the string for https, and if its not there then do: context.Response.Redirect(context.Request.RawUrl.Replace("http:", "https:"));

    Read the article

  • How to intercept 401 from Forms Authentication in ASP.NET MVC?

    - by Jiho Han
    I would like to generate a 401 page if the user does not have the right permission. The user requests a url and is redirected to the login page (I have deny all anonymous in web.config). The user logs in successfully and is redirected to the original url. However, upon permission check, it is determined that the user does not have the required permission, so I would like to generate a 401. But Forms Authentication always handles 401 and redirects the user to the login page. To me, this isn't correct. The user has already authenticated, the user just does not have the proper authorization. In other scenarios, such as in ajax or REST service scenario, I definitely do not want the login page - I need the proper 401 page. So far, I've tried custom Authorize filter to return ViewResult with 401 but didn't work. I then tried a normal Action Filter, overriding OnActionExecuting, which did not work either. What I was able to do is handle an event in global.asax, PostRequestHandlerExecute, and check for the permission then write out directly to response: if (permissionDenied) { Context.Response.StatusCode = 401; Context.Response.Clear(); Context.Response.Write("Permission Denied"); Context.Response.Flush(); Context.Response.Close(); return; } That works but it's not really what I want. First of all, I'm not even sure if that is the right event or the place in the pipeline to do that. Second, I want the 401 page to have a little more content. Preferably, it should be an aspx page with possibly the same master page as the rest of the site. That way, anyone browsing the site can see that the permission is denied but with the same look and feel, etc. but the ajax or service user will get the proper status code to act on. Any idea how this can be achieved? I've seen other posts with similar requests but didn't see a solution that I can use. And no, I do not want a 403.

    Read the article

  • What is the order of execution when dealing with .NET MVC 2 Action Filters?

    - by user357933
    Say I have: [Attribute1(Order=0)] public class Controller1 { [Attribute2] [Attribute3] public ActionResult Action1() { ... } } The attributes get executed in the following order: 2, 3, 1 This makes sense because attributes 2 and 3 have an order of -1 and will be executed before attribute 1 which has an explicitly set order equal to 0. Now, lets say I have: [Attribute1] [Attribute2(Order=0)] public class Controller1 { [Attribute3] public ActionResult Action1() { ... } } The attributes get executed in the following order: 1, 2, 3 Why is it that attribute 2 in this case (which has an order equal to 0) is executed before attribute 3 (which has an order equal to -1)?

    Read the article

  • Testing ActionFilterAttributes with MSpec

    - by Tomas Lycken
    I'm currently trying to grasp MSpec, mainly to learn new ways of (T/B)DD to be able to make an educated decision on which technology to use. Previously, I've mostly (read: only) used the built-in MSTest framework with Moq, so BDD is quite new for me. I'm writing an ASP.NET MVC app, and I want to implement PRG. Last time I did this, I used action filters to export and import ModelState via TempData, so that I could return a RedirectResult and the validation errors would still be there when the user got the view. I tested that scenario by verifying two things: a) That the ExportModelStateAttribute I had written was applied (among tests for my controller) b) That the attribute worked (among tests for action filter attributes) However, in BDD I've understood I should be even more concerned with behavior, and even less with implementation. This means I should probably just verify that the model state is in tempdata when the action has finished executing - not necessarily that it's done via an attribute. To further complicate things, attributes are not run when calling the action directly in the test, so I can't just call the action and see if the job's been done. How should I spec/test this in MSpec?

    Read the article

  • Using Action Filters for user login in Asp.NET MVC?

    - by ripper234
    I recently built a site using Asp.Net. The way I chose to implement user login is through a base 'UserAwareController' class, that all controllers extend. It contained a reference to the UserRepository, and exposed a protected GetCurrentUser() method that concrete controllers could query. The whole process felt a bit wishy-washy to me. Is Action Filters a good alternative? What are its benefits? Is there something else I might be missing?

    Read the article

  • Rails: getting logic to run at end of request, regardless of filter chain aborts?

    - by JSW
    Is there a reliable mechanism discussed in rails documentation for calling a function at the end of the request, regardless of filter chain aborts? It's not after filters, because after filters don't get called if any prior filter redirected or rendered. For context, I'm trying to put some structured profiling/reporting information into the app log at the end of every request. This information is collected throughought the request lifetime via instance variables wrapped in custom controller accessors, and dumped at the end in a JSON blob for use by a post-processing script. My end goal is to generate reports about my application's logical query distribution (things that depend on controller logic, not just request URIs and parameters), performance profile (time spent in specific DB queries or blocked on webservices), failure rates (including invalid incoming requests that get rejected by before_filter validation rules), and a slew of other things that cannot really be parsed from the basic information in the application and apache logs. At a higher level, is there a different "rails way" that solves my app profiling goal?

