I've successfully implemented SSO authentication using Spring-SAML extension. Primary requirement for us to support IDP-initiated SSO to our application. Well, by using the configurations from spring-security-saml2-sample even SP-initiated SSO flow also works for us.
Question: Is keystore is used in IDP-initiated SSO (if metadata has certificate)? If not used, I would like to get rid of keystore configurations from securityContext.xml.
Note: SP-initiated SSO and Global logout is not needed for us. We use Okta as IDP.
This is a good feature request. I've opened https://jira.spring.io/browse/SES-160 for you and support is available in Spring SAML's trunk with the following documentation:
In case your application doesn't need to create digital signatures
and/or decrypt incoming messages, it is possible to use an empty
implementation of the keystore which doesn't require any JKS file
- org.springframework.security.saml.key.EmptyKeyManager. This can be the
case for example when using only IDP-Initialized single sign-on.
Please note that when using the EmptyKeyManager some of Spring SAML
features will be unavailable. This includes at least SP-initialized
Single Sign-on, Single Logout, usage of additional keys in
ExtendedMetadata and verification of metadata signatures. Use the
following bean in order to initialize the EmptyKeyManager:
<bean id="keyManager" class="org.springframework.security.saml.key.EmptyKeyManager"/>
Related
I'm new to IdentityServer4 (2.5) and certificate setup so please bear with me. I think that I've chased down everything I could. I am using it with ASP.Net Core 2.2.0 in a proof of concept app. I have OpenIdConnect with an authority app and a client using cookies with X509Certificate2. Works great on my local machine; however, when I deploy to IIS I get this error:
System.InvalidOperationException: IDX20803: Unable to obtain configuration from: 'https://my.com/mpauth/.well-known/openid-configuration'. ---> System.ArgumentException: IDX20108: The address specified 'http://my.com/mpauth/.well-known/openid-configuration/jwks' is not valid as per HTTPS scheme. Please specify an https address for security reasons. If you want to test with http address, set the RequireHttps property on IDocumentRetriever to false.
The problem is here - http://my.com/mpauth/.well-known/openid-configuration/jwks. If I put that in the browser I get an error; however, if I change http to https I get the data. What setting controls this?
TL;DR
In most cases IdentityServer defers the base hostname/URI from the incoming request but there might be deployment scenarios which require enforcing it via the IssuerUri and/or PublicOrigin options as documented here.
More Info
The URL you are getting in your exception is part of the discovery lookup. It is necessary for validating tokens (e.g. in an applications auth middleware).
There should be a first request to .../.well-known/openid-configuration (the main discovery document) that refers to several other URIs and one of them should be the jwks (signing key sets). In most cases the other URIs in openid-configuration will point to the same primary hostname and protocol scheme your identity server is using. In your case it looks like the scheme changes to HTTP which might be unwanted in this day and age.
Is it possible, that the deployed IdentityServer lives behind a load balancer/SSL termination appliance? This could cause behavior.
I am not sure about IIS details but there might also be some kind of default hostname/URI thing at play.
We currently have ADFS 2.0 with hotfix 2 rollup installed and working properly as an identity provider for several external relying parties using SAML authentication. This week we attempted to add a new relying party, however, when a client presents the authentication request from the new party, ADFS simply returns an error page with a reference number and does not prompt the client for credentials.
I checked the server ADFS 2.0 event log for the reference number, but it is not present (searching the correlation id column). I enabled the ADFS trace log, re-executed the authentication attempt and this message was presented:
Failed to process the Web request because the request is not valid. Cannot get protocol message from HTTP query. The following errors occurred when trying to parse incoming HTTP request:
Microsoft.IdentityServer.Protocols.Saml.HttpSamlMessageException: MSIS7015: This request does not contain the expected protocol message or incorrect protocol parameters were found according to the HTTP SAML protocol bindings.
at Microsoft.IdentityServer.Web.HttpSamlMessageFactory.CreateMessage(HttpContext httpContext)
at Microsoft.IdentityServer.Web.FederationPassiveContext.EnsureCurrent(HttpContext context)
As the message indicates that the request is not well formed, I went ahead and ran the request through xmlsectool and validated it against the SAML protocol XSD (http://docs.oasis-open.org/security/saml/v2.0/saml-schema-protocol-2.0.xsd) and it came back clean:
C:\Users\ebennett\Desktop\xmlsectool-1.2.0>xmlsectool.bat --validateSchema --inFile metaauth_kld_request.xml --schemaDirectory . --verbose
INFO XmlSecTool - Reading XML document from file 'metaauth_kld_request.xml'
DEBUG XmlSecTool - Building DOM parser
DEBUG XmlSecTool - Parsing XML input stream
INFO XmlSecTool - XML document parsed and is well-formed.
DEBUG XmlSecTool - Building W3 XML Schema from file/directory 'C:\Users\ebennett\Desktop\xmlsectool-1.2.0\.'
