Search Results

Search found 6908 results on 277 pages for 'username 4567'.

Page 19/277 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • Security Issues with Single Page Apps

    - by Stephen.Walther
    Last week, I was asked to do a code review of a Single Page App built using the ASP.NET Web API, Durandal, and Knockout (good stuff!). In particular, I was asked to investigate whether there any special security issues associated with building a Single Page App which are not present in the case of a traditional server-side ASP.NET application. In this blog entry, I discuss two areas in which you need to exercise extra caution when building a Single Page App. I discuss how Single Page Apps are extra vulnerable to both Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) attacks and Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks. This goal of this blog post is NOT to persuade you to avoid writing Single Page Apps. I’m a big fan of Single Page Apps. Instead, the goal is to ensure that you are fully aware of some of the security issues related to Single Page Apps and ensure that you know how to guard against them. Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) Attacks According to WhiteHat Security, over 65% of public websites are open to XSS attacks. That’s bad. By taking advantage of XSS holes in a website, a hacker can steal your credit cards, passwords, or bank account information. Any website that redisplays untrusted information is open to XSS attacks. Let me give you a simple example. Imagine that you want to display the name of the current user on a page. To do this, you create the following server-side ASP.NET page located at http://MajorBank.com/SomePage.aspx: <%@Page Language="C#" %> <html> <head> <title>Some Page</title> </head> <body> Welcome <%= Request["username"] %> </body> </html> Nothing fancy here. Notice that the page displays the current username by using Request[“username”]. Using Request[“username”] displays the username regardless of whether the username is present in a cookie, a form field, or a query string variable. Unfortunately, by using Request[“username”] to redisplay untrusted information, you have now opened your website to XSS attacks. Here’s how. Imagine that an evil hacker creates the following link on another website (hackers.com): <a href="/SomePage.aspx?username=<script src=Evil.js></script>">Visit MajorBank</a> Notice that the link includes a query string variable named username and the value of the username variable is an HTML <SCRIPT> tag which points to a JavaScript file named Evil.js. When anyone clicks on the link, the <SCRIPT> tag will be injected into SomePage.aspx and the Evil.js script will be loaded and executed. What can a hacker do in the Evil.js script? Anything the hacker wants. For example, the hacker could display a popup dialog on the MajorBank.com site which asks the user to enter their password. The script could then post the password back to hackers.com and now the evil hacker has your secret password. ASP.NET Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC have two automatic safeguards against this type of attack: Request Validation and Automatic HTML Encoding. Protecting Coming In (Request Validation) In a server-side ASP.NET app, you are protected against the XSS attack described above by a feature named Request Validation. If you attempt to submit “potentially dangerous” content — such as a JavaScript <SCRIPT> tag — in a form field or query string variable then you get an exception. Unfortunately, Request Validation only applies to server-side apps. Request Validation does not help in the case of a Single Page App. In particular, the ASP.NET Web API does not pay attention to Request Validation. You can post any content you want – including <SCRIPT> tags – to an ASP.NET Web API action. For example, the following HTML page contains a form. When you submit the form, the form data is submitted to an ASP.NET Web API controller on the server using an Ajax request: <!DOCTYPE html> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <title></title> </head> <body> <form data-bind="submit:submit"> <div> <label> User Name: <input data-bind="value:user.userName" /> </label> </div> <div> <label> Email: <input data-bind="value:user.email" /> </label> </div> <div> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> </div> </form> <script src="Scripts/jquery-1.7.1.js"></script> <script src="Scripts/knockout-2.1.0.js"></script> <script> var viewModel = { user: { userName: ko.observable(), email: ko.observable() }, submit: function () { $.post("/api/users", ko.toJS(this.user)); } }; ko.applyBindings(viewModel); </script> </body> </html> The form above is using Knockout to bind the form fields to a view model. When you submit the form, the view model is submitted to an ASP.NET Web API action on the server. Here’s the server-side ASP.NET Web API controller and model class: public class UsersController : ApiController { public HttpResponseMessage Post(UserViewModel user) { var userName = user.UserName; return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.OK); } } public class UserViewModel { public string UserName { get; set; } public string Email { get; set; } } If you submit the HTML form, you don’t get an error. The “potentially dangerous” content is passed to the server without any exception being thrown. In the screenshot below, you can see that I was able to post a username form field with the value “<script>alert(‘boo’)</script”. So what this means is that you do not get automatic Request Validation in the case of a Single Page App. You need to be extra careful in a Single Page App about ensuring that you do not display untrusted content because you don’t have the Request Validation safety net which you have in a traditional server-side ASP.NET app. Protecting Going Out (Automatic HTML Encoding) Server-side ASP.NET also protects you from XSS attacks when you render content. By default, all content rendered by the razor view engine is HTML encoded. For example, the following razor view displays the text “<b>Hello!