Home / My Disclaimer / Who am I? / Search... / Sign in

// Claims

Preventing Frame Exploits in a Passive Claims Model

by Steve Syfuhs / November 30, 2010 04:00 PM

At a presentation a few weeks ago someone asked me about capturing session details during authentication at an STS by way of frames and JavaScript.  To paraphrase the question: “What prevents a malicious developer from sticking an RP within an iframe, cause a redirect to an STS, get some user to log in, and then capture the details through JavaScript from the parent page?”  There are a couple of ways this problem can be solved.  It’s a defense-in-depth problem where on their own, each piece won’t close every attack vector, but when used together you end up with a pretty solid solution.

  • First, a lot of new browsers will actually prevent cross-frame JavaScript calls when SSL is involved.  Depending on the browser, the JavaScript will throw the equivalent of an Access Denied exception.  This is not the case with all browser versions though.  Older browsers may not do this.
  • Second, some browsers will not allow you to host an SSL page in a frame if the parent page is not using SSL.  The easy fix for the malicious developer is to simply use SSL for the parent site, but that could be problematic as the CA’s theoretically verify the sites requesting certificates.
  • Third, you could write some JavaScript for the STS to bust out of the frame.  It would look something like this:

if (top != self)
{
    try
    {
        top.location.replace(self.location.href);
    }
    catch (e)
    {
    }
}

The problem with this is that it wouldn’t work if the browser has JavaScript disabled.

  • Fourth, there is a new HTTP header that Microsoft introduced in IE 8 that tells the browser that if the requested page is hosted in a frame to simply stop processing the request.  Safari and Chrome support it natively, and Firefox supports it with the NoScript add on.  The header is called X-Frame-Options and it can have two values: “DENY” which prevents all requests, and “SAMEORIGIN” which allows a page to be rendered if the parent page is the same page.  E.g. the parent is somesite.com/page and the framed page is somesite.com/page.

There are a couple of ways to add this header to your page.  First you can add it via ASP.NET:

Context.Response.AddHeader("x-frame-options", "DENY");

Or you could add it to all pages via IIS.  To do this open the IIS Manager and select the site in question.  Then select the Feature “HTTP Response Headers”:

image

Select Add… and then set the name to x-frame-options and the value to DENY:

image

By keeping in mind these options you can do a lot to prevent any exploits that use frames.

Generating Federation Metadata Dynamically

by Steve Syfuhs / November 03, 2010 04:00 PM

In a previous post we looked at what it takes to actually write a Security Token Service.  If we knew what the STS offered and required already, we could set up a relying party relatively easily with that setup.  However, we don’t always know what is going on.  That’s the purpose of federation metadata.  It gives us a basic breakdown of the STS so we can interact with it.

Now, if we are building a custom STS we don’t have anything that is creating this metadata.  We could do it manually by hardcoding stuff in an xml file and then signing it, but that gets ridiculously tedious after you have to make changes for the third or fourth time – which will happen.  A lot.  The better approach is to generate the metadata automatically.  So in this post we will do just that.

The first thing you need to do is create a endpoint.  There is a well known path of /FederationMetadata/2007-06/FederationMetadata.xml that is generally used, so let’s use that.  There are a lot of options to generate dynamic content and in Programming Windows Identity Foundation, Vitorrio uses a WCF Service:

[ServiceContract]
public interface IFederationMetadata
{    
    [ServiceBehavior]    
    [webGet(UriTemplate = "2007-06/FederationMetadata.xml")]    
    XElement FederationMetadata();
}

It’s a great approach, but for some reason I prefer the way that Dominick Baier creates the endpoint in StarterSTS.  He uses an IHttpHandler and a web.config entry to create a handler:

<location path="FederationMetadata/2007-06">    
    <system.webServer>
        <handlers>
            <add name="MetadataGenerator"
                path="FederationMetadata.xml"
                verb="GET"
                type="Syfuhs.TokenService.WSTrust.FederationMetadataHandler" 
                />        
            </handlers>    
    </system.webServer>    
    <system.web>        
        <authorization>
            <allow users="*" />
        </authorization>
    </system.web>
</location>