    Read the article

  • GZip/Deflate Compression in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Rick Strahl
    A long while back I wrote about GZip compression in ASP.NET. In that article I describe two generic helper methods that I've used in all sorts of ASP.NET application from WebForms apps to HttpModules and HttpHandlers that require gzip or deflate compression. The same static methods also work in ASP.NET MVC. Here are the two routines:/// <summary> /// Determines if GZip is supported /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> public static bool IsGZipSupported() { string AcceptEncoding = HttpContext.Current.Request.Headers["Accept-Encoding"]; if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(AcceptEncoding) && (AcceptEncoding.Contains("gzip") || AcceptEncoding.Contains("deflate"))) return true; return false; } /// <summary> /// Sets up the current page or handler to use GZip through a Response.Filter /// IMPORTANT: /// You have to call this method before any output is generated! /// </summary> public static void GZipEncodePage() { HttpResponse Response = HttpContext.Current.Response; if (IsGZipSupported()) { string AcceptEncoding = HttpContext.Current.Request.Headers["Accept-Encoding"]; if (AcceptEncoding.Contains("gzip")) { Response.Filter = new System.IO.Compression.GZipStream(Response.Filter, System.IO.Compression.CompressionMode.Compress); Response.Headers.Remove("Content-Encoding"); Response.AppendHeader("Content-Encoding", "gzip"); } else { Response.Filter = new System.IO.Compression.DeflateStream(Response.Filter, System.IO.Compression.CompressionMode.Compress); Response.Headers.Remove("Content-Encoding"); Response.AppendHeader("Content-Encoding", "deflate"); } } // Allow proxy servers to cache encoded and unencoded versions separately Response.AppendHeader("Vary", "Content-Encoding"); } The first method checks whether the client sending the request includes the accept-encoding for either gzip or deflate, and if if it does it returns true. The second function uses IsGzipSupported() to decide whether it should encode content and uses an Response Filter to do its job. Basically response filters look at the Response output stream as it's written and convert the data flowing through it. Filters are a bit tricky to work with but the two .NET filter streams for GZip and Deflate Compression make this a snap to implement. In my old code and even now in MVC I can always do:public ActionResult List(string keyword=null, int category=0) { WebUtils.GZipEncodePage(); …} to encode my content. And that works just fine. The proper way: Create an ActionFilterAttribute However in MVC this sort of thing is typically better handled by an ActionFilter which can be applied with an attribute. So to be all prim and proper I created an CompressContentAttribute ActionFilter that incorporates those two helper methods and which looks like this:/// <summary> /// Attribute that can be added to controller methods to force content /// to be GZip encoded if the client supports it /// </summary> public class CompressContentAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute { /// <summary> /// Override to compress the content that is generated by /// an action method. /// </summary> /// <param name="filterContext"></param> public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { GZipEncodePage(); } /// <summary> /// Determines if GZip is supported /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> public static bool IsGZipSupported() { string AcceptEncoding = HttpContext.Current.Request.Headers["Accept-Encoding"]; if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(AcceptEncoding) && (AcceptEncoding.Contains("gzip") || AcceptEncoding.Contains("deflate"))) return true; return false; } /// <summary> /// Sets up the current page or handler to use GZip through a Response.Filter /// IMPORTANT: /// You have to call this method before any output is generated! /// </summary> public static void GZipEncodePage() { HttpResponse Response = HttpContext.Current.Response; if (IsGZipSupported()) { string AcceptEncoding = HttpContext.Current.Request.Headers["Accept-Encoding"]; if (AcceptEncoding.Contains("gzip")) { Response.Filter = new System.IO.Compression.GZipStream(Response.Filter, System.IO.Compression.CompressionMode.Compress); Response.Headers.Remove("Content-Encoding"); Response.AppendHeader("Content-Encoding", "gzip"); } else { Response.Filter = new System.IO.Compression.DeflateStream(Response.Filter, System.IO.Compression.CompressionMode.Compress); Response.Headers.Remove("Content-Encoding"); Response.AppendHeader("Content-Encoding", "deflate"); } } // Allow proxy servers to cache encoded and unencoded versions separately Response.AppendHeader("Vary", "Content-Encoding"); } } It's basically the same code wrapped into an ActionFilter attribute, which intercepts requests MVC requests to Controller methods and lets you hook up logic before and after the methods have executed. Here I want to override OnActionExecuting() which fires before the Controller action is fired. With the CompressContentAttribute created, it can now be applied to either the controller as a whole:[CompressContent] public class ClassifiedsController : ClassifiedsBaseController { … } or to one of the Action methods:[CompressContent] public ActionResult List(string keyword=null, int category=0) { … } The former applies compression to every action method, while the latter is selective and only applies it to the individual action method. Is the attribute better than the static utility function? Not really, but it is the standard MVC way to hook up 'filter' content and that's where others are likely to expect to set options like this. In fact,  you have a bit more control with the utility function because you can conditionally apply it in code, but this is actually much less likely in MVC applications than old WebForms apps since controller methods tend to be more focused. Compression Caveats Http compression is very cool and pretty easy to implement in ASP.NET but you have to be careful with it - especially if your content might get transformed or redirected inside of ASP.NET. A good example, is if an error occurs and a compression filter is applied. ASP.NET errors don't clear the filter, but clear the Response headers which results in some nasty garbage because the compressed content now no longer matches the headers. Another issue is Caching, which has to account for all possible ways of compression and non-compression that the content is served. Basically compressed content and caching don't mix well. I wrote about several of these issues in an old blog post and I recommend you take a quick peek before diving into making every bit of output Gzip encoded. None of these are show stoppers, but you have to be aware of the issues. Related Posts GZip Compression with ASP.NET Content ASP.NET GZip Encoding Caveats© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in ASP.NET  MVC   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Difference between MVC FilterAttribute and Filter