</b>” instead of the text “Hello!” in bold: @{ var message = "<b>Hello!</b>"; } @message   If you don’t want to render content as HTML encoded in razor then you need to take the extra step of using the @Html.Raw() helper. In a Web Form page, if you use <%: %> instead of <%= %> then you get automatic HTML Encoding: <%@ Page Language="C#" %> <% var message = "<b>Hello!</b>"; %> <%: message %> This automatic HTML Encoding will prevent many types of XSS attacks. It prevents <script> tags from being rendered and only allows &lt;script&gt; tags to be rendered which are useless for executing JavaScript. (This automatic HTML encoding does not protect you from all forms of XSS attacks. For example, you can assign the value “javascript:alert(‘evil’)” to the Hyperlink control’s NavigateUrl property and execute the JavaScript). The situation with Knockout is more complicated. If you use the Knockout TEXT binding then you get HTML encoded content. On the other hand, if you use the HTML binding then you do not: <!-- This JavaScript DOES NOT execute --> <div data-bind="text:someProp"></div> <!-- This Javacript DOES execute --> <div data-bind="html:someProp"></div> <script src="Scripts/jquery-1.7.1.js"></script> <script src="Scripts/knockout-2.1.0.js"></script> <script> var viewModel = { someProp : "<script>alert('Evil!')<" + "/script>" }; ko.applyBindings(viewModel); </script>   So, in the page above, the DIV element which uses the TEXT binding is safe from XSS attacks. According to the Knockout documentation: “Since this binding sets your text value using a text node, it’s safe to set any string value without risking HTML or script injection.” Just like server-side HTML encoding, Knockout does not protect you from all types of XSS attacks. For example, there is nothing in Knockout which prevents you from binding JavaScript to a hyperlink like this: <a data-bind="attr:{href:homePageUrl}">Go</a> <script src="Scripts/jquery-1.7.1.min.js"></script> <script src="Scripts/knockout-2.1.0.js"></script> <script> var viewModel = { homePageUrl: "javascript:alert('evil!')" }; ko.applyBindings(viewModel); </script> In the page above, the value “javascript:alert(‘evil’)” is bound to the HREF attribute using Knockout. When you click the link, the JavaScript executes. Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) Attacks Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks rely on the fact that a session cookie does not expire until you close your browser. In particular, if you visit and login to MajorBank.com and then you navigate to Hackers.com then you will still be authenticated against MajorBank.com even after you navigate to Hackers.com. Because MajorBank.com cannot tell whether a request is coming from MajorBank.com or Hackers.com, Hackers.com can submit requests to MajorBank.com pretending to be you. For example, Hackers.com can post an HTML form from Hackers.com to MajorBank.com and change your email address at MajorBank.com. Hackers.com can post a form to MajorBank.com using your authentication cookie. After your email address has been changed, by using a password reset page at MajorBank.com, a hacker can access your bank account. To prevent CSRF attacks, you need some mechanism for detecting whether a request is coming from a page loaded from your website or whether the request is coming from some other website. The recommended way of preventing Cross-Site Request Forgery attacks is to use the “Synchronizer Token Pattern” as described here: https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Cross-Site_Request_Forgery_%28CSRF%29_Prevention_Cheat_Sheet When using the Synchronizer Token Pattern, you include a hidden input field which contains a random token whenever you display an HTML form. When the user opens the form, you add a cookie to the user’s browser with the same random token. When the user posts the form, you verify that the hidden form token and the cookie token match. Preventing Cross-Site Request Forgery Attacks with ASP.NET MVC ASP.NET gives you a helper and an action filter which you can use to thwart Cross-Site Request Forgery attacks. For example, the following razor form for creating a product shows how you use the @Html.AntiForgeryToken() helper: @model MvcApplication2.Models.Product <h2>Create Product</h2> @using (Html.BeginForm()) { @Html.AntiForgeryToken(); <div> @Html.LabelFor( p => p.Name, "Product Name:") @Html.TextBoxFor( p => p.Name) </div> <div> @Html.LabelFor( p => p.Price, "Product Price:") @Html.TextBoxFor( p => p.Price) </div> <input type="submit" /> } The @Html.AntiForgeryToken() helper generates a random token and assigns a serialized version of the same random token to both a cookie and a hidden form field. (Actually, if you dive into the source code, the AntiForgeryToken() does something a little more complex because it takes advantage of a user’s identity when generating the token). Here’s what the hidden form field looks like: <input name=”__RequestVerificationToken” type=”hidden” value=”NqqZGAmlDHh6fPTNR_mti3nYGUDgpIkCiJHnEEL59S7FNToyyeSo7v4AfzF2i67Cv0qTB1TgmZcqiVtgdkW2NnXgEcBc-iBts0x6WAIShtM1″ /> And here’s what the cookie looks like using the Google Chrome developer toolbar: You use the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] action filter on the controller action which is the recipient of the form post to validate that the token in the hidden form field matches the token in the cookie. If the tokens don’t match then validation fails and you can’t post the form: public ActionResult Create() { return View(); } [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] [HttpPost] public ActionResult