Search Results

Search found 58245 results on 2330 pages for 'asp net authentication'.

Page 22/2330 | < Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >

  • Blog Now Hosted on IIS 8.0–DiscountASP.Net

    - by The Official Microsoft IIS Site
    On Thursday night I was having an email conversation with Takeshi Eto from DiscountASP.Net about the hosting of my blog.  I’ve been hosting my blog with DiscountASP.Net for nearly five years and have been very, very happy with their service – always up to date often offering services faster than other hosters and very quick turn around of support tickets if ever I’ve had any issues – they also host the NEBytes site. Well on Thursday I was asking about migrating my site onto IIS 8.0 hosting and...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Writing an ASP.Net Web based TFS Client

    - by Glav
    So one of the things I needed to do was write an ASP.Net MVC based application for our senior execs to manage a set of arbitrary attributes against stories, bugs etc to be able to attribute whether the item was related to Research and Development, and if so, what kind. We are using TFS Azure and don’t have the option of custom templates. I have decided on using a string based field within the template that is not very visible and which we don’t use to write a small set of custom which will determine the research and development association. However, this string munging on the field is not very user friendly so we need a simple tool that can display attributes against items in a simple dropdown list or something similar. Enter a custom web app that accesses our TFS items in Azure (Note: We are also using Visual Studio 2012) Now TFS Azure uses your Live ID and it is not really possible to easily do this in a server based app where no interaction is available. Even if you capture the Live ID credentials yourself and try to submit them to TFS Azure, it wont work. Bottom line is that it is not straightforward nor obvious what you have to do. In fact, it is a real pain to find and there are some answers out there which don’t appear to be answers at all given they didn’t work in my scenario. So for anyone else who wants to do this, here is a simple breakdown on what you have to do: Go here and get the “TFS Service Credential Viewer”. Install it, run it and connect to your TFS instance in azure and create a service account. Note the username and password exactly as it presents it to you. This is the magic identity that will allow unattended, programmatic access. Without this step, don’t bother trying to do anything else. In your MVC app, reference the following assemblies from “C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0\Common7\IDE\ReferenceAssemblies\v2.0”: Microsoft.TeamFoundation.Client.dll Microsoft.TeamFoundation.Common.dll Microsoft.TeamFoundation.VersionControl.Client.dll Microsoft.TeamFoundation.VersionControl.Common.dll Microsoft.TeamFoundation.WorkItemTracking.Client.DataStoreLoader.dll Microsoft.TeamFoundation.WorkItemTracking.Client.dll Microsoft.TeamFoundation.WorkItemTracking.Common.dll If hosting this in Internet Information Server, for the application pool this app runs under, you will need to enable 32 Bit support. You also have to allow the TFS client assemblies to store a cache of files on your system. If you don’t do this, you will authenticate fine, but then get an exception saying that it is unable to access the cache at some directory path when you query work items. You can set this up by adding the following to your web.config, in the <appSettings> element as shown below: <appSettings> <!-- Add reference to TFS Client Cache --> <add key="WorkItemTrackingCacheRoot" value="C:\windows\temp" /> </appSettings> With all that in place, you can write the following code: var token = new Microsoft.TeamFoundation.Client.SimpleWebTokenCredential("{you-service-account-name", "{your-service-acct-password}"); var clientCreds = new Microsoft.TeamFoundation.Client.TfsClientCredentials(token); var currentCollection = new TfsTeamProjectCollection(new Uri(“https://{yourdomain}.visualstudio.com/defaultcollection”), clientCreds); TfsConfigurationServercurrentCollection.EnsureAuthenticated(); In the above code, not the URL contains the “defaultcollection” at the end of the URL. Obviously replace {yourdomain} with whatever is defined for your TFS in Azure instance. In addition, make sure the service user account and password that was generated in the first step is substituted in here. Note: If something is not right, the “EnsureAuthenticated()” call will throw an exception with the message being you are not authorised. If you forget the “defaultcollection” on the URL, it will still fail but with a message saying you are not authorised. That is, a similar but different exception message. And that is it. You can then query the collection using something like: var service = currentCollection.GetService<WorkItemStore>(); var proj = service.Projects[0]; var allQueries = proj.StoredQueries; for (int qcnt = 0; qcnt < allQueries.Count; qcnt++) {     var query = allQueries[qcnt];     var queryDesc = string.format(“Query found named: {0}”,query.Name); } You get the idea. If you search around, you will find references to the ServiceIdentityCredentialProvider which is referenced in this article. I had no luck with this method and it all looked too hard since it required an extra KB article and other magic sauce. So I hope that helps. This article certainly would have helped me save a boat load of time and frustration.

    Read the article

  • Integrating Apache Shiro with ASP.NET MVC

    - by Garry Shutler
    I'm looking at using Apache Shiro as a central authentication service for all our applications over a variety of platforms. It's hinted at that it can integrate with a variety of platforms which would be ideal for my purposes but I cannot find any examples of how this is achieved from .NET (ASP.NET MVC specifically if it makes any difference). Does anyone know where I can find an example of how to do this?