    - by zaaaaphod
    I'm trying to write my own custom AuthorizationAttribute that uses DI. I'm using the MUNQ IoC provider for it's speed and have decided to use constructor injection on all my classes as opposed to post instatiation property binding (because I prefer it). I'm trying to write a custom IFilterProvider that will use my IoC container to return requests for filters (so that I can map concrete classes using the container). I've come up with the following. public class FilterProvider : IFilterProvider { private readonly IocContainer _container; public FilterProvider(IocContainer container) { _container = container; } public IEnumerable<Filter> GetFilters(ControllerContext controllerContext, ActionDescriptor actionDescriptor) { var x = Enumerable.Union<Object>(_container.ResolveAll<IActionFilter>(), _container.ResolveAll<IAuthorizationFilter>()); foreach (Filter actionFilter in x) yield return new Filter(actionFilter, FilterScope.First, null); } } The above code will fail during the foreach because my objects that implement IAuthorizationFilter are based on FilterAttribute and not Filter My question is, what is the difference between Filter and FilterAttribute? I would have thought that there would have been a common link between them, unless I'm missing something. Another deeper question is, how come there is no IFilterAttributeProvider that would support IEnumerable GetFilters(...) Is there some other way that I should be using to resolve IAuthorizationFilter via my IoC container? Thank you very much for your help. Z