Create(Product productToCreate) { if (ModelState.IsValid) { // save product to db return RedirectToAction("Index"); } return View(); } How does this all work? Let’s imagine that a hacker has copied the Create Product page from MajorBank.com to Hackers.com – the hacker grabs the HTML source and places it at Hackers.com. Now, imagine that the hacker trick you into submitting the Create Product form from Hackers.com to MajorBank.com. You’ll get the following exception: The Cross-Site Request Forgery attack is blocked because the anti-forgery token included in the Create Product form at Hackers.com won’t match the anti-forgery token stored in the cookie in your browser. The tokens were generated at different times for different users so the attack fails. Preventing Cross-Site Request Forgery Attacks with a Single Page App In a Single Page App, you can’t prevent Cross-Site Request Forgery attacks using the same method as a server-side ASP.NET MVC app. In a Single Page App, HTML forms are not generated on the server. Instead, in a Single Page App, forms are loaded dynamically in the browser. Phil Haack has a blog post on this topic where he discusses passing the anti-forgery token in an Ajax header instead of a hidden form field. He also describes how you can create a custom anti-forgery token attribute to compare the token in the Ajax header and the token in the cookie. See: http://haacked.com/archive/2011/10/10/preventing-csrf-with-ajax.aspx Also, take a look at Johan’s update to Phil Haack’s original post: http://johan.driessen.se/posts/Updated-Anti-XSRF-Validation-for-ASP.NET-MVC-4-RC (Other server frameworks such as Rails and Django do something similar. For example, Rails uses an X-CSRF-Token to prevent CSRF attacks which you generate on the server – see http://excid3.com/blog/rails-tip-2-include-csrf-token-with-every-ajax-request/#.UTFtgDDkvL8 ). For example, if you are creating a Durandal app, then you can use the following razor view for your one and only server-side page: @{ Layout = null; } <!DOCTYPE html> <html> <head> <title>Index</title> </head> <body> @Html.AntiForgeryToken() <div id="applicationHost"> Loading app.... </div> @Scripts.Render("~/scripts/vendor") <script type="text/javascript" src="~/App/durandal/amd/require.js" data-main="/App/main"></script> </body> </html> Notice that this page includes a call to @Html.AntiForgeryToken() to generate the anti-forgery token. Then, whenever you make an Ajax request in the Durandal app, you can retrieve the anti-forgery token from the razor view and pass the token as a header: var csrfToken = $("input[name='__RequestVerificationToken']").val(); $.ajax({ headers: { __RequestVerificationToken: csrfToken }, type: "POST", dataType: "json", contentType: 'application/json; charset=utf-8', url: "/api/products", data: JSON.stringify({ name: "Milk", price: 2.33 }), statusCode: { 200: function () { alert("Success!"); } } }); Use the following code to create an action filter which you can use to match the header and cookie tokens: using System.Linq; using System.Net.Http; using System.Web.Helpers; using System.Web.Http.Controllers; namespace MvcApplication2.Infrastructure { public class ValidateAjaxAntiForgeryToken : System.Web.Http.AuthorizeAttribute { protected override bool IsAuthorized(HttpActionContext actionContext) { var headerToken = actionContext .Request .Headers .GetValues("__RequestVerificationToken") .FirstOrDefault(); ; var cookieToken = actionContext .Request .Headers .GetCookies() .Select(c => c[AntiForgeryConfig.CookieName]) .FirstOrDefault(); // check for missing cookie or header if (cookieToken == null || headerToken == null) { return false; } // ensure that the cookie matches the header try { AntiForgery.Validate(cookieToken.Value, headerToken); } catch { return false; } return base.IsAuthorized(actionContext); } } } Notice that the action filter derives from the base AuthorizeAttribute. The ValidateAjaxAntiForgeryToken only works when the user is authenticated and it will not work for anonymous requests. Add the action filter to your ASP.NET Web API controller actions like this: [ValidateAjaxAntiForgeryToken] public HttpResponseMessage PostProduct(Product productToCreate) { // add product to db return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.OK); } After you complete these steps, it won’t be possible for a hacker to pretend to be you at Hackers.com and submit a form to MajorBank.com. The header token used in the Ajax request won’t travel to Hackers.com. This approach works, but I am not entirely happy with it. The one thing that I don’t like about this approach is that it creates a hard dependency on using razor. Your single page in your Single Page App must be generated from a server-side razor view. A better solution would be to generate the anti-forgery token in JavaScript. Unfortunately, until all browsers support a way to generate cryptographically strong random numbers – for example, by supporting the window.crypto.getRandomValues() method — there is no good way to generate anti-forgery tokens in JavaScript. So, at least right now, the best solution for generating the tokens is the server-side solution with the (regrettable) dependency on razor. Conclusion The goal of this blog entry was to explore some ways in which you need to handle security differently in the case of a Single Page App than in the case of a traditional server app. In particular, I focused on how to prevent Cross-Site Scripting and Cross-Site Request Forgery attacks in the case of a Single Page App. I want to emphasize that I am not suggesting that Single Page Apps are inherently less secure than server-side apps. Whatever type of web application you build – regardless of whether it is a Single Page App, an ASP.NET MVC app, an ASP.NET Web Forms app, or a Rails app – you must constantly guard against security vulnerabilities.