    Read the article

  • Flex URLRequest and .NET authorization

    - by user252160
    can I make role based authorization when sending requests to an ASP.NET MVC backend system. I am calling action methods and expecting JSON results, however, some action methods are decorated with the [Authorize] attribute, others require some role privileges to be present. I certainly hope that passing authorization data with every request is possible

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Paging/Sorting/Filtering a list using ModelMetadata

    - by rajbk
    This post looks at how to control paging, sorting and filtering when displaying a list of data by specifying attributes in your Model using the ASP.NET MVC framework and the excellent MVCContrib library. It also shows how to hide/show columns and control the formatting of data using attributes.  This uses the Northwind database. A sample project is attached at the end of this post. Let’s start by looking at a class called ProductViewModel. The properties in the class are decorated with attributes. The OrderBy attribute tells the system that the Model can be sorted using that property. The SearchFilter attribute tells the system that filtering is allowed on that property. Filtering type is set by the  FilterType enum which currently supports Equals and Contains. The ScaffoldColumn property specifies if a column is hidden or not The DisplayFormat specifies how the data is formatted. public class ProductViewModel { [OrderBy(IsDefault = true)] [ScaffoldColumn(false)] public int? ProductID { get; set; }   [SearchFilter(FilterType.Contains)] [OrderBy] [DisplayName("Product Name")] public string ProductName { get; set; }   [OrderBy] [DisplayName("Unit Price")] [DisplayFormat(DataFormatString = "{0:c}")] public System.Nullable<decimal> UnitPrice { get; set; }   [DisplayName("Category Name")] public string CategoryName { get; set; }   [SearchFilter] [ScaffoldColumn(false)] public int? CategoryID { get; set; }   [SearchFilter] [ScaffoldColumn(false)] public int? SupplierID { get; set; }   [OrderBy] public bool Discontinued { get; set; } } Before we explore the code further, lets look at the UI.  The UI has a section for filtering the data. The column headers with links are sortable. Paging is also supported with the help of a pager row. The pager is rendered using the MVCContrib Pager component. The data is displayed using a customized version of the MVCContrib Grid component. The customization was done in order for the Grid to be aware of the attributes mentioned above. Now, let’s look at what happens when we perform actions on this page. The diagram below shows the process: The form on the page has its method set to “GET” therefore we see all the parameters in the query string. The query string is shown in blue above. This query gets routed to an action called Index with parameters of type ProductViewModel and PageSortOptions. The parameters in the query string get mapped to the input parameters using model binding. The ProductView object created has the information needed to filter data while the PageAndSorting object is used for paging and sorting the data. The last block in the figure above shows how the filtered and paged list is created. We receive a product list from our product repository (which is of type IQueryable) and first filter it by calliing the AsFiltered extension method passing in the productFilters object and then call the AsPagination extension method passing in the pageSort object. The AsFiltered extension method looks at the type of the filter instance passed in. It skips properties in the instance that do not have the SearchFilter attribute. For properties that have the SearchFilter attribute, it adds filter expression trees to filter against the IQueryable data. The AsPagination extension method looks at the type of the IQueryable and ensures that the column being sorted on has the OrderBy attribute. If it does not find one, it looks for the default sort field [OrderBy(IsDefault = true)]. It is required that at least one attribute in your model has the [OrderBy(IsDefault = true)]. This because a person could be performing paging without specifying an order by column. As you may recall the LINQ Skip method now requires that you call an OrderBy method before it. Therefore we need a default order by column to perform paging. The extension method adds a order expressoin tree to the IQueryable and calls the MVCContrib AsPagination extension method to page the data. Implementation Notes Auto Postback The search filter region auto performs a get request anytime the dropdown selection is changed. This is implemented using the following jQuery snippet $(document).ready(function () { $("#productSearch").change(function () { this.submit(); }); }); Strongly Typed View The code used in the Action method is shown below: public ActionResult Index(ProductViewModel productFilters, PageSortOptions pageSortOptions) { var productPagedList = productRepository.GetProductsProjected().AsFiltered(productFilters).AsPagination(pageSortOptions);   var productViewFilterContainer = new ProductViewFilterContainer(); productViewFilterContainer.Fill(productFilters.CategoryID, productFilters.SupplierID, productFilters.ProductName);   var gridSortOptions = new GridSortOptions { Column = pageSortOptions.Column, Direction = pageSortOptions.Direction };   var productListContainer = new ProductListContainerModel { ProductPagedList = productPagedList, ProductViewFilterContainer = productViewFilterContainer, GridSortOptions = gridSortOptions };   return View(productListContainer); } As you see above, the object that is returned to the view is of type ProductListContainerModel. This contains all the information need for the view to render the Search filter section (including dropdowns),  the Html.Pager (MVCContrib) and the Html.Grid (from MVCContrib). It also stores the state of the search filters so that they can recreate themselves when the page reloads (Viewstate, I miss you! :0)  The class diagram for the container class is shown below.   Custom MVCContrib Grid The MVCContrib grid default behavior was overridden so that it would auto generate the columns and format the columns based on the metadata and also make it aware of our custom attributes (see MetaDataGridModel in the sample code). The Grid ensures that the ShowForDisplay on the column is set to true This can also be set by the ScaffoldColumn attribute ref: http://bradwilson.typepad.com/blog/2009/10/aspnet-mvc-2-templates-part-2-modelmetadata.html) Column headers are set using the DisplayName attribute Column sorting is set using the OrderBy attribute. The data is formatted using the DisplayFormat attribute. Generic Extension methods for Sorting and Filtering The extension method AsFiltered takes in an IQueryable<T> and uses expression trees to query against the IQueryable data. The query is constructed using the Model metadata and the properties of the T filter (productFilters in our case). Properties in the Model that do not have the SearchFilter attribute are skipped when creating the filter expression tree.  It returns an IQueryable<T>. The extension method AsPagination takes in an IQuerable<T> and first ensures that the column being sorted on has the OrderBy attribute. If not, we look for the default OrderBy column ([OrderBy(IsDefault = true)]). We then build an expression tree to sort on this column. We finally hand off the call to the MVCContrib AsPagination which returns an IPagination<T>. This type as you can see in the class diagram above is passed to the view and used by the MVCContrib Grid and Pager components. Custom Provider To get the system to recognize our custom attributes, we create our MetadataProvider as mentioned in this article (http://bradwilson.typepad.com/blog/2010/01/why-you-dont-need-modelmetadataattributes.html) protected override ModelMetadata CreateMetadata(IEnumerable<Attribute> attributes, Type containerType, Func<object> modelAccessor, Type modelType, string propertyName) { ModelMetadata metadata = base.CreateMetadata(attributes, containerType, modelAccessor, modelType, propertyName);   SearchFilterAttribute searchFilterAttribute = attributes.OfType<SearchFilterAttribute>().FirstOrDefault(); if (searchFilterAttribute != null) { metadata.AdditionalValues.Add(Globals.SearchFilterAttributeKey, searchFilterAttribute); }   OrderByAttribute orderByAttribute = attributes.OfType<OrderByAttribute>().FirstOrDefault(); if (orderByAttribute != null) { metadata.AdditionalValues.Add(Globals.OrderByAttributeKey, orderByAttribute); }   return metadata; } We register our MetadataProvider in Global.asax.cs. protected void Application_Start() { AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas();   RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);   ModelMetadataProviders.Current = new MvcFlan.QueryModelMetaDataProvider(); } Bugs, Comments and Suggestions are welcome! You can download the sample code below. This code is purely experimental. Use at your own risk. Download Sample Code (VS 2010 RTM) MVCNorthwindSales.zip