    Read the article

  • Log message Request and Response in ASP.NET WebAPI

    - by Fredrik N
    By logging both incoming and outgoing messages for services can be useful in many scenarios, such as debugging, tracing, inspection and helping customers with request problems etc.  I have a customer that need to have both incoming and outgoing messages to be logged. They use the information to see strange behaviors and also to help customers when they call in  for help (They can by looking in the log see if the customers sends in data in a wrong or strange way).   Concerns Most loggings in applications are cross-cutting concerns and should not be  a core concern for developers. Logging messages like this:   // GET api/values/5 public string Get(int id) { //Cross-cutting concerns Log(string.Format("Request: GET api/values/{0}", id)); //Core-concern var response = DoSomething(); //Cross-cutting concerns Log(string.Format("Reponse: GET api/values/{0}\r\n{1}", id, response)); return response; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } will only result in duplication of code, and unnecessarily concerns for the developers to be aware of, if they miss adding the logging code, no logging will take place. Developers should focus on the core-concern, not the cross-cutting concerns. By just focus on the core-concern the above code will look like this: // GET api/values/5 public string Get(int id) { return DoSomething(); } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } The logging should then be placed somewhere else so the developers doesn’t need to focus care about the cross-concern. Using Message Handler for logging There are different ways we could place the cross-cutting concern of logging message when using WebAPI. We can for example create a custom ApiController and override the ApiController’s ExecutingAsync method, or add a ActionFilter, or use a Message Handler. The disadvantage with custom ApiController is that we need to make sure we inherit from it, the disadvantage of ActionFilter, is that we need to add the filter to the controllers, both will modify our ApiControllers. By using a Message Handler we don’t need to do any changes to our ApiControllers. So the best suitable place to add our logging would be in a custom Message Handler. A Message Handler will be used before the HttpControllerDispatcher (The part in the WepAPI pipe-line that make sure the right controller is used and called etc). Note: You can read more about message handlers here, it will give you a good understanding of the WebApi pipe-line. To create a Message Handle we can inherit from the DelegatingHandler class and override the SendAsync method: public class MessageHandler : DelegatingHandler { protected override async Task<HttpResponseMessage> SendAsync(HttpRequestMessage request, CancellationToken cancellationToken) { return base.SendAsync(request, cancellationToken); } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   If we skip the call to the base.SendAsync our ApiController’s methods will never be invoked, nor other Message Handlers. Everything placed before base.SendAsync will be called before the HttpControllerDispatcher (before WebAPI will take a look at the request which controller and method it should be invoke), everything after the base.SendAsync, will be executed after our ApiController method has returned a response. So a message handle will be a perfect place to add cross-cutting concerns such as logging. To get the content of our response within a Message Handler we can use the request argument of the SendAsync method. The request argument is of type HttpRequestMessage and has a Content property (Content is of type HttpContent. The HttpContent has several method that can be used to read the incoming message, such as ReadAsStreamAsync, ReadAsByteArrayAsync and ReadAsStringAsync etc. Something to be aware of is what will happen when we read from the HttpContent. When we read from the HttpContent, we read from a stream, once we read from it, we can’t be read from it again. So if we read from the Stream before the base.SendAsync, the next coming Message Handlers and the HttpControllerDispatcher can’t read from the Stream because it’s already read, so our ApiControllers methods will never be invoked etc. The only way to make sure we can do repeatable reads from the HttpContent is to copy the content into a buffer, and then read from that buffer. This can be done by using the HttpContent’s LoadIntoBufferAsync method. If we make a call to the LoadIntoBufferAsync method before the base.SendAsync, the incoming stream will be read in to a byte array, and then other HttpContent read operations will read from that buffer if it’s exists instead directly form the stream. There is one method on the HttpContent that will internally make a call to the  LoadIntoBufferAsync for us, and that is the ReadAsByteArrayAsync. This is the method we will use to read from the incoming and outgoing message. public abstract class MessageHandler : DelegatingHandler { protected override async Task<HttpResponseMessage> SendAsync(HttpRequestMessage request, CancellationToken cancellationToken) { var requestMessage = await request.Content.ReadAsByteArrayAsync(); var response = await base.SendAsync(request, cancellationToken); var responseMessage = await response.Content.ReadAsByteArrayAsync(); return response; } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } The above code will read the content of the incoming message and then call the SendAsync and after that read from the content of the response message. The following code will add more logic such as creating a correlation id to combine the request with the response, and create a log entry etc: public abstract class MessageHandler : DelegatingHandler { protected override async Task<HttpResponseMessage> SendAsync(HttpRequestMessage request, CancellationToken cancellationToken) { var corrId = string.Format("{0}{1}", DateTime.Now.Ticks, Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId); var requestInfo = string.Format("{0} {1}", request.Method, request.RequestUri); var requestMessage = await request.Content.ReadAsByteArrayAsync(); await IncommingMessageAsync(corrId, requestInfo, requestMessage); var response = await base.SendAsync(request, cancellationToken); var responseMessage = await response.Content.ReadAsByteArrayAsync(); await OutgoingMessageAsync(corrId, requestInfo, responseMessage); return response; } protected abstract Task IncommingMessageAsync(string correlationId, string requestInfo, byte[] message); protected abstract Task OutgoingMessageAsync(string correlationId, string requestInfo, byte[] message); } public class MessageLoggingHandler : MessageHandler { protected override async Task IncommingMessageAsync(string correlationId, string requestInfo, byte[] message) { await Task.Run(() => Debug.WriteLine(string.Format("{0} - Request: {1}\r\n{2}", correlationId, requestInfo, Encoding.UTF8.GetString(message)))); } protected override async Task OutgoingMessageAsync(string correlationId, string requestInfo, byte[] message) { await Task.Run(() => Debug.WriteLine(string.Format("{0} - Response: {1}\r\n{2}", correlationId, requestInfo, Encoding.UTF8.GetString(message)))); } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   The code above will show the following in the Visual Studio output window when the “api/values” service (One standard controller added by the default WepAPI template) is requested with a Get http method : 6347483479959544375 - Request: GET http://localhost:3208/api/values 6347483479959544375 - Response: GET http://localhost:3208/api/values ["value1","value2"] .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   Register a Message Handler To register a Message handler we can use the Add method of the GlobalConfiguration.Configration.MessageHandlers in for example Global.asax: public class WebApiApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication { protected void Application_Start() { GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.MessageHandlers.Add(new MessageLoggingHandler()); ... } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   Summary By using a Message Handler we can easily remove cross-cutting concerns like logging from our controllers. You can also find the source code used in this blog post on ForkCan.com, feel free to make a fork or add comments, such as making the code better etc. Feel free to follow me on twitter @fredrikn if you want to know when I will write other blog posts etc.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC - HttpPost to ReturnURL after redirect

    - by JP
    Hello, I am writing an ASP.NET MVC 2.0 application which requires users to log in before placing a bid on an item. I am using an actionfilter to ensure that the user is logged in and, if not, send them to a login page and set the return url. Below is the code i use in my action filter. if (!filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated) { filterContext.Result = new RedirectResult(String.Concat("~/Account/LogOn","?ReturnUrl=",filterContext.HttpContext.Request.RawUrl)); return; } In my logon controller I validate the users credentials then sign them in and redirect to the return url FormsAuth.SignIn(userName, rememberMe); if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(returnUrl)) { return Redirect(returnUrl); } My problem is that this will always use a Get (HttpGet) request whereas my original submission was a post (HttpPost) and should always be a post. Can anyone suggest a way of passing this URL including the HttpMethod or any workaround to ensure that the correct HttpMethod is used? Thanks in advance, JP

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC POST Parameter into RouteData

    - by David Thomas Garcia
    I'm using jQuery to POST an Id to my route, for example: http://localhost:1234/Load/Delete with a POST Parameter Id = 1 I'm only using the default route in Global.asax.cs right now: routes.MapRoute( "Default", "{controller}/{action}/{id}", new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "" } ); When I perform the POST, in my ActionFilter filterContext.RouteData.Values["Id"] is set to the default value of "". Ideally, I'd like it to use the POST Parameter value automatically if the URL comes up with "". I know it is posting properly because I can see the value of "1" in filterContext.HttpContext.Request.Params["Id"]. Is there a way to get RouteData to use a POST parameter as a fall back value?

    Read the article

  • Accessing Linq Values in ViewData

    - by Jemes
    I'm having trouble accessing the id, area and theme values in my ViewData. They are being set in my action filter but when I get to the Site.Master I don't have access to them. Any help or advice would be great. ActionFilter public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { int SectionID = Convert.ToInt32(filterContext.RouteData.Values["Section_ID"]); int CourseID = Convert.ToInt32(filterContext.RouteData.Values["Course_ID"]); if (CourseID == 0) { filterContext.Controller.ViewData["Styles"] = (from m in _dataContext.Styles where m.Area_ID == SectionID select new {theme = m.Area_FolderName }).ToList(); } else { filterContext.Controller.ViewData["Styles"] = (from m in _dataContext.Styles where m.Course_ID == CourseID select new { theme = m.Course_FolderName }).ToList(); } } } Site.Master <%@ Master Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewMasterPage" % <%@ Import Namespace="Website.Models" % <% foreach (var c in (IEnumerable<Styles>)ViewData["Styles"]) { Response.Write(c.Theme); }%>

    Read the article

  • Custom fine-grained claims based authorization system in ASP.NET MVC - wheres and hows

    - by BuzzBubba
    So, I'd like to implement my own custom authorization system in MVC2. If I'd have to create a global class, where do I instantiate it? Can HttpContext be extended with my own additions and where do I do that? Should I use Authorization filters for rights validation or ActionFilters or do it within an action? Can ActionFilter pass any data to the action itself? Previously (in WebForms) I was using a Session object where I would put a serialized object containing essential user data (account id and a list of roles and rights) and I'd extend my own Page class.

    Read the article

1 2  | Next Page >