    Read the article

  • Add Eclipse to Unity Dock in Ubuntu 12.04

    - by csilk
    I'm using the following eclipse.desktop file [1] on the Unity dock but I keep seeing the following error [2] in the ".xsession-errors" file everytime I click the Eclipse icon. Are there any ideas why this is happening? [1] [Desktop Entry] Encoding=UTF-8 Name=Eclipse Comment=Java IDE Exec=/bin/sh /home/USERNAME/eclipse/eclipse Icon=/home/USERNAME/eclipse/icon.png Categories=Application;Development;Java;IDE Version=1.0 Type=Application Terminal=0 [2] /home/USERNAME/eclipse/eclipse: 5: /home/USERNAME/eclipse/eclipse: Syntax error: "(" unexpected

    Read the article

  • Weird IIS with Windows Authentication + IE problem

    - by Paulius Maruška
    Hello. I have a website running on IIS and using Windows Authentication. All users that are configured to get access to the site are form a AD domain (not local users). In the properties of a Website, I have set to use the AD domain as the realm. Now, when using Firefox, Safari or Chrome - Everything is fine. When the user tries to open the site, he get's the login box. he enters simply "username" and "password" (let's pretend that it's an actual login and password :P) and he get's into the site. When using IE, however, things get nasty. When the user tries to open the site - he get's the login box. User enters the "username" and "password" again, but those get rejected! And when the second time login box pops up - it has the username filled in as "web-server-domain-name\username" which is wrong, because web-server-domain-name is not the domain where all users reside (it's "ad-domain"). I've spent days trying to figure out what's going on... Note, that if I manually enter "ad-domain\username" - I get accepted into the site without problems. So, my guess is that IE sends wrong username if domain is not specified. Anyway, IE is the only browser that triggers this behavior! Is it possible to do a server-side fix? Maybe it's possible to somehow auto-map the users to AD users? If it's not solvable server-side - is there a client-side fix for this? Thank you. PS: I'm more of a programmer than a sys-admin, so configuring servers isn't the strong side of mine... :P UPDATE: @Evan: Yes, "Digest authentication for Windows domain servers" is also enabled. @Eric: IIS version is 6.0. The authentication methods enabled are: Integrated and digest - all other methods are disabled. As for the security log. I looked at it, when doing "username" and "password" login in Chrome/Firefox and when doing "ad-domain\username" and "password" login from IE - the generated log messages are the same (I see no difference, anyway). When entering "username" and "password" I don't see any errors in the security (or any other) log, so can't tell what method it's trying to use. UPDATE 2: As suggested by Eric in the comments - I played around with Fiddler... While playing with it, I noticed, that when "username" and "password" is entered in FF and IE - the "Authorization" header value (encrypted) sent by IE is longer (almost two times) than one sent by FF. I tried to disable Windows Integrated authentication and only leave the Digest enabled - that fixed the problem (meaning, IE used the right realm just like other browsers), but that caused bazillion other problems with my site, because with Digest - user impersonation on the server doesn't work (that causes problems, when connecting to database etc). Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Naming conventions for language file keys

    - by VirtuosiMedia
    What is your strategy for naming conventions for the keys in language files used for localization? We have a team that is going to conversion of a project to multiple languages and would like to have some guidelines to follow. As an example, usually the files end up being a series of key/value pairs, with the key being the placeholder in the template for the language specific value. 'Username': 'Username', 'Enter Username': 'Enter your username here'

    Read the article

  • How to search for a string everywhere (C: and D:) using Findstr?

    - by amiregelz
    I have a text (.txt) file located somewhere on my PC that contains a bunch of data, including the following string: Secret Username: ********* Secret Password: ********* How can I find this file from command-line, using Findstr? I don't know if it's on C: drive or D: drive. I tried various Findstr queries, such as: findstr /s /m /n /i Secret Username C: findstr /s /m /n /i Secret Username D: findstr /s /m /n /i /c:"Secret Username" findstr /s /m /n /r /i .*Secret Username.* but couldn't find the file.

    Read the article

  • Weird IIS with Windows Authentication + IE problem

    - by Paulius Maruška
    I have a website running on IIS and using Windows Authentication. All users that are configured to get access to the site are form a AD domain (not local users). In the properties of a Website, I have set to use the AD domain as the realm. Now, when using Firefox, Safari or Chrome - Everything is fine. When the user tries to open the site, he get's the login box. he enters simply "username" and "password" (let's pretend that it's an actual login and password :P) and he get's into the site. When using IE, however, things get nasty. When the user tries to open the site - he get's the login box. User enters the "username" and "password" again, but those get rejected! And when the second time login box pops up - it has the username filled in as "web-server-domain-name\username" which is wrong, because web-server-domain-name is not the domain where all users reside (it's "ad-domain"). I've spent days trying to figure out what's going on... Note, that if I manually enter "ad-domain\username" - I get accepted into the site without problems. So, my guess is that IE sends wrong username if domain is not specified. Anyway, IE is the only browser that triggers this behavior! Is it possible to do a server-side fix? Maybe it's possible to somehow auto-map the users to AD users? If it's not solvable server-side - is there a client-side fix for this? Thank you. PS: I'm more of a programmer than a sys-admin, so configuring servers isn't the strong side of mine... :P UPDATE: @Evan: Yes, "Digest authentication for Windows domain servers" is also enabled. @Eric: IIS version is 6.0. The authentication methods enabled are: Integrated and digest - all other methods are disabled. As for the security log. I looked at it, when doing "username" and "password" login in Chrome/Firefox and when doing "ad-domain\username" and "password" login from IE - the generated log messages are the same (I see no difference, anyway). When entering "username" and "password" I don't see any errors in the security (or any other) log, so can't tell what method it's trying to use. UPDATE 2: As suggested by Eric in the comments - I played around with Fiddler... While playing with it, I noticed, that when "username" and "password" is entered in FF and IE - the "Authorization" header value (encrypted) sent by IE is longer (almost two times) than one sent by FF. I tried to disable Windows Integrated authentication and only leave the Digest enabled - that fixed the problem (meaning, IE used the right realm just like other browsers), but that caused bazillion other problems with my site, because with Digest - user impersonation on the server doesn't work (that causes problems, when connecting to database etc). Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • gpasswd and access to a file or directory