    Read the article

  • MVC2 Apps (and others) sharing WCF services and authentication

    - by stupid-phil
    Hi, I've seen several similar scenarios explained here but not my particular one. I wonder if someone could tell me which direction to go in? I am developing two (and more later) MVC2 apps. There will also be another (thicker) client later on (WPF or Silverlight, TBD). These all need to share the same authentication. For the MVC2 apps they (preferably) need to be single log on - ie if a user logs in to one MVC2 app, they should be authorised on the other, as long as the cookie hasn't timed out. Forms authentication is to be used. All the apps need to use common business functionality and perform db access via a common WCF Service App. It would be nice (I think) if the WCF is not publicly accessible (ie blocked behind FW). The thicker client could use an additional service layer to access the Common WCF App. What this should look like is: MVCApp1 - WCFAppCommon MVCApp2 - WCFAppCommon ThickClient - WCFApp2 - WCFAppCommon Is it possible to carry out all the authentication/authorization in the WCFAppCommon? Otherwise I think I'll have to repeat all the security logic in the MVCApps and WCFApp2, whereas, to me, it seems to sit naturally in WCFAppCommon. On the otherhand, it seems if I authenticate/authorize in WCFAppCommon, I wouldn't be able to use Forms Authentication. Where I've seen possible solutions (that I haven't tried yet) they seem much more complex than Forms Authentication and a single DB. Any help appreciated, Phil