As such, I’m going to go that route.  Let’s take a look at the implementation for the handler:

using System.Web;

namespace Syfuhs.TokenService.WSTrust
{
    public class FederationMetadataHandler : IHttpHandler
    {
        public void ProcessRequest(HttpContext context)
        {
            context.Response.ClearHeaders();
            context.Response.Clear();
            context.Response.ContentType = "text/xml";
            MyAwesomeTokenServiceConfiguration.Current.SerializeMetadata(context.Response.OutputStream);

        }

        public bool IsReusable { get { return false; } }
    }
}

All the handler is doing is writing metadata out to a stream, which in this case is the response stream.  You can see that it is doing this through the MyAwesomeTokenServiceConfiguration class which we created in the previous article.  The SeriaizeMetadata method creates an instance of a MetadataSerializer and writes an entity to the stream:

public void SerializeMetadata(Stream stream)
{ 
    MetadataSerializer serializer = new MetadataSerializer(); 
    serializer.WriteMetadata(stream, GenerateEntities()); 
}

The entities are generated through a collection of tasks:

private EntityDescriptor GenerateEntities()
{
    if (entity != null)
        return entity;
            
    SecurityTokenServiceDescriptor sts = new SecurityTokenServiceDescriptor();
    FillOfferedClaimTypes(sts.ClaimTypesOffered);
    FillEndpoints(sts);
    FillSupportedProtocols(sts);
    FillSigningKey(sts);

    entity = new EntityDescriptor(new EntityId(string.Format("https://{0}", host))) 
    { 
        SigningCredentials = this.SigningCredentials 
    };

    entity.RoleDescriptors.Add(sts);
    return entity;
}

The entity is generated, and an object is created to describe the STS called a SecurityTokenServiceDescriptor.  At this point it’s just a matter of sticking in the data and defining the credentials used to sign the metadata:

private void FillSigningKey(SecurityTokenServiceDescriptor sts)
{
    KeyDescriptor signingKey = new KeyDescriptor(this.SigningCredentials.SigningKeyIdentifier)
    {
        Use = KeyType.Signing
    };

    sts.Keys.Add(signingKey);
}

private void FillSupportedProtocols(SecurityTokenServiceDescriptor sts)
{
    sts.ProtocolsSupported.Add(new System.Uri(WSFederationConstants.Namespace));
}

private void FillEndpoints(SecurityTokenServiceDescriptor sts)
{
    EndpointAddress activeEndpoint = new EndpointAddress(string.Format("https://{0}/STS/activeSTS.svc", host));

    sts.SecurityTokenServiceEndpoints.Add(activeEndpoint);
    sts.TargetScopes.Add(activeEndpoint);
}

private void FillOfferedClaimTypes(ICollection<DisplayClaim> claimTypes)
{
    claimTypes.Add(new DisplayClaim(ClaimTypes.Name, "Name", ""));
    claimTypes.Add(new DisplayClaim(ClaimTypes.Email, "Email", ""));
    claimTypes.Add(new DisplayClaim(ClaimTypes.Role, "Role", ""));
}

That in a nutshell is how to create a basic metadata document as well as sign it.  There is a lot more information you can put into this, and you can find more things to work with in the Microsoft.IdentityModel.Protocols.WSFederation.Metadata namespace.

The Basics of Building a Security Token Service

by Steve Syfuhs / October 29, 2010 04:00 PM

Last week at TechDays in Toronto I ran into a fellow I worked with while I was at Woodbine.  He works with a consulting firm Woodbine uses, and he caught my session on Windows Identity Foundation.  His thoughts were (essentially—paraphrased) that the principle of Claims Authentication was sound and a good idea, however implementing it requires a major investment.  Yes.  Absolutely.  You will essentially be adding a new tier to the application.  Hmm.  I’m not sure if I can get away with that analogy.  It will certainly feel like you are adding a new tier anyway.

What strikes me as the main investment is the Security Token Service.  When you break it down, there are a lot of moving parts in an STS.  In a previous post I asked what it would take to create something similar to ADFS 2.  I said it would be fairly straightforward, and broke down the parts as well as what would be required of them.  I listed:

  • Token Services
  • A Windows Authentication end-point
  • An Attribute store-property-to-claim mapper (maps any LDAP properties to any claim types)
  • An application management tool (MMC snap-in and PowerShell cmdlets)
  • Proxy Services (Allows requests to pass NAT’ed zones)

These aren’t all that hard to develop.  With the exception of the proxy services and token service itself, there’s a good chance we have created something similar to each one if user authentication is part of an application.  We have the authentication endpoint: a login form to do SQL Authentication, or the Windows Authentication Provider for ASP.NET.  We have the attribute store and something like a claims mapper: Active Directory, SQL databases, etc.  We even have an application management tool: anything you used to manage users in the first place.  This certainly doesn’t get us all the way there, but they are good starting points.

Going back to my first point, the STS is probably the biggest investment.  However, it’s kind of trivial to create an STS using WIF.  I say that with a big warning though: an STS is a security system.  Securing such a system is NOT trivial.  Writing your own STS probably isn’t the best way to approach this.  You would probably be better off to use an STS like ADFS.  With that being said it’s good to know what goes into building an STS, and if you really do have the proper resources to develop one, as well as do proper security testing (you probably wouldn’t be reading this article on how to do it in that case…), go for it.

For the sake of simplicity I’ll be going through the Fabrikam Shipping demo code since they did a great job of creating a simple STS.  The fun bits are in the Fabrikam.IPSts project under the Identity folder.  The files we want to look at are CustomSecurityTokenService.cs, CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration.cs, and the default.aspx code file.  I’m not sure I like the term “configuration”, as the way this is built strikes me as factory-ish.

image

The process is pretty simple.  A request is made to default.aspx which passes the request to FederatedPassiveSecurityTokenServiceOperations.ProcessRequest() as well as a newly instantiated CustomSecurityTokenService object by calling CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration.Current.CreateSecurityTokenService().

The configuration class contains configuration data for the STS (hence the name) like the signing certificate, but it also instantiates an instance of the STS using the configuration.  The code for is simple:

namespace Microsoft.Samples.DPE.Fabrikam.IPSts
{
    using Microsoft.IdentityModel.Configuration;
    using Microsoft.IdentityModel.SecurityTokenService;

    internal class CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration
: SecurityTokenServiceConfiguration
    {
        private static CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration current;

        private CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration()
        {
            this.SecurityTokenService = typeof(CustomSecurityTokenService);
            this.SigningCredentials =
new X509SigningCredentials(this.ServiceCertificate);
            this.TokenIssuerName = "https://ipsts.fabrikam.com/";
        }

        public static CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration Current
        {
            get
            {
                if (current == null)
                {
                    current = new CustomSecurityTokenServiceConfiguration();
                }

                return current;
            }
        }
    }
}

It has a base type of SecurityTokenServiceConfiguration and all it does is set the custom type for the new STS, the certificate used for signing, and the issuer name.  It then lets the base class handle the rest.  Then there is the STS itself.  It’s dead simple.  The custom class has a base type of SecurityTokenService and overrides a couple methods.  The important method it overrides is GetOutputClaimsIdentity():

protected override IClaimsIdentity GetOutputClaimsIdentity(
IClaimsPrincipal principal, RequestSecurityToken request, Scope scope)
{
    var inputIdentity = (IClaimsIdentity)principal.Identity;

    Claim name = inputIdentity.Claims.Single(claim =>
claim.ClaimType == ClaimTypes.Name);
    Claim email = new Claim(ClaimTypes.Email,
Membership.Provider.GetUser(name.Value, false).Email);
    string[] roles = Roles.Provider.GetRolesForUser(name.Value);

    var issuedIdentity = new ClaimsIdentity();
    issuedIdentity.Claims.Add(name);
    issuedIdentity.Claims.Add(email);

    foreach (var role in roles)
    {
        var roleClaim = new Claim(ClaimTypes.Role, role);
        issuedIdentity.Claims.Add(roleClaim);
    }

    return issuedIdentity;
}

It gets the authenticated user, grabs all the roles from the RolesProvider, and generates a bunch of claims then returns the identity.  Pretty simple.

At this point you’ve just moved the authentication and Roles stuff away from the application.  Nothing has really changed data-wise.  If you only cared about roles, name, and email you are done.  If you needed something more you could easily add in the logic to grab the values you needed. 

By no means is this production ready, but it is a good basis for how the STS creates claims.

Presentation: Changing the Identity Game with the Windows Identity Foundation

by Steve Syfuhs / October 13, 2010 04:00 PM

Rob Windsor and TVBUG are letting me present on November 8th on Claims-Based Authentication and Identification.  Here are the details:

Location: Room 1, Library, 2nd floor, North York Public Library

Date: Monday, November 8, 2010

Time:
6:30 to 6:50 (Pizza - Meet and Greet)
6:50 to 7:00 (Group Business)
7:00 to 9:00 (Presentation)

Topic: Changing the Identity Game with the Windows Identity Foundation

Abstract: Identity is a tricky thing to manage. These days every application requires some knowledge of the user, which inevitably requires users to log in and out of the applications to prove they are who they are as well as keep a record of their accounts. With the Windows Identity Foundation, there is a fundamental shift in the way we manage these users and their accounts. In this presentation we will take a look at the why's and dig into the how's of the Windows Identity Foundation by building an Identity aware application from scratch.

Directions

All TVBUG meetings are held at the North York Public Library or North York Memorial Hall. Both are located in the same building at Yonge Street and Park Home Avenue (North of the 401 between Sheppard and Finch across from Empress Walk). If you are taking the Subway get off at the North York Centre Station. The library meeting rooms are on the 2nd Floor. Memorial Hall meeting rooms are on the Concourse Level near the food court.

Using Claims Based Identities with SharePoint 2010

by Steve Syfuhs / September 29, 2010 04:00 PM

When SharePoint 2010 was developed, Microsoft took extra care to include support for a claims-based identity model.  There are quite a few benefits to doing it this way, one of which is that it simplifies managing identities across organizational structures.  So lets take a look at adding a Secure Token Service as an Authentication Provider to SharePoint 2010.

First, Some Prerequisites

  • You have to use PowerShell for most of this.  You wouldn’t/shouldn’t be adding too many Providers to SharePoint all that often so there isn’t a GUI for this.
  • The claims that SharePoint will know about must be known during setup.  This isn’t that big a deal, but…

Telling SharePoint about the STS

Once you’ve collected all the information you need, open up PowerShell as an Administrator and add the SharePoint snap-in on the server.

Add-PSSnapin Microsoft.SharePoint.PowerShell

Next we need to create the certificate and claim mapping objects:

$cert = New-Object System.Security.Cryptography.X509Certificates.X509Certificate2("d:\path\to\adfsCert.cer")

$claim1 = New-SPClaimTypeMapping -IncomingClaimType "http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/claims/role" -IncomingClaimTypeDisplayName "Role" –SameAsIncoming

$claim2 = New-SPClaimTypeMapping "http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity/claims/emailaddress" -IncomingClaimTypeDisplayName "EmailAddress" –SameAsIncoming

There should be three lines.  They will be word-wrapped.

The certificate is pretty straightforward.  It is the public key of the STS.  The claims are also pretty straightforward.  There are two claims: the roles of the identity, and the email address of the identity.  You can add as many as the STS will support.

Next is to define the realm of the Relying Party; i.e. the SharePoint server.

$realm = "urn:" + $env:ComputerName + ":adfs"

By using a URN value you can mitigate future changes to addresses.  This becomes especially useful in an intranet/extranet scenario.

Then we define the sign-in URL for the STS.  In this case, we are using ADFS:

$signinurl = https://[myAdfsServer.fullyqualified.domainname]/adfs/ls/

Mind the SSL.

And finally we put it all together:

New-SPTrustedIdentityTokenIssuer -Name "MyDomainADFS2" -Description "ADFS 2 Federated Server for MyDomain" -Realm $realm -ImportTrustCertificate $cert -ClaimsMappings $claim1,$claim2 -SignInUrl $signinurl -IdentifierClaim $claim2.InputClaimType

This should be a single line, word wrapped.  If you wanted to you could just call New-SPTrustedIdentityTokenIssuer and then fill in the values one at a time.  This might be useful for debugging.

At this point SharePoint now knows about the STS but none of the sites are set up to use it.

Authenticating SharePoint sites using the STS

For a good measure restart SharePoint/IIS.  Go into SharePoint Administration and create a new website and select Claims Based Authentication at the top:

image

Fill out the rest of the details and then when you get to Claims Authentication Types select Trusted Identity Provider and then select your STS.  In this case it is my ADFS Server:

image

Save the site and you are done.  Try navigating to the site and it should redirect you to your STS.  You can then manage users as you would normally with Active Directory accounts.

Claims Transformation and Custom Attribute Stores in Active Directory Federation Services 2

by Steve Syfuhs / September 14, 2010 04:00 PM

Active Directory Federation Services 2 has an amazing amount of power when it comes to claims transformation.  To understand how it works lets take a look at a set of claims rules and the flow of data from ADFS to the Relying Party:

image

We can have multiple rules to transform claims, and each one takes precedence via an Order:

image

In the case above, Transform Rule 2 transformed the claims that Rule 1 requested from the attribute store, which in this case was Active Directory.  This becomes extremely useful because there are times when some of the data you need to pull out of Active Directory isn’t in a useable format.  There are a couple options to fix this:

  • Make the receiving application deal with it
  • Modify it before sending it off
  • Ignore it

Lets take a look at the second option (imagine an entire blog post on just ignoring it…).  ADFS allows us to transform claims before they are sent off in the token by way of the Claims Rule Language.  It follows the pattern: "If a set of conditions is true, issue one or more claims."  As such, it’s a big Boolean system.  Syntactically, it’s pretty straightforward.

To issue a claim by implicitly passing true:

=> issue(Type = "http://MyAwesomeUri/claims/AwesomeRole", Value = "Awesome Employee");

What that did was ignored the fact that there weren’t any conditions and will always pass a value.

To check a condition:

c:[Type == "http://schemas.microsoft.com/ws/2008/06/identity/claims/role", Value == "SomeRole"]
    => issue(Type = "http://MyAwesomeUri/claims/AwesomeRole", Value = "AwesomeRole");

Breaking down the query, we are checking that a claim created in a previous step has a specific type; in this case role and the claim’s value is SomeRole.  Based on that we are going to append a new claim to the outgoing list with a new type and a new value.

That’s pretty useful in it’s own right, but ADFS can actually go even further by allowing you to pull data out of custom data stores by way of Custom Attribute Stores.  There are four options to choose from when getting data:

  1. Active Directory (default)
  2. LDAP (Any directory that you can query via LDAP)
  3. SQL Server (awesome)
  4. Custom built store via custom .NET assembly

Let’s get some data from a SQL database.  First we need to create the attribute store.  Go to Trust Relationships/Attribute Stores in the ADFS MMC Console (or you could also use PowerShell):

image

Then add an attribute store:

image

All you need is a connection string to the database in question:

image

The next step is to create the query to pull data from the database.  It’s surprisingly straightforward.  This is a bit of a contrived example, but lets grab the certificate name and the certificate hash from a database table where the certificate name is equal to the value of the http://MyCertUri/UserCertName claim type:

c:[type == http://MyCertUri/UserCertName]
   => issue(store = "MyAttributeStore",
         types = ("http://test/CertName", "http://test/CertHash"),
         query = "SELECT CertificateName, CertificateHash FROM UserCertificates WHERE CertificateName='{0}'", param = c.value);

For each column you request in the SQL query, you need a claim type as well.  Also, unlike most SQL queries, to use parameters we need to use a format similar to String.Format instead of using @MyVariable syntaxes.

In a nutshell this is how you deal with claims transformation.  For a more in depth article on how to do this check out TechNet: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd807118(WS.10).aspx.

Converting Bootstrap Tokens to SAML Tokens

by Steve Syfuhs / September 09, 2010 04:00 PM

there comes a point where using an eavesdropping application to catch packets as they fly between Secure Token Services and Relying Parties becomes tiresome.  For me it came when I decided to give up on creating a man-in-the-middle between SSL sessions between ADFS and applications.  Mainly because ADFS doesn’t like that.  At all.

Needless to say I wanted to see the tokens.  Luckily, Windows Identity Foundation has the solution by way of the Bootstrap token.  To understand what it is, consider how this whole process works.  Once you’ve authenticated, the STS will POST a chunk of XML (the SAML Token) back to the RP.  WIF will interpret it as necessary and do it’s magic generating a new principal with the payload.  However, in some instances you need to keep this token intact.  This would be the case if you were creating a web service and needed to forward the token.  What WIF does is generate a bootstrap token from the SAML token, in the event you needed to forward it off to somewhere.

Before taking a look at it, let's add in some useful using statements:

using System;
using System.IdentityModel.Tokens;
using System.Text;
using System.Threading;
using System.Xml;
using Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims;
using Microsoft.IdentityModel.Tokens;
using Microsoft.IdentityModel.Tokens.Saml11;

The bootstrap token is attached to IClaimsPrincipal identity:

SecurityToken bootstrapToken = ((IClaimsPrincipal)Thread.CurrentPrincipal).Identities[0].BootstrapToken;

However if you do this out of the box, BootstrapToken will be null.  By default, WIF will not save the token.  We need to explicitly enable this in the web.config file.  Add this line under <microsoft.IdentityModel><service><securityTokenHandlers>:

<securityTokenHandlerConfiguration saveBootstrapTokens="true" />

Once you’ve done that, WIF will load the token.

The properties are fairly straightforward, but you can’t just get a blob from it:

image

Luckily we have some code to convert from the bootstrap token to a chunk of XML:

SecurityToken bootstrapToken = ((IClaimsPrincipal)Thread.CurrentPrincipal).Identities[0].BootstrapToken;

StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();

using (var writer = XmlWriter.Create(sb))
{
     new Saml11SecurityTokenHandler(new SamlSecurityTokenRequirement()).WriteToken(writer, bootstrapToken);
}

string theXml = sb.ToString();

We get a proper XML document:

image

That’s all there is to it.

Converting Claims to Windows Tokens and User Impersonation

by Steve Syfuhs / September 09, 2010 04:00 PM

In a domain environment it is really useful to switch user contexts in a web application.  This could be if you are needing to log in with credentials that have elevated permissions (or vice-versa) or just needing to log in as another user.

It’s pretty easy to do this with Windows Identity Foundation and Claims Authentication.  When the WIF framework is installed, a service is installed (that is off by default) that can translate Claims to Windows Tokens.  This is called (not surprisingly) the Claims to Windows Token Service or (c2WTS).

Following the deploy-with-least-amount-of-attack-surface methodology, this service does not work out of the box.  You need to turn it on and enable which user’s are allowed to impersonate via token translation.  Now, this doesn’t mean which users can switch, it means which users running the process are allowed to switch.  E.g. the process running the IIS application pools local service/network service/local system/etc (preferably a named service user other than system users).

To allow users to do this go to C:\Program Files\Windows Identity Foundation\v3.5\c2wtshost.exe.config and add in the service users to <allowedCallers>:

<windowsTokenService> 
  <!-- 
      By default no callers are allowed to use the Windows Identity Foundation Claims To NT Token Service. 
      Add the identities you wish to allow below. 
    --> 
  <allowedCallers> 
    <clear/> 
    <!-- <add value="NT AUTHORITY\Network Service" /> --> 
    <!-- <add value="NT AUTHORITY\Local Service" /> –> 
    <!-- <add value="nt authority\system" /> –> 
    <!-- <add value="NT AUTHORITY\Authenticated Users" /> --> 
  </allowedCallers> 
</windowsTokenService> 

You should notice that by default, all users are not allowed.  Once you’ve done that you can start up the service.  It is called Claims to Windows Token Service in the Services MMC snap-in.

That takes care of the administrative side of things.  Lets write some code.  But first, some usings:

using System;
using System.Linq;
using System.Security.Principal;
using System.Threading;
using Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims;
using Microsoft.IdentityModel.WindowsTokenService;

The next step is to actually generate the token.  From an architectural perspective, we want to use the UPN claims type as that’s what the service wants to see.  To get the claim, we do some simple LINQ:

IClaimsIdentity identity = (ClaimsIdentity)Thread.CurrentPrincipal.Identity;
string upn = identity.Claims.Where(c => c.ClaimType == ClaimTypes.Upn).First().Value;

if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(upn))
{
    throw new Exception("No UPN claim found");
}

Following that we do the impersonation:

WindowsIdentity windowsIdentity = S4UClient.UpnLogon(upn);

using (WindowsImpersonationContext ctxt = windowsIdentity.Impersonate())
{
    DoSomethingAsNewUser();

    ctxt.Undo(); // redundant with using { } statement
}

To release the token we call the Undo() method, but if you are within a using { } statement the Undo() method is called when the object is disposed.

One thing to keep in mind though.  If you do not have permission to impersonate a user a System.ServiceModel.Security.SecurityAccessDeniedException will be thrown.

That’s all there is to it.

Implementation Details

In my opinion, these types of calls really shouldn’t be made all that often.  Realistically you need to take a look at how impersonation fits into the application and then go from there.

Build your own Directory Federation Service

by Steve Syfuhs / September 02, 2010 04:00 PM

This is more of a random collection of thoughts because earlier today I came to the conclusion that I need something very similar to Active Directory Federation Services, except for non-domain users.  This is relatively easy to do; all I need is to create a Secure Token Service with a user store for the back end. 

The simplest approach is to use ASP.NET Membership and Roles with SqlProvider’s wrapped up by some WIF special sauce.  Turns out Dominick Baier already did just that with StarterSTS.

The problems I have with this is that it’s a pain to manage when you start getting more than a hundred or so users.  Extending user properties is hard to do too.  So my solution is to use something that is designed for user identities… an LDAP directory.  If it’s good enough for Active Directory, it’ll be plenty useful for this situation.

Reasoning
As an aside, the reason I’m not using Active Directory in the first place is because I need to manage a few thousand well known users without CAL’s.  This would amount to upwards of a couple hundred thousand dollars in licensing costs that just isn’t in the budget.  Further, most of these users probably wouldn’t use any of our systems that use Active Directory for authentication, but nevertheless, we need accounts for them.

Also, it would be a lot easier to manage creation and modification of user accounts because there are loads of processes that have been designed to pull user data out of HR applications into LDAP directories instead of custom SQL queries.

So lets think about what makes up Active Directory Federation Services.  It has roles that provides:

  • Token Services
  • A Windows Authentication end-point
  • An Attribute store-property-to-claim mapper (maps any LDAP properties to any claim types)
  • An application management tool (MMC snap-in and PowerShell cmdlets)
  • Proxy Services (Allows requests to pass NAT’ed zones)

That’s a pretty lightweight product when you compare it to the other services in Microsoft’s Identity stack. 

We can simplify it even further by breaking down the roles we need.

Token Services

This is actually pretty easy to accomplish.  Refer back to the WIF magic sauce.

Authentication end-point

This is just (well, you know what I mean) a web page login control.  We can’t do Windows Authentication without Kerberos (or NTLM), and we can’t do Kerberos without Active Directory (technically it could be done, but you’d be crazy to try).

Attribute store-property-to-claim mapper

ADFS can connect to a bunch of different attribute stores, including custom built stores if you provide assemblies.  We only really need to map to a few LDAP properties, and make it easy to map to other properties in the future.

Application management tool

This would be to manage the mapper and a few STS settings like URI names and certificates.  This, I think, would be a relatively simple application if we designed the configuration database properly.

Proxy Services

Proxies are a pain in the butt.  Useful in general, but we don’t really need to think about this at the moment.

Some Warnings

There are some things that are worth mentioning.  We have to be really careful about what we create because we are developing a serious piece of the security infrastructure.  Yes, it is for a group of employees that won’t have much access to anything dangerous (if they need access, they’d be migrated to Active Directory), but nevertheless we are creating the main ingress point for the majority of our employees.  It also needs to be accessible from the internet.

It may sound like I think it’ll be a synch to develop this system and have it work securely, but in reality there is a lot that will need to go into it to protect the network, the employees, and the data this could possibly interact with.  It is tough to develop applications securely.  It is far harder to develop secure applications whose sole responsibility is security related.

Next Steps

The next step is to design the thing.  I know how it will exist in relation to the systems it will be used to provide identity to, but aside from that, the architecture of the thing is still unknown.  With any luck I can accomplish rough designs tomorrow on the train, on my way to visit family for the holiday.

Better yet, maybe while visiting with family. Winking smile

Using the ASP.NET Roles Provider with Windows Identity Foundation

by Steve Syfuhs / August 30, 2010 04:00 PM

Using the Windows Identity Foundation to handle user authentication and identity management can require you to drastically rethink how you will build your application.  There are a few fundamental differences between how authentication and roles will be handled when you switch to a Claims model. 

As an example if you used an STS to provide Claims to your application, you wouldn’t (couldn’t really) use the FormsAuthentication class.

Another thing to keep in mind is how you would handle Roles.  WIF sort of handles roles if you were to use <location> tags in web.config files like:

  <location path="test.aspx">
    <system.web>
      <authorization>
        <deny users="*" />
        <allow roles="admin" />
      </authorization>
    </system.web>
  </location>

WIF would handle this in an earlier part of the page lifecycle, and only allow authenticated users with a returned Role claim of admin.  This works well for some cases, but not all.

In larger applications we may want custom Roles, and the ability to map these roles to the Roles provided by the STS. 

This is by no means a place to tell you when you should use what architectural design, but a lot of times we want somewhere in the middle of these extremes…

Sometimes we just want to use the Roles class to check for role membership based on the Role claims.  From what I can find there is no RolesProvider implementation for WIF, so I wrote a very simple provider.  It is by all rights a hack.  The reason I say this is because there are quite a few methods that just can’t be implemented.  For instance, getting roles for other users is impossible, or adding a user to a role, or creating a role, deleting a role, etc.  This is all impossible because we can’t send anything back to the STS telling it what to do with the roles.

We are also limited to the scope of the roles.  I can only get the roles of the currently logged in user, nothing beyond.  So, with all the usual warnings (it works on my machine, don’t blame me if it steals your soul, etc)…

using System;
using System.Linq;
using System.Threading;
using System.Web.Security;
using Microsoft.IdentityModel.Claims;

public class ClaimsRoleProvider : RoleProvider
{
    IClaimsIdentity claimsIdentity;
    ClaimCollection userClaims;

    private void initClaims()
    {
        claimsIdentity = ((IClaimsPrincipal)(Thread.CurrentPrincipal)).Identities[0];
        userClaims = claimsIdentity.Claims;
    }

    public override string ApplicationName
    {
        get
        {
            initClaims();
            return claimsIdentity.GetType().ToString();
        }
        set
        {
            throw new NotImplementedException();
        }
    }

    public override bool RoleExists(string roleName)
    {
        initClaims();

        return userClaims.Where(r => r.Value == roleName).Any();
    }

    public override bool IsUserInRole(string username, string roleName)
    {
        initClaims();

        return userClaims.Where(r => r.Value == roleName).Any();
    }

    public override string[] GetRolesForUser(string username)
    {
        initClaims();

        return userClaims.Where(r => r.ClaimType == ClaimTypes.Role).Select(r => r.Value).ToArray();
    }

    public override string[] GetAllRoles()
    {
        initClaims();

        return userClaims.Where(r => r.ClaimType == ClaimTypes.Role).Select(r => r.Value).ToArray();
    }

    #region Not implementable

    public override string[] GetUsersInRole(string roleName)
    {
        throw new NotImplementedException();
    }

    public override void RemoveUsersFromRoles(string[] usernames, string[] roleNames)
    {
        throw new NotImplementedException();
    }

    public override void CreateRole(string roleName)
    {
        throw new NotImplementedException();
    }

    public override bool DeleteRole(string roleName, bool throwOnPopulatedRole)
    {
        throw new NotImplementedException();
    }

    public override string[] FindUsersInRole(string roleName, string usernameToMatch)
    {
        throw new NotImplementedException();
    }

    public override void AddUsersToRoles(string[] usernames, string[] roleNames)
    {
        throw new NotImplementedException();
    }

    #endregion
}

The next step is to modify the web.config to use this provider.  I put this in a separate assembly so it could be re-used.

    <roleManager enabled="true" defaultProvider="claimsRoleProvider">
      <providers>
        <clear />
        <add name="claimsRoleProvider" type="ClaimsRoleProvider, MyAssem.Providers,
Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=4a27739ef3347280" />
      </providers>
    </roleManager>

One final thing to be aware of… Roles.IsUserInRole(string roleName) uses IPrincipal.Identity.Name in it’s overloaded version in lieu of a username parameter which could result in this ArgumentNullException:

Value cannot be null.
Parameter name: username

Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.
Exception Details: System.ArgumentNullException: Value cannot be null.
Parameter name: username
Source Error:

Line 17:         var claims = from c in claimsIdentity.Claims select c;
Line 18: 
Line 19:         bool inRole = Roles.IsUserInRole("VPN");
Line 20:         
Line 21:         foreach (var r in claims)

Since the IClaimsIdentity is getting generated based on the claims it receives, it sets the Name property to whatever claim value is associated with the http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity/claims/name claim type. If one isn't present, it will be set to null.

It took way too long for me to figure that one out. :)

// About

Steve is a renaissance kid when it comes to technology. He spends his time in the security stack.