    - by PeanutsMonkey
    As I understand it if I run the command gpasswd -A username directoryname I assign administrator privileges to username for the directory directoryname. This means that username is able to add new members to the group for directoryname without root privileges. Does this also mean that username belongs to the group or do I need to add username to the group using the commands usermod, gpasswd -a or gpasswd -M

    Read the article

  • Nautilus could not create the following required folders

    - by babak
    I have changed my username and when I did this,I can not log in with my new user and this error comes in the screen: nautilus could not create the following required folders: /home/"last username"/desktop and /home/'last username'/.nautilus .Also when I press CTRL+ALT+F6 for the command line I can not login with my new username. Although I have still access to Linux by root. My Ubuntu version is 11.04 .

    Read the article

  • Mapping UrlEncoded POST Values in ASP.NET Web API

    - by Rick Strahl
    If there's one thing that's a bit unexpected in ASP.NET Web API, it's the limited support for mapping url encoded POST data values to simple parameters of ApiController methods. When I first looked at this I thought I was doing something wrong, because it seems mighty odd that you can bind query string values to parameters by name, but can't bind POST values to parameters in the same way. To demonstrate here's a simple example. If you have a Web API method like this:[HttpGet] public HttpResponseMessage Authenticate(string username, string password) { …} and then hit with a URL like this: http://localhost:88/samples/authenticate?Username=ricks&Password=sekrit it works just fine. The query string values are mapped to the username and password parameters of our API method. But if you now change the method to work with [HttpPost] instead like this:[HttpPost] public HttpResponseMessage Authenticate(string username, string password) { …} and hit it with a POST HTTP Request like this: POST http://localhost:88/samples/authenticate HTTP/1.1 Host: localhost:88 Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Content-Length: 30 Username=ricks&Password=sekrit you'll find that while the request works, it doesn't actually receive the two string parameters. The username and password parameters are null and so the method is definitely going to fail. When I mentioned this over Twitter a few days ago I got a lot of responses back of why I'd want to do this in the first place - after all HTML Form submissions are the domain of MVC and not WebAPI which is a valid point. However, the more common use case is using POST Variables with AJAX calls. The following is quite common for passing simple values:$.post(url,{ Username: "Rick", Password: "sekrit" },function(result) {…}); but alas that doesn't work. How ASP.NET Web API handles Content Bodies Web API supports parsing content data in a variety of ways, but it does not deal with multiple posted content values. In effect you can only post a single content value to a Web API Action method. That one parameter can be very complex and you can bind it in a variety of ways, but ultimately you're tied to a single POST content value in your parameter definition. While it's possible to support multiple parameters on a POST/PUT operation, only one parameter can be mapped to the actual content - the rest have to be mapped to route values or the query string. Web API treats the whole request body as one big chunk of data that is sent to a Media Type Formatter that's responsible for de-serializing the content into whatever value the method requires. The restriction comes from async nature of Web API where the request data is read only once inside of the formatter that retrieves and deserializes it. Because it's read once, checking for content (like individual POST variables) first is not possible. However, Web API does provide a couple of ways to access the form POST data: Model Binding - object property mapping to bind POST values FormDataCollection - collection of POST keys/values ModelBinding POST Values - Binding POST data to Object Properties The recommended way to handle POST values in Web API is to use Model Binding, which maps individual urlencoded POST values to properties of a model object provided as the parameter. Model binding requires a single object as input to be bound to the POST data, with each POST key that matches a property name (including nested properties like Address.Street) being mapped and updated including automatic type conversion of simple types. This is a very nice feature - and a familiar one from MVC - that makes it very easy to have model objects mapped directly from inbound data. The obvious drawback with Model Binding is that you need a model for it to work: You have to provide a strongly typed object that can receive the data and this object has to map the inbound data. To rewrite the example above to use ModelBinding I have to create a class maps the properties that I need as parameters:public class LoginData { public string Username { get; set; } public string Password { get; set; } } and then accept the data like this in the API method:[HttpPost] public HttpResponseMessage Authenticate(LoginData login) { string username = login.Username; string password = login.Password; … } This works fine mapping the POST values to the properties of the login object. As a side benefit of this method definition, the method now also allows posting of JSON or XML to the same endpoint. If I change my request to send JSON like this: POST http://localhost:88/samples/authenticate HTTP/1.1 Host: localhost:88 Accept: application/jsonContent-type: application/json Content-Length: 40 {"Username":"ricks","Password":"sekrit"} it works as well and transparently, courtesy of the nice Content Negotiation features of Web API. There's nothing wrong with using Model binding and in fact it's a common practice to use (view) model object for inputs coming back from the client and mapping them into these models. But it can be  kind of a hassle if you have AJAX applications with a ton of backend hits, especially if many methods are very atomic and focused and don't effectively require a model or view. Not always do you have to pass structured data, but sometimes there are just a couple of simple response values that need to be sent back. If all you need is to pass a couple operational parameters, creating a view model object just for parameter purposes seems like overkill. Maybe you can use the query string instead (if that makes sense), but if you can't then you can often end up with a plethora of 'message objects' that serve no further  purpose than to make Model Binding work. Note that you can accept multiple parameters with ModelBinding so the following would still work:[HttpPost] public HttpResponseMessage Authenticate(LoginData login, string loginDomain) but only the object will be bound to POST data. As long as loginDomain comes from the querystring or route data this will work. Collecting POST values with FormDataCollection Another more dynamic approach to handle POST values is to collect POST data into a FormDataCollection. FormDataCollection is a very basic key/value collection (like FormCollection in MVC and Request.Form in ASP.NET in general) and then read the values out individually by querying each. [HttpPost] public HttpResponseMessage Authenticate(FormDataCollection form) { var username = form.Get("Username"); var password = form.Get("Password"); …} The downside to this approach is that it's not strongly typed, you have to handle type conversions on non-string parameters, and it gets a bit more complicated to test such as setup as you have to seed a FormDataCollection with data. On the other hand it's flexible and easy to use and especially with string parameters is easy to deal with. It's also dynamic, so if the client sends you a variety of combinations of values on which you make operating decisions, this is much easier to work with than a strongly typed object that would have to account for all possible values up front. The downside is that the code looks old school and isn't as self-documenting as a parameter list or object parameter would be. Nevertheless it's totally functionality and a viable choice for collecting POST values. What about [FromBody]? Web API also has a [FromBody] attribute that can be assigned to parameters. If you have multiple parameters on a Web API method signature you can use [FromBody] to specify which one will be parsed from the POST content. Unfortunately it's not terribly useful as it only returns content in raw format and requires a totally non-standard format ("=content") to specify your content. For more info in how FromBody works and several related issues to how POST data is mapped, you can check out Mike Stalls post: How WebAPI does Parameter Binding Not really sure where the Web API team thought [FromBody] would really be a good fit other than a down and dirty way to send a full string buffer. Extending Web API to make multiple POST Vars work? Don't think so Clearly there's no native support for multiple POST variables being mapped to parameters, which is a bit of a bummer. I know in my own work on one project my customer actually found this to be a real sticking point in their AJAX backend work, and we ended up not using Web API and using MVC JSON features instead. That's kind of sad because Web API is supposed to be the proper solution for AJAX backends. With all of ASP.NET Web API's extensibility you'd think there would be some way to build this functionality on our own, but after spending a bit of time digging and asking some of the experts from the team and Web API community I didn't hear anything that even suggests that this is possible. From what I could find I'd say it's not possible primarily because Web API's Routing engine does not account for the POST variable mapping. This means [HttpPost] methods with url encoded POST buffers are not mapped to the parameters of the endpoint, and so the routes would never even trigger a request that could be intercepted. Once the routing doesn't work there's not much that can be done. If somebody has an idea how this could be accomplished I would love to hear about it. Do we really need multi-value POST mapping? I think that that POST value mapping is a feature that one would expect of any API tool to have. If you look at common APIs out there like Flicker and Google Maps etc. they all work with POST data. POST data is very prominent much more so than JSON inputs and so supporting as many options that enable would seem to be crucial. All that aside, Web API does provide very nice features with Model Binding that allows you to capture many POST variables easily enough, and logistically this will let you build whatever you need with POST data of all shapes as long as you map objects. But having to have an object for every operation that receives a data input is going to take its toll in heavy AJAX applications, with a lot of types created that do nothing more than act as parameter containers. I also think that POST variable mapping is an expected behavior and Web APIs non-support will likely result in many, many questions like this one: How do I bind a simple POST value in ASP.NET WebAPI RC? with no clear answer to this question. I hope for V.next of WebAPI Microsoft will consider this a feature that's worth adding. Related Articles Passing multiple POST parameters to Web API Controller Methods Mike Stall's post: How Web API does Parameter Binding Where does ASP.NET Web API Fit?© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in Web Api   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