    Read the article

  • Anti-Forgery Request Recipes For ASP.NET MVC And AJAX

    - by Dixin
    Background To secure websites from cross-site request forgery (CSRF, or XSRF) attack, ASP.NET MVC provides an excellent mechanism: The server prints tokens to cookie and inside the form; When the form is submitted to server, token in cookie and token inside the form are sent in the HTTP request; Server validates the tokens. To print tokens to browser, just invoke HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken():<% using (Html.BeginForm()) { %> <%: this.Html.AntiForgeryToken(Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)%> <%-- Other fields. --%> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> <% } %> This invocation generates a token then writes inside the form:<form action="..." method="post"> <input name="__RequestVerificationToken" type="hidden" value="J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP" /> <!-- Other fields. --> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> </form> and also writes into the cookie: __RequestVerificationToken_Lw__= J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP When the above form is submitted, they are both sent to server. In the server side, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute is used to specify the controllers or actions to validate them:[HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult Action(/* ... */) { // ... } This is very productive for form scenarios. But recently, when resolving security vulnerabilities for Web products, some problems are encountered. Specify validation on controller (not on each action) The server side problem is, It is expected to declare [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] on controller, but actually it has be to declared on each POST actions. Because POST actions are usually much more then controllers, the work would be a little crazy. Problem Usually a controller contains actions for HTTP GET and actions for HTTP POST requests, and usually validations are expected for HTTP POST requests. So, if the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] is declared on the controller, the HTTP GET requests become invalid:[ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller // One [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute. { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Index() cannot work. { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } If browser sends an HTTP GET request by clicking a link: http://Site/Some/Index, validation definitely fails, because no token is provided. So the result is, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute must be distributed to each POST action:public class SomeController : Controller // Many [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes. { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Works. { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } This is a little bit crazy, because one application can have a lot of POST actions. Solution To avoid a large number of [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes (one for each POST action), the following ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute wrapper class can be helpful, where HTTP verbs can be specified:[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter { private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs) : this(verbs, null) { } public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = salt }; } public void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext) { string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride(); if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext); } } } When this attribute is declared on controller, only HTTP requests with the specified verbs are validated:[ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper(HttpVerbs.Post, Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller { // GET actions are not affected. // Only HTTP POST requests are validated. } Now one single attribute on controller turns on validation for all POST actions. Maybe it would be nice if HTTP verbs can be specified on the built-in [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute, which is easy to implemented. Specify Non-constant salt in runtime By default, the salt should be a compile time constant, so it can be used for the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] or [ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper] attribute. Problem One Web product might be sold to many clients. If a constant salt is evaluated in compile time, after the product is built and deployed to many clients, they all have the same salt. Of course, clients do not like this. Even some clients might want to specify a custom salt in configuration. In these scenarios, salt is required to be a runtime value. Solution In the above [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] and [ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper] attribute, the salt is passed through constructor. So one solution is to remove this parameter:public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter { public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = AntiForgeryToken.Value }; } // Other members. } But here the injected dependency becomes a hard dependency. So the other solution is moving validation code into controller to work around the limitation of attributes:public abstract class AntiForgeryControllerBase : Controller { private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; protected AntiForgeryControllerBase(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = salt }; } protected override void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext) { base.OnAuthorization(filterContext); string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride(); if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext); } } } Then make controller classes inheriting from this AntiForgeryControllerBase class. Now the salt is no long required to be a compile time constant. Submit token via AJAX For browser side, once server side turns on anti-forgery validation for HTTP POST, all AJAX POST requests will fail by default. Problem In AJAX scenarios, the HTTP POST request is not sent by form. Take jQuery as an example:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 // Token is not posted. }, callback); This kind of AJAX POST requests will always be invalid, because server side code cannot see the token in the posted data. Solution Basically, the tokens must be printed to browser then sent back to server. So first of all, HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() need to be called somewhere. Now the browser has token in both HTML and cookie. Then jQuery must find the printed token in the HTML, and append token to the data before sending:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1, __RequestVerificationToken: getToken() // Token is posted. }, callback); To be reusable, this can be encapsulated into a tiny jQuery plugin:/// <reference path="jquery-1.4.2.js" /> (function ($) { $.getAntiForgeryToken = function (tokenWindow, appPath) { // HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() must be invoked to print the token. tokenWindow = tokenWindow && typeof tokenWindow === typeof window ? tokenWindow : window; appPath = appPath && typeof appPath === "string" ? "_" + appPath.toString() : ""; // The name attribute is either __RequestVerificationToken, // or __RequestVerificationToken_{appPath}. tokenName = "__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath; // Finds the <input type="hidden" name={tokenName} value="..." /> from the specified. // var inputElements = $("input[type='hidden'][name='__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath + "']"); var inputElements = tokenWindow.document.getElementsByTagName("input"); for (var i = 0; i < inputElements.length; i++) { var inputElement = inputElements[i]; if (inputElement.type === "hidden" && inputElement.name === tokenName) { return { name: tokenName, value: inputElement.value }; } } return null; }; $.appendAntiForgeryToken = function (data, token) { // Converts data if not already a string. if (data && typeof data !== "string") { data = $.param(data); } // Gets token from current window by default. token = token ? token : $.getAntiForgeryToken(); // $.getAntiForgeryToken(window). data = data ? data + "&" : ""; // If token exists, appends {token.name}={token.value} to data. return token ? data + encodeURIComponent(token.name) + "=" + encodeURIComponent(token.value) : data; }; // Wraps $.post(url, data, callback, type). $.postAntiForgery = function (url, data, callback, type) { return $.post(url, $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data), callback, type); }; // Wraps $.ajax(settings). $.ajaxAntiForgery = function (settings) { settings.data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(settings.data); return $.ajax(settings); }; })(jQuery); In most of the scenarios, it is Ok to just replace $.post() invocation with $.postAntiForgery(), and replace $.ajax() with $.ajaxAntiForgery():$.postAntiForgery(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 }, callback); // Token is posted. There might be some scenarios of custom token, where $.appendAntiForgeryToken() is useful:data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, token); // Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery(). $.post(url, data, callback); And there are scenarios that the token is not in the current window. For example, an HTTP POST request can be sent by an iframe, while the token is in the parent window. Here, token's container window can be specified for $.getAntiForgeryToken():data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, $.getAntiForgeryToken(window.parent)); // Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery(). $.post(url, data, callback); If you have better solution, please do tell me.