DEBUG XmlSecTool - Schema validating XML document
INFO XmlSecTool - XML document is schema valid
So, I'm thinking that ADFS isn't playing full compliance with the SAML specification. To verify, I manually examined the submitted AuthnRequest, and discovered that our vendor is making use of the 'Extensions' element to embed their custom properties (which is valid, according to the SAML specification) (note: "ns33" below correctly namspaces "urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:protocol" elsewhere in the request)
<ns33:Extensions>
<vendor_ns:fedId xmlns:vendor_ns="urn:vendor.name.here" name="fedId" value="http://idmfederation.vendorname.org"/>
</ns33:Extensions>
If I remove the previous element from the AuthnRequest and resubmit it to ADFS, everything goes swimmingly. And, in fact, I can leave the 'Extensions' container and simply edit out the vendor namespaced element, and ADFS succeeds.
Now, I guess I have 3 questions:
Why was the reference number not logged to the ADFS log? That really would have helped my early debugging efforts
Is it a known issue that ADFS's SAML handler cannot handle custom elements defined within the Extensions element, and if so, is there a way to add support (or at least not crash while handling it)? My vendor has offered to change the SAML AuthnRequest generated to omit that tag, but said that it 'may take some time'-- and we all know what that means...
Does anyone think that installing ADFS hotfix rollup 3 will address this situation? I didn't see anything in the doc to indicate the affirmative.
Thanks for your feedback.
When facing a MSIS7015 ADFS error, the best place to start would be enabling ADFS Tracing. Login to the ADFS server as admin and run the following command. If you have a very busy ADFS server, might be wise to do it when the server is not as busy.
C:\Windows\System32\> wevtutil sl “AD FS Tracing/Debug” /L:5
C:\Windows\System32\> eventvwr.msc
In Event Viewer select “Application and Services Logs”, right-click and select “View – Show Analytics and Debug Logs”
Go to AD FS Tracing – Debug, right-click and select “Enable Log” to start Trace Debugging.
Process your ADFS login / logout steps and when finished, go to the event viewer mmc find the sub tree AD FS Tracing – Debug, right-click and select “Disable Log” to stop Trace Debugging.
Look for EventID 49 - incoming AuthRequest - and verify values are not being sent with CAPs value. For example, in my case, it was I was receiving the following values: IsPassive='False', ForceAuthn='False'
In my case, to address the issue, all I needed to do was create incoming claim transformer rule - for the distinct endpoints.
Once the CAPs were transformed to lower case true and false, authentication started working.
Http Form adapter serves as an authentication service in my application. I have not implemented any application on the Identity Provider to get user inputs.
Therefore, on successful authentication, SP verifies the user's signature and redirects to the application. At my target Resource, I receive an open token. Is it still possible to utilize the open Token Jar to read the user attributes from OTK?
**Note: ** In Service Provider, I use open token Adapter.
Also, please let me know if there is any other possible way of getting the user attributes other than using the open token adapter/http form adapter.
Thanks.
There are numerous SP Adapters you can choose to use for your last mile integration with your application. The OpenToken Adapter is just one of them. If your application is in Java and you are using the SP OpenToken Adapter, then you would most likely use the Java OpenToken Agent implementation within your application to read the OTK (documented in the Java Integration Kit). If you look at the Add Ons list, there are actually 3 flavors of OTK Agents (.NET, Java and PHP from PingID. Ruby on Rails and Perl are available via respective Open Source repositories).
However, you are not limited to OpenToken Adapters. The Agentless Integration Kit is also very popular for SP/last-mile integration with PingFederate.
Unfortunately, the question is just too open ended for the Stackoverflow format. I would suggest talking to your Ping Identity Solution Architect who can help steer you in the right direction and ask the necessary follow-up questions on your use case.
If understand the question correctly, you desire attributes to be fulfilled that the web application can read and utilize. This starts with the SP Connection configuration. I am going to assume you are using Active Directory and already configured that data source along with the Password Credential Validator (PCV) for the HTML Form IdP Adapter. In the SP Connection you will need to extend the attribute contract to define the values to put into the SAML assertion and then use the Active Directory data source to fulfill the attributes. When the SAML assertion is received by the PingFederate SP role server, the SP Adapter maps the attribute values from the SAML assertion into the OpenToken. When your application receives the OpenToken, it can read the values.
I'm trying to implement a SAML 2.0 authentication against Windows ADFS for a web application. So far I succeeded in authenticating and getting what I need from ADFS by manually configuring the Relying Party Trust and the assigned Claim Rules.
Now I want to provide federation metadata for my application to make it easier to set up the required stuff in ADFS. However I can't figure out how to pass the required Claim Rules in that metadata.
Here's what I have so far:
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<EntityDescriptor xmlns="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:metadata" xmlns:saml="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:assertion" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" entityID="dokuwiki-entity" validUntil="2015-03-24T20:30:16Z">
<SPSSODescriptor protocolSupportEnumeration="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:protocol" WantAssertionsSigned="true">
<NameIDFormat>urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:nameid-format:transient</NameIDFormat>
<NameIDFormat>urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:nameid-format:persistent</NameIDFormat>
<AssertionConsumerService index="1" isDefault="true" Binding="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:bindings:HTTP-POST" Location="https://perd.cosmo/dw-2014-01-13/doku.php?id=start"/>
<AttributeConsumingService index="1">
<ServiceName xml:lang="en">DokuWiki</ServiceName>
<RequestedAttribute isRequired="true" Name="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/05/identity/claims/emailaddress" NameFormat="urn:oasis:names:tc:SAML:2.0:attrname-format:uri" FriendlyName="E-Mail-Adresse" />
</AttributeConsumingService>
</SPSSODescriptor>
<Organization>
<OrganizationName xml:lang="en">DokuWiki</OrganizationName>
<OrganizationDisplayName xml:lang="en">DokuWiki</OrganizationDisplayName>
<OrganizationURL xml:lang="en">https://www.dokuwiki.org</OrganizationURL>
</Organization>
</EntityDescriptor>
From what I understand the RequestedAttribute should tell the ADFS to send me the user's E-Mail address upon authentication. Unfortunately after using this metadata to set up the Relying Party Trust no Claim Rules are set up.
Question: Is it possible to set up Claim Rules through metadata or has this always to be done manually? If it is possible where do I find the appropriate documentation?
You have to setup the claimsrules manually (or through powershell). ADFS does not look at that part of the metadata.
I would like to configure Tomcat to be able to connect to AD and authenticate users accordingly.
In addition, I would also like to invoke some web services (in this case, Share Point) using the client credentials.
So far, I've managed to successfully configure Tomcat to use SPNEGO authentication, as described in the tutorial at http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-7.0-doc/windows-auth-howto.html. Note that I have used Tomcat's SPNEGO authentication (not Source Forge's or Waffle).
I did not use Source Forge's implementation since I wanted to keep things simple and use Tomcat's as provided out of the box. In addition, I wanted all the authentication and authorization to be handled by Tomcat, using the SPNEGO as the authentication method in WEB.XML and Tomcat's JNDI realm for authorization.
Also I have not used WAFFLE, since this is Windows only.
I'm using CXF as my Web Service stack. According to the CXF documentation at http://cxf.apache.org/docs/client-http-transport-including-ssl-support.html#ClientHTTPTransport%28includingSSLsupport%29-SpnegoAuthentication%28Kerberos%29, all you need to do to authenticate with the a web service (in my case, Share Point) is to use:
<conduit name="{http://example.com/}HelloWorldServicePort.http-conduit"
xmlns="http://cxf.apache.org/transports/http/configuration">
<authorization>
<AuthorizationType>Negotiate</AuthorizationType>
<Authorization>CXFClient</Authorization>
</authorization>
</conduit>
and configure CXFClient in jaas.conf (in my case, where Tomcat's server JAAS configuration is located, such that my jass.conf looks like:
CXFClient {
com.sun.security.auth.module.Krb5LoginModule required client=true useTicketCache=true debug=true;
};
com.sun.security.jgss.krb5.initiate {
com.sun.security.auth.module.Krb5LoginModule required
doNotPrompt=true
principal="HTTP/tomcatsrv.corporate.intra#CORPORATE.INTRA"
useKeyTab=true
keyTab="C:/Program Files/Apache/apache-tomcat-7.0.27/conf/tomcatsrv.keytab"
storeKey=true
debug=true;
};
com.sun.security.jgss.krb5.accept {
com.sun.security.auth.module.Krb5LoginModule required
doNotPrompt=true
principal="HTTP/tomcatsrv.corporate.intra#CORPORATE.INTRA"
useKeyTab=true
keyTab="C:/Program Files/Apache/apache-tomcat-7.0.27/conf/tomcatsrv.keytab"
storeKey=true
debug=true;
};
Yet, when I'm invoking the web service, it is invoked under the service username (i.e. Tomcat's username configured in AD and in tomcatsrv.keytab), rather than the client's username (e.g. duncan.attard).
So my question is this: Is there some way in which the client's username can be delegated (or use some sort of impersonation) to CXF so that when I invoke Share Point's web service (e.g. I want to upload a file using Copy.asmx), the file is uploaded as duncan.attard and not as tomcat.srv.
Thanks all, your help is much appreciated.
Technically, this works perfectly. Here's the recipe:
You do not need a login module name if you work with credential delegation.
You have to make sure that the user account is eligible for delegation.
Take a look at the implementation of Tomcat's GenericPrincipal, it will save you the GSS credential if there is one. Cast request.getPrincipal to GenericPrincipal and get the credential.
Now say you have the credential:
Construct a Subject with the Principal and the GSSCredential as private credential.
Wrap the CXF code into a PrivilegedAction.
Pass the constructed subject and an instance of your privileged action to the Subject.doAs method and the system will construct an AccessControlContext on behalf of the passed subject and will invoke everything in JAAS on behalf of that context. CXF should use those if it is implemented correctly. This is like su or sudo on Unix.
The easiest way to test that is to create an InitialDirContext in the privileged action on behalf of the client to your Active Directory. This is how I test a working credential delegation environment.