  • WPF-Prism CanExecute method not being called

    - by nareshbhatia
    I am coding a simple login UserControl with two TextBoxes (Username and Password) and a Login button. I want the Login button to be enabled only when the username and password fields are filled in. I am using Prism and MVVM. The LoginViewModel contains a property called LoginCommand that is bound to the Login button. I have a CanLoginExecute() method in my ViewModel but it fires only when the application comes up and then never again. So the Login button is never enabled. What am I missing? Here's my xaml: <TextBox x:Name="username" Text="{Binding Path=Username, UpdateSourceTrigger=PropertyChanged, ValidatesOnDataErrors=True}" /> <TextBox x:Name="password" Text="{Binding Path=Password, UpdateSourceTrigger=PropertyChanged, ValidatesOnDataErrors=True}" /> <Button Content="Login" cmnd:Click.Command="{Binding LoginCommand}" /> Here's my ViewModel class LoginViewModel : IDataErrorInfo, INotifyPropertyChanged { public LoginViewModel() { this.LoginCommand = new DelegateCommand<object>( this.LoginExecute, this.CanLoginExecute); } private Boolean CanLoginExecute(object dummyObject) { return (string.IsNullOrEmpty(Username) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(Password)) ? false : true; } private void LoginExecute(object dummyObject) { if (CheckCredentials(Username, Password)) { .... } } #region IDataErrorInfo Members public string Error { get { throw new NotImplementedException(); } } public string this[string columnName] { get { string result = null; if (columnName == "Username") { if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(Username)) result = "Please enter a username"; } else if (columnName == "Password") { if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(Password)) result = "Please enter a password"; } return result; } } #endregion // IDataErrorInfo Members #region INotifyPropertyChanged Members public event PropertyChangedEventHandler PropertyChanged; void OnPropertyChanged(string propertyName) { if (PropertyChanged != null) PropertyChanged(this, new PropertyChangedEventArgs(propertyName)); } #endregion // INotifyPropertyChanged Members #region Properties private String _username; public String Username { get { return _username; } set { if (value == _username) return; _username = value; this.OnPropertyChanged("Username"); } } private String _password; public String Password { get { return _password; } set { if (value == _password) return; _password = value; this.OnPropertyChanged("Password"); } } public ICommand LoginCommand { get; private set; } #endregion // Properties }