    Read the article

  • Blackberry support for Forms Authentication - ASP.NET MVC app

    - by Derek Mitchell
    I'm writing an ASP.NET MVC application that uses Forms Authentication. The target clients are a variety of mobile web browsers. When I use the BlackBerry 8530 simulator my MVC app authenticates as expected. I can visit pages whose controller methods are decorated with the [Authorize] attribute - no problem - they display and therefore I assume my Forms Authentication is working correctly. Using a physical Windows Mobile device to browse my site, I have the same experience as the BB simulator, the forms authentication works as I would expect. BUT when I try to visit the site using a Blackberry 8900 physical device the Login page keeps on looping back when I click the Login page. The device is not retaining it's "authenticated" status. I added code to verify this and I can see that: Request.IsAuthenticated: False User.Identity.IsAuthenticated: False So my question is what next steps can I take to try and find out why the Blackberry 8900 is losing it's authentication status. Is this cookie related? Anyone have any ideas? Cheers Derek

    Read the article

  • .NET 3.5 Installation Problems in Windows 8

    - by Rick Strahl
    Windows 8 installs with .NET 4.5. A default installation of Windows 8 doesn't seem to include .NET 3.0 or 3.5, although .NET 2.0 does seem to be available by default (presumably because Windows has app dependencies on that). I ran into some pretty nasty compatibility issues regarding .NET 3.5 which I'll describe in this post. I'll preface this by saying that depending on how you install Windows 8 you may not run into these issues. In fact, it's probably a special case, but one that might be common with developer folks reading my blog. Specifically it's the install order that screwed things up for me -  installing Visual Studio before explicitly installing .NET 3.5 from Windows Features - in particular. If you install Visual Studio 2010 I highly recommend you install .NET 3.5 from Windows features BEFORE you install Visual Studio 2010 and save yourself the trouble I went through. So when I installed Windows 8, and then looked at the Windows Features to install after the fact in the Windows Feature dialog, I thought - .NET 3.5 - who needs it. I'd be happy to not have to install .NET 3.5, but unfortunately I found out quite a while after initial installation that one of my applications/tools (DevExpress's awesome CodeRush) depends on it and won't install without it. Enabling .NET 3.5 in Windows 8 If you want to run .NET 3.5 on Windows 8, don't download an installer - those installers don't work on Windows 8, and you don't need to do this because you can use the Windows Features dialog to enable .NET 3.5: And that *should* do the trick. If you do this before you install other apps that require .NET 3.5 and install a non-SP1 one version of it, you are going to have no problems. Unfortunately for me, even after I've installed the above, when I run the CodeRush installer I still get this lovely dialog: Now I double checked to see if .NET 3.5 is installed - it is, both for 32 bit and 64 bit. I went as far as creating a small .NET Console app and running it to verify that it actually runs. And it does… So naturally I thought the CodeRush installer is a little whacky. After some back and forth Alex Skorkin on Twitter pointed me in the right direction: He asked me to look in the registry for exact info on which version of .NET 3.5 is installed here: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\NET Framework Setup\NDP where I found that .NET 3.5 SP1 was installed. This is the 64 bit key which looks all correct. However, when I looked under the 32 bit node I found: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\NET Framework Setup\NDP\v3.5 Notice that the service pack number is set to 0, rather than 1 (which it was for the 64 bit install), which is what the installer requires. So to summarize: the 64 bit version is installed with SP1, the 32 bit version is not. Uhm, Ok… thanks for that! Easy to fix, you say - just install SP1. Nope, not so easy because the standalone installer doesn't work on Windows 8. I can't get either .NET 3.5 installer or the SP 1 installer to even launch. They simply start and hang (or exit immediately) without messages. I also tried to get Windows to update .NET 3.5 by checking for Windows Updates, which should pick up on the dated version of .NET 3.5 and pull down SP1, but that's also no go. Check for Updates doesn't bring down any updates for me yet. I'm sure at some random point in the future Windows will deem it necessary to update .NET 3.5 to SP1, but at this point it's not letting me coerce it to do it explicitly. How did this happen I'm not sure exactly whether this is the cause and effect, but I suspect the story goes like this: Installed Windows 8 without support for .NET 3.5 Installed Visual Studio 2010 which installs .NET 3.5 (no SP) I now had .NET 3.5 installed but without SP1. I then: Tried to install CodeRush - Error: .NET 3.5 SP1 required Enabled .NET 3.5 in Windows Features I figured enabling the .NET 3.5 Windows Features would do the trick. But still no go. Now I suspect Visual Studio installed the 32 bit version of .NET 3.5 on my machine and Windows Features detected the previous install and didn't reinstall it. This left the 32 bit install at least with no SP1 installed. How to Fix it My final solution was to completely uninstall .NET 3.5 *and* to reboot: Go to Windows Features Uncheck the .NET Framework 3.5 Restart Windows Go to Windows Features Check .NET Framework 3.5 and voila, I now have a proper installation of .NET 3.5. I tried this before but without the reboot step in between which did not work. Make sure you reboot between uninstalling and reinstalling .NET 3.5! More Problems The above fixed me right up, but in looking for a solution it seems that a lot of people are also having problems with .NET 3.5 installing properly from the Windows Features dialog. The problem there is that the feature wasn't properly loading from the installer disks or not downloading the proper components for updates. It turns out you can explicitly install Windows features using the DISM tool in Windows.dism.exe /online /enable-feature /featurename:NetFX3 /Source:f:\sources\sxs You can try this without the /Source flag first - which uses the hidden Windows installer files if you kept those. Otherwise insert the DVD or ISO and point at the path \sources\sxs path where the installer lives. This also gives you a little more information if something does go wrong.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in Windows  .NET   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

  • Anti-Forgery Request Helpers for ASP.NET MVC and jQuery AJAX

    - by Dixin
    Background To secure websites from cross-site request forgery (CSRF, or XSRF) attack, ASP.NET MVC provides an excellent mechanism: The server prints tokens to cookie and inside the form; When the form is submitted to server, token in cookie and token inside the form are sent in the HTTP request; Server validates the tokens. To print tokens to browser, just invoke HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken():<% using (Html.BeginForm()) { %> <%: this.Html.AntiForgeryToken(Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)%> <%-- Other fields. --%> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> <% } %> This invocation generates a token then writes inside the form:<form action="..." method="post"> <input name="__RequestVerificationToken" type="hidden" value="J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP" /> <!-- Other fields. --> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> </form> and also writes into the cookie: __RequestVerificationToken_Lw__= J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP When the above form is submitted, they are both sent to server. In the server side, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute is used to specify the controllers or actions to validate them:[HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult Action(/* ... */) { // ... } This is very productive for form scenarios. But recently, when resolving security vulnerabilities for Web products, some problems are encountered. Specify validation on controller (not on each action) The server side problem is, It is expected to declare [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] on controller, but actually it has be to declared on each POST actions. Because POST actions are usually much more then controllers, this is a little crazy Problem Usually a controller contains actions for HTTP GET and actions for HTTP POST requests, and usually validations are expected for HTTP POST requests. So, if the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] is declared on the controller, the HTTP GET requests become invalid:[ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller // One [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute. { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Index() cannot work. { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } If browser sends an HTTP GET request by clicking a link: http://Site/Some/Index, validation definitely fails, because no token is provided. So the result is, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute must be distributed to each POST action:public class SomeController : Controller // Many [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes. { [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index() // Works. { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */) { // ... } [HttpPost] [ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */) { // ... } // ... } This is a little bit crazy, because one application can have a lot of POST actions. Solution To avoid a large number of [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes (one for each POST action), the following ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute wrapper class can be helpful, where HTTP verbs can be specified:[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)] public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter { private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs) : this(verbs, null) { } public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt) { this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs); this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute() { Salt = salt }; } public void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext) { string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride(); if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase)) { this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext); } } } When this attribute is declared on controller, only HTTP requests with the specified verbs are validated:[ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper(HttpVerbs.Post, Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)] public class SomeController : Controller { // GET actions are not affected. // Only HTTP POST requests are validated. } Now one single attribute on controller turns on validation for all POST actions. Maybe it would be nice if HTTP verbs can be specified on the built-in [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute, which is easy to implemented. Submit token via AJAX The browser side problem is, if server side turns on anti-forgery validation for POST, then AJAX POST requests will fail be default. Problem For AJAX scenarios, when request is sent by jQuery instead of form:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 // Token is not posted. }, callback); This kind of AJAX POST requests will always be invalid, because server side code cannot see the token in the posted data. Solution The tokens are printed to browser then sent back to server. So first of all, HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() must be called somewhere. Now the browser has token in HTML and cookie. Then jQuery must find the printed token in the HTML, and append token to the data before sending:$.post(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1, __RequestVerificationToken: getToken() // Token is posted. }, callback); To be reusable, this can be encapsulated into a tiny jQuery plugin:/// <reference path="jquery-1.4.2.js" /> (function ($) { $.getAntiForgeryToken = function (tokenWindow, appPath) { // HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() must be invoked to print the token. tokenWindow = tokenWindow && typeof tokenWindow === typeof window ? tokenWindow : window; appPath = appPath && typeof appPath === "string" ? "_" + appPath.toString() : ""; // The name attribute is either __RequestVerificationToken, // or __RequestVerificationToken_{appPath}. tokenName = "__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath; // Finds the <input type="hidden" name={tokenName} value="..." /> from the specified. // var inputElements = $("input[type='hidden'][name='__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath + "']"); var inputElements = tokenWindow.document.getElementsByTagName("input"); for (var i = 0; i < inputElements.length; i++) { var inputElement = inputElements[i]; if (inputElement.type === "hidden" && inputElement.name === tokenName) { return { name: tokenName, value: inputElement.value }; } } return null; }; $.appendAntiForgeryToken = function (data, token) { // Converts data if not already a string. if (data && typeof data !== "string") { data = $.param(data); } // Gets token from current window by default. token = token ? token : $.getAntiForgeryToken(); // $.getAntiForgeryToken(window). data = data ? data + "&" : ""; // If token exists, appends {token.name}={token.value} to data. return token ? data + encodeURIComponent(token.name) + "=" + encodeURIComponent(token.value) : data; }; // Wraps $.post(url, data, callback, type). $.postAntiForgery = function (url, data, callback, type) { return $.post(url, $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data), callback, type); }; // Wraps $.ajax(settings). $.ajaxAntiForgery = function (settings) { settings.data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(settings.data); return $.ajax(settings); }; })(jQuery); In most of the scenarios, it is Ok to just replace $.post() invocation with $.postAntiForgery(), and replace $.ajax() with $.ajaxAntiForgery():$.postAntiForgery(url, { productName: "Tofu", categoryId: 1 }, callback); // Token is posted. There might be some scenarios of custom token. Here $.appendAntiForgeryToken() is provided:data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, token); // Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery(). $.post(url, data, callback); And there are scenarios that the token is not in the current window. For example, an HTTP POST request can be sent by iframe, while the token is in the parent window. Here window can be specified for $.getAntiForgeryToken():data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, $.getAntiForgeryToken(window.parent)); // Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery(). $.post(url, data, callback); If you have better solution, please do tell me.

    Read the article

  • Edit and Continue does not Work in VS 2010 / ASP.Net MVC 2

    - by Eric J.
    Although Enable Edit and Continue is checked on the Web tab of my ASP.Net MVC 2 project, I cannot in fact change the source code while running. For example, if I try to edit a controller while paused in the debugger, I cannot change the file (acts as if read only). I found a related post Edit and continue in ASP.NET web projects, however The answers seem to suggest I should be able to at least edit the code, then reload the page to see the result. I don't know what the distinction is between a Web Application and Web Site projects Any guidance is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Invalid padding on ASP 2.0 cookie, MVC looks ok

    - by brian b
    We have a cookie management library that writes a cookie containing some sensitive information, encrypted with Rijndael. The cookie encrypts and decrypts fine in unit tests (using Moq), works fine for MVC web applications, but when called from an ASP.net 2.0 website, the cookie cannot be decrypted. "Padding is invalid and cannot be removed." We are sure that the cookie value is valid because we tested it 10,000 times with random data in a unit test. There is something about what ASP.NET 2.0 does when it reads and writes the cookie that causes trouble. There has to be a gotcha. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET: images broken when combining URL Rewriting, asp:ImageButton and html base tag

    - by Nick G
    Hi, I'm using URL Rewriting under ASP.NET 4 (using ISAPI_Rewrite) and I'm finding that that some of my images are not loading as .NET does not seem to understand I'm using an html BASE tag (pretty standard and essential when doing URL Rewriting): eg in my development environment I have: <base href='http://localhost/venuefinder/Website/'></base> and on my pages I have: <asp:ImageButton runat="server" ImageUrl="~/images/button.gif" /> On the home page of the site (http://localhost/venuefinder/Website/) this works fine, however on a page that uses URL rewriting, the image does not work: /venuefinder/Website/venues/ashton_gate_stadium/V18639/ ..as the browser is trying to load: http://localhost/images/buttons/search-button.gif instead of: http://localhost/venuefinder/Website/venues/images/buttons/search-button.gif This is happening because .NET is rendering the button as: src="../../../images/buttons/search-button.gif" ...which is incorrect. Is there any way I can correct this problem so that .NET renders the correct src attribute for the image? (without all the ../../../ etc)

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MCV 2, re-use of SQL-Connection string

    - by cc0
    Hi, so I'm very very far from an expert on MVC or ASP.NET. I just want to make a few simple Controllers in C# at the moment, so I have the following question; Right now I have the connection string used by the controller, -inside- the controller itself. Which is kind of silly when there are multiple controllers using the same string. I'd like to be able to change the connection string in just one place and have it affect all controllers. Not knowing a lot about asp.net or the 'm' and 'v' part of MVC, what would be the best (and simplest) way of going about accomplishing just this? I'd appreciate any input on this, examples would be great too.

    Read the article

  • What's missing in ASP.NET MVC?

    - by LukaszW.pl
    Hello programmers, I think there are not many people who don't think that ASP.NET MVC is one of the greatest technologies Microsoft gave us. It gives full control over the rendered HTML, provides separation of concerns and suits to stateless nature of web. Next versions of framework gaves us new features and tools and it's great, but... what solutions should Microsoft include in new versions of framework? What are biggest gaps in comparison with another web frameworks like PHP or Ruby? What could improve developers productivity? What's missing in ASP.NET MVC?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET 4.5 Bundling in Debug Mode - Stale Resources

    - by RPM1984
    Is there any way we can make the ASP.NET 4.5 Bundling functionality generate GUID's as part of the querystring when running in debug mode (e.g bundling turned OFF). The problem is when developing locally, the scripts/CSS files are generated like this: <script type="text/javascript" src="/Content/Scripts/myscript.js" /> So if i change that file, i need to do a hard-refresh (sometimes a few times) to get the file to be picked up by the browser - annoying. Is there any way we can make it render out like this: <script type="text/javascript" src="/Content/Scripts/myscript.js?v=x" /> Where x is a GUID (e.g always unique). Ideas? I'm on ASP.NET MVC 4.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to share session state between asp.net aspx page making a call to an asp.net webservi

    - by Greg Balajewicz
    My Situation: I have 1 asp.net application with both aspx pages AND webservices I make calls (using ajax) to the webservice from an aspx page - all within the same asp.net application! Here is my problem/question Is there any way to share the session state? I.e. - the aspx page has a sessionID and the state is being maintained. When the call to the webservice is made, is there a way to automatically send the seesionID to the webservice and then be able to access the same session state from the webservice? -- That would greatly simplify my work! :) Many thanks for your ideas!!

    Read the article

  • What's missing in ASP.NET MVC?

    - by LukaszW.pl
    Hello stackoverflow, I think there are not many people who don't think that ASP.NET MVC is one of the greatest technologies Microsoft gave us. It gives full control over the rendered HTML, provides separation of concerns and suits to stateless nature of web. Next versions of framework gaves us new features and tools and it's great, but... what solutions should Microsoft include in new versions of framework? What are biggest gaps in comparison with another web frameworks like PHP or Ruby? What could improve developers productivity? What's missing in ASP.NET MVC?

    Read the article

  • asp.net, wcf authentication and caching

    - by andrew
    I need to place my app business logic into a WCF service. The service shouldn't be dependent on ASP.NET and there is a lot of data regarding the authenticated user which is frequently used in the business logic hence it's supposed to be cached (probably using a distributed cache). As for authentication - I'm going to use two level authentication: Front-End - forms authentication back-end (WCF Service) - message username authentication. For both authentications the same custom membership provider is supposed to be used. To cache the authenticated user data, I'm going to implement two service methods: 1) Authenticate - will retrieve the needed data and place it into the cache(where username will be used as a key) 2) SignOut - will remove the data from the cache Question 1. Is correct to perform authentication that way (in two places) ? Question 2. Is this caching strategy worth using or should I look at using aspnet compatible service and asp.net session ? Maybe, these questions are too general. But, anyway I'd like to get any suggestions or recommendations. Any Idea

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net MVC2 (RTM) breaks response filtering - "Filtering is not allowed"

    - by womp
    I've just done a test run of upgrading a project to ASP.Net MVC 2 (RTM) in anticipation of the full official .Net 4.0 release coming later this month. Our application is using a minimizer for our CSS and javascript. To do so, it is making use of the HttpResponse.Filter property to set a custom filter. With the upgrade, the setter for this property is throwing an HttpException saying "Filtering is not allowed." Looking that the HttpResponse.Filter property in reflector shows this: set { if (!this.UsingHttpWriter) { throw new HttpException(SR.GetString("Filtering_not_allowed")); } ... private bool UsingHttpWriter { get { return ((this._httpWriter != null) && (this._writer == this._httpWriter)); } } Clearly something has changed in the way the HttpResponse is writing to the output stream in MVC2. Does anyone know what the change is, or at least a workaround for this? EDIT: This seems pretty radical. Some further investigation shows that ASP.Net MVC 2 RTM is using a System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage.SwitchWriter as the Output property of an HttpResponse, whereas MVC 1 was using a plain old HttpWriter. That explains why the exception is being thrown. But that doesn't explain why they've chosen to completely break this functionality. This thread seems to indicate that this is just temporary... but this makes me pretty nervous... this is the RTM after all. Any further comments appreciated on this.

    Read the article

  • Support for nested model and class validation with ASP.NET MVC 2.0

    - by Diep-Vriezer
    I'm trying to validate a model containing other objects with validation rules using the System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations attributes was hoping the default MVC implementation would suffice: var obj = js.Deserialize(json, objectInfo.ObjectType); if(!TryValidateModel(obj)) { // Handle failed model validation. } The object is composed of primitive types but also contains other classes which also use DataAnnotications. Like so: public class Entry { [Required] public Person Subscriber { get; set; } [Required] public String Company { get; set; } } public class Person { public String FirstName { get; set;} [Required] public String Surname { get; set; } } The problem is that the ASP.NET MVC validation only goes down 1 level and only evaluates the properties of the top level class, as can be read on digitallycreated.net/Blog/54/deep-inside-asp.net-mvc-2-model-metadata-and-validation. Does anyone know an elegant solution to this? I've tried xVal, but they seem to use a non-recursive pattern (http://blog.stevensanderson.com/2009/01/10/xval-a-validation-framework-for-aspnet-mvc/). Someone must have run into this problem before right? Nesting objects in your model doesn't seem so weird if you're designing a web service.

    Read the article

  • Authenticating to Google Search Appliance using Basic HTTP auth and ASP.NET (VB)

    - by Chainlink
    I've run into a snag though which has to do with authentication between the Google Search Appliance and ASP. Normally, when asking for secure pages from the search appliance, the search appliance asks for credentials, then uses these credentials to try and access the secure results. If this attempt is successful, the page shows up in the results list. Since ASP is contacting the search appliance on the client's behalf, it will need to collect credentials and pass them along to the search appliance. I have tried a couple of different documented ways of accomplishing this, but they don't seem to work. Below is the code I have tried: 'Bypass SSL since discovery.gov.mb.ca does not have valid SSL cert (NOT PRODUCTION SAFE) ServerCertificateValidationCallback = New System.Net.Security.RemoteCertificateValidationCallback(AddressOf customXertificateValidation) googleUrl = "https://removed.com" Dim rdr As New XmlTextReader(googleUrl) Dim resolver As New XmlUrlResolver() Dim myCred As New System.Net.NetworkCredential("USERNAME", "PASSWORD", Nothing) Dim credCache As New CredentialCache() credCache.Add(New Uri(googleUrl), "Basic", myCred) resolver.Credentials = credCache rdr.XmlResolver = resolver doc = New System.Xml.XPath.XPathDocument(rdr) path = doc.CreateNavigator() Private Function customXertificateValidation(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal certificate As System.Security.Cryptography.X509Certificates.X509Certificate, ByVal chain As System.Security.Cryptography.X509Certificates.X509Chain, ByVal sslPolicyErrors As Net.Security.SslPolicyErrors) As Boolean Return True End Function

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  | Next Page >