    Read the article

  • Login Script for PostGreSQL and PHP not working =[

    - by MrEnder
    Ok I'm quite new at logins what not so bare with me here lol but I gota learn so don't discourage me. I tried this so far <?php $error = ""; $conn = pg_connect("host=localhost dbname=brittains_db user=brittains password=XXXX" ); $sql = "SELECT * FROM logins"; $result = pg_query($conn, $sql); if($_SERVER["REQUEST_METHOD"] == "GET") { $userName=""; $password=""; } else if($_SERVER["REQUEST_METHOD"] == "POST") { $userName=trim($_POST["userNameLogin"]); $password=trim($_POST["passwordLogin"]); if(pg_fetch_result($results, $userName, "userName")==true && pg_fetch_result($results, $password, "userName")==true) { setcookie("userIDforDV", $userName, time()+43200); } else { $error = "Your username and or password is incorrect"; } } $userName = $_COOKIE['userIDforDV']; if(isset($userName) && $userName!="") { echo "Welcome " . $userName; } echo $error; ?> <form> <table> <tr> <td class="signupTd"> User Name:&nbsp; </td> <td> <input type="text" name="userNameLogin" value="" size="20" /> </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="signupTd"> Password:&nbsp; </td> <td> <input type="password" name="passwordLogin" value="" size="20" /> </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="signupTd" colspan="2"> <input type="submit" name="submit" value="Submit"/> </td> </tr> </table> </form> that was the idea I came up with... but its prolly a really bad idea and it doesn't work... how might I go about this properly? I need really detailed descriptions please. Thanks a tun Shelby

    Read the article

  • Killing Mysql prcoesses staying in sleep command.

    - by Shino88
    Hey I am connecting a MYSQL database through hibernate and i seem to have processes that are not being killed after they are finished in the session. I have called flush and close on each session but when i check the server the last processes are still there with a sleep command. This is a new problem which i am having and was not the case yesterday. Is there any way i can ensure the killng of theses processes when i am done with a session. Below is an example of one of my classes. public JSONObject check() { //creates a new session needed to add elements to a database Session session = null; //holds the result of the check in the database JSONObject check = new JSONObject(); try{ //creates a new session needed to add elements to a database SessionFactory sessionFactory = new Configuration().configure().buildSessionFactory(); session = sessionFactory.openSession(); if (justusername){ //query created to select a username from user table String hquery = "Select username from User user Where username = ? "; //query created Query query = session.createQuery(hquery); //sets the username of the query the values JSONObject contents query.setString(0, username); // executes query and adds username string variable String user = (String) query.uniqueResult(); //checks to see if result is found (null if not found) if (user == null) { //adds false to Jobject if not found check.put("indatabase", "false"); } else { check.put("indatabase", "true"); } //adds check to Jobject to say just to check username check.put("justusername", true); } else { //query created to select a username and password from user table String hquery = "Select username from User user Where username = :user and password = :pass "; Query query = session.createQuery(hquery); query.setString("user", username); query.setString("pass", password); String user = (String) query.uniqueResult(); if(user ==null) { check.put("indatabase", false); } else { check.put("indatabase", true); } check.put("justusername", false); } }catch(Exception e){ System.out.println(e.getMessage()); //logg.log(Level.WARNING, " Exception", e.getMessage()); }finally{ // Actual contact insertion will happen at this step session.flush(); session.close(); } //returns Jobject return check; }

    Read the article

  • How to change a Datasource's username/password at runtime in a J2EE app?

    - by Toto
    I've deployed a web-module which connects to the database via a datasource configured in the J2EE application server. Currently, the user/password for the database connection is set in the proper J2EE application server's datasources configuration file. I want to change during runtime the datasource's user/password. (e.g.: implement a new web form in which the user is asked to enter de user/password to be used in the database connection). Is there a standard way to do that in J2EE applications or it depends on the J2EE application server? In this case I'm using Orion application server.

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to password protect folder/page using php without a db or username

    - by Salt Packets
    What is the best way to password protect folder using php without a database or user name but using. Basically I have a page that will list contacts for organization and need to password protect that folder without having account for every user . Just one password that gets changes every so often and distributed to the group. I understand that it is not very secure but never the less I would like to know how to do this. In the best way. It would be nice if the password is remembered for a while once user entered it correctly.

    Read the article

  • MySQL calling in Username to show instead of ID!

    - by Jess
    I have a users table, books table and authors table. An author can have many books, while a user can also have many books. (This is how my DB is currently setup). As I'm pretty new to So far my setup is like bookview.php?book_id=23 from accessing authors page, then seeing all books for the author. The single book's details are all displayed on this new page...I can get the output to display the user ID associated with the book, but not the user name, and this also applies for the author's name, I can the author ID to display, but not the name, so somewhere in the query below I am not calling in the correct values: SELECT users.user_id, authors.author_id, books.book_id, books.bookname, books.bookprice, books.bookplot FROM books INNER JOIN authors on books.book_id = authors.book_id INNER JOIN users ON books.book_id = users.user_id WHERE books.book_id=" . $book_id; Could someone help me correct this so I can display the author name and user name both associated with the book! Thanks for the help :)

    Read the article

  • How to handle dynamic role or username changes in JSF?

    - by roadrunner
    I have a JSF application running on glassfish 2.1 with a EJB 3 backend. For authentication I use a custom realm. The user authenticates using the e-mail-address and password he specified on registration. Everything is working quite well. Now I have two related problems: 1) The user can edit his profile and -- naturally -- he can also change his e-mail-address. Unfortunately when I perform operations based on the current user's identity using ExternalContext.getUserPrincipal().getName(), I will receive the previous e-mail-address the user used on login. At the moment I handle this by forcing the user to reauthenticate after he changed his e-mail-address, but is there another more graceful possibility? 2) Same for user roles. E.g. I have the user roles MEMBER and PREMIUM_MEMBER. A MEMBER may become a PREMIUM_MEMBER during his current session. Unfortunately the role seems to be only determined at login. Is there any possibility, that JSF and EJB recognize the new user role without the need for the user to re-authenticated?

    Read the article

  • how to get my program to enter windows username password?

    - by blood
    i have been working on a program that will enter usernames and passwords if someone plugs in a Usb, but i don't know how to enter a windows log in password. So the idea is to have my program running so it can find if the usb is plugged in if so it will use keybd_event to enter the password and to hit enter. how would i get my program to run so i can do this?

    Read the article

  • Killing Mysql processes staying in sleep command.

    - by Shino88
    Hey I am connecting a MYSQL database through hibernate and i seem to have processes that are not being killed after they are finished in the session. I have called flush and close on each session but when i check the server the last processes are still there with a sleep command. This is a new problem which i am having and was not the case yesterday. Is there any way i can ensure the killng of theses processes when i am done with a session. Below is an example of one of my classes. public JSONObject check() { //creates a new session needed to add elements to a database Session session = null; //holds the result of the check in the database JSONObject check = new JSONObject(); try{ //creates a new session needed to add elements to a database SessionFactory sessionFactory = new Configuration().configure().buildSessionFactory(); session = sessionFactory.openSession(); if (justusername){ //query created to select a username from user table String hquery = "Select username from User user Where username = ? "; //query created Query query = session.createQuery(hquery); //sets the username of the query the values JSONObject contents query.setString(0, username); // executes query and adds username string variable String user = (String) query.uniqueResult(); //checks to see if result is found (null if not found) if (user == null) { //adds false to Jobject if not found check.put("indatabase", "false"); } else { check.put("indatabase", "true"); } //adds check to Jobject to say just to check username check.put("justusername", true); } else { //query created to select a username and password from user table String hquery = "Select username from User user Where username = :user and password = :pass "; Query query = session.createQuery(hquery); query.setString("user", username); query.setString("pass", password); String user = (String) query.uniqueResult(); if(user ==null) { check.put("indatabase", false); } else { check.put("indatabase", true); } check.put("justusername", false); } }catch(Exception e){ System.out.println(e.getMessage()); //logg.log(Level.WARNING, " Exception", e.getMessage()); }finally{ // Actual contact insertion will happen at this step session.flush(); session.close(); } //returns Jobject return check; }

    Read the article

  • How can I find out the original username a process was started with?

    - by szabgab
    There is a perl script that needs to run as root but the we must make sure the user who runs the script did not log-in originally as user foo as it will be removed during the script. So how can I find out if the user, who might have su-ed several times since she logged in has not impersonated 'foo' at any time in that chain? I found an interesting perl script that was calling the following two shell scripts, but I think that would only work on Solaris. my $shell_paren = `ps -ef | grep -v grep | awk \'{print \$2\" \"\$3}\' | egrep \"^@_\" | awk \'{print \$2}'`; my $parent_owner = `ps -ef | grep -v grep | awk \'{print \$1\" \"\$2}\' | grep @_ | awk \'{print \$1}\'`; This needs to work on both Linux and Solaris and I'd rather eliminate the repeated calls to he the shell and keep the whole thing in Perl.

    Read the article

  • In order to bypass a website's login screen, can you load a link with a username and password?

    - by Jeff
    I am relatively new to web development, and I was hoping I could get some pointers about the feasibility of a feature I would like to implement. Is it possible to have a url link that you can click on, that can contain login credentials for the website it is linking to, so as to bypass that websites login screen? In other words, can I make a link from my website to facebook, that would allow me to login right in to my facebook, from any computer? Meaning, if I don't have cookies to store my login info in, is it possible to login still? This is just a conceptual question, so any help would be appreciated! Thanks!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >