I have combined Admin SDK Directory API with the Google+ Domains API to fetch all the Google plus profile information.
But , There are people who do not have Google Plus profile in our organization which generates a null pointer Exception,I also tried the below code to validate
Person profile = plus.people().get(directorylist.getId()).execute();
if(!profile.isEmpty())
{
System.out.println(profile.getDisplayName());
profile.getImage().getUrl();
profile.getSkills();
System.out.println("SKILL="+profile.getSkills());
System.out.println("ORG="+profile.getOrganizations());
}
But the validation is not working and it is throwing null pointer Exception . Let me know if anyone has a better solution to this problem
You want:
public abstract boolean isPlusUser()
source
Related
I'm actually using this React library (https://www.npmjs.com/package/react-google-login) to authenticate with Google.
As for the basic profile and email scopes, this works fine. On my client app on Google Cloud Platform, I've correctly enabled the People API (https://developers.google.com/people) and added the correct scope to the scope list, in React (https://www.googleapis.com/auth/user.phonenumbers.read). I've also ensured that my phone number on my Google Profile was made public even if I don't know if that could matter. After doing all this, the consent screen is working fine asking me to allow the app to access my phone number.
However after login, I can only see the data linked to profile and email scopes. In the library I can see that they made some object properties as shown in the code below inside the library itself :
function handleSigninSuccess(res) {
/*
offer renamed response keys to names that match use
*/
const basicProfile = res.getBasicProfile()
const authResponse = res.getAuthResponse(true)
res.googleId = basicProfile.getId()
res.tokenObj = authResponse
res.tokenId = authResponse.id_token
res.accessToken = authResponse.access_token
res.profileObj = {
googleId: basicProfile.getId(),
imageUrl: basicProfile.getImageUrl(),
email: basicProfile.getEmail(),
name: basicProfile.getName(),
givenName: basicProfile.getGivenName(),
familyName: basicProfile.getFamilyName()
}
onSuccess(res)
}
\
So the problem is that I don't know if I even receive the phone data or if I just can't read it because I don't know how to call the phone data inside the response, in terms of variables name in React. Anyone has an idea ?
The library you're using seems to be using Google Identity which does not include a method to obtain the user's phone number, just their basic profile.
You can get the user's phone number with the people api but this is not in the scope of this library. You'd have to make your own method to get the the authenticated user profile with the phoneNumbers field. Enabling the people api and requesting authorization are just the first steps.
https://developers.google.com/people/api/rest/v1/people/get
I have a Non-Salesforce Auth System which holds usernames and passwords for a few thousand users. I am willing to migrate these users to Salesforce and give access to these users to my Experience Cloud site. I am developing an apex REST Resource which will take username and password as arguments and create a user with that username and password with a community profile. I am planning to call this API from my Non-Salesforce system and migrate all these users. I am using Site.createExternalUser method in this API. I am getting the exception
Site.ExternalUserCreateException: [That operation is only allowed from within an active site.]
The reason I am using Site.createExternalUser is because I don't want to send the welcome email/reset password email to my users since they already have signed up successfully long ago.
I am open to any alternatives for achiving this.
Below is my code:
#RestResource(urlMapping='/createUser/*')
global with sharing class createUserRestResource {
#HttpPost
global static String doPost(){
Contact con=new Contact();
con.Firstname="First";
con.LastName= "Last";
con.Email="first.last#example.com";
con.AccountId='/Add an account Id here./';
insert con;
usr.Username= "usernameFromRequest#example.com";
usr.Alias= "alias123";
usr.Email= "first.last#example.com";
usr.FirstName= "First";
usr.IsActive= true;
usr.LastName= "Last";
usr.ProfileId='/Community User Profile Id/';
usr.EmailEncodingKey= 'ISO-8859-1';
usr.TimeZoneSidKey= 'America/Los_Angeles';
usr.LocaleSidKey= 'en_US';
usr.LanguageLocaleKey= 'en_US';
usr.ContactId = con.Id;
String userId = Site.createExternalUser(usr, con.AccountId, 'Password#1234', false);
return userId;
}
}
You can suppress sending emails out in whole org (Setup -> Deliverability) or in the Community config there will be way to not send welcome emails (your community -> Workspaces -> Administration -> Emails).
Without running on actual Site I don't think you can pull it off in one go. In theory it's simple, insert contact, then insert user. In practice depends which fields you set on the user. If it's Partner community you might be setting UserRoleId too and that's forbidden. See MIXED DML error. In Customer community you might be safe... until you decide to assign them some permission sets too.
You might need 2 separate endpoints, 1 to create contact, 1 to make user out of it. Or save the contact and then offload user creation to #future/Queueable/something else like that.
I am a Google Apps customer and want to use the Contact API to search for a user in the company directory.
I am able to access contacts using for example:
feed = gd_client.GetContacts()
However the contacts this returns is only a subset of my contacts and is not those in the company directory.
Has anyone had experience of this or give me any pointers.
I think what you are looking for is the Domain Shared Contact API instead of the Contact API. Check this out (https://developers.google.com/google-apps/domain-shared-contacts/)
Try to run the get request against the domain, you should be able to retrieve your directory contacts instead of personal contacts (https://developers.google.com/admin-sdk/domain-shared-contacts/#Retrieving)
Try using Query to get result feed. You can specify max results to get in query. This way your result feed will be returned with more contacts in other groups as well.
URL FeedURL = new URL("https://www.google.com/m8/feeds/contacts/default/full");
Query MyQuery = new Query(FeedURL);
MyQuery.setMaxResults(200);
ContactFeed ResultFeed = MyService.query(MyQuery, ContactFeed.class);
I am building a REST API for a DotNetNuke 6 website, making use of DNN's MVC-based Services Framework. However, I don't have any background in authentication, so I'm not even sure where to start.
Basically, we want our clients to be able to make GET requests for their portal's data, and we want some clients (but not all) to be able to POST simple updates to their user data.
I've been trying to search for information, but the trouble is I'm not sure what I'm searching for. DNN has different logins and roles, but I'm not sure if or how they factor in. I've heard of things like oAuth but my understanding of it is at the most basic level. I don't know if it's what I need or not and if or how it applies to DNN. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
UPDATE:
Based on the answer below about tying it with a module and further research, here is what I have done:
I created a module just for this service, and I added two special permissions for it: "APIGET" and "APIPOST." I assigned these to some test roles/test accounts in DNN. I wrote a custom authorize attribute that, given the module ID, checks if the current user has the necessary permission (either through roles or directly). As far as I can tell, tab ID is irrelevant in my case.
It appears to be working both with a web browser (based on the DNN account I'm logged into) and with a php script that sends an HTTP request with an account username/password.
The authorize attribute:
using DotNetNuke.Entities.Modules;
using DotNetNuke.Entities.Portals;
using DotNetNuke.Security;
using DotNetNuke.Security.Permissions;
using System.Web;
public class MyAuthorize : DotNetNuke.Web.Services.AuthorizeAttributeBase
{
public const string AuthModuleFriendlyName = "MyAuthModule";
public const string GETPermission = "APIGET";
public const string POSTPermission = "APIPOST";
public string Permission { get; set; }
protected override bool AuthorizeCore(HttpContextBase context)
{
ModuleController mc = new ModuleController();
ModuleInfo mi = mc.GetModuleByDefinition(PortalController.GetCurrentPortalSettings().PortalId, AuthModuleFriendlyName);
ModulePermissionCollection permCollection = mi.ModulePermissions;
return ModulePermissionController.HasModulePermission(permCollection, Permission);
}
}
The controller:
("mytest" is the endpoint for both GET and POST)
public class MyController : DnnController
{
[ActionName("mytest")]
[AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Get)]
[DnnAuthorize(AllowAnonymous = true)]
[MyAuthorize(Permission = MyAuthorize.GETPermission)]
public string myget(string id = "")
{
return "You have my permission to GET";
}
[ActionName("mytest")]
[AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)]
[DnnAuthorize(AllowAnonymous = true)]
[MyAuthorize(Permission = MyAuthorize.POSTPermission)]
public string mypost(string id = "")
{
return "You have my permission to POST";
}
}
The main way that you tie a service in the DNN Services Framework into DNN permissions is to associate the permissions with a module instance. That is, you'll require users of your service to identify which module they're calling from/about (by sending ModuleId and TabId in the request [headers, query-string, cookies, form]), then you can indicate what permissions they need on that module to take a particular action on the service.
You can use the SupportedModules attribute on your service, and pass in a comma-delimited list of module names, to ensure that only your own modules are being allowed. Then, add the DnnModuleAuthorize attribute at the service or individual action level to say what permission the user needs on that module. In your instance, you can also add the AllowAnonymous attribute on the GET actions, and have one DnnModuleAuthorize on the service, for the POST methods (and anything else). Note that you cannot put the AllowAnonymous attribute on the controller; it will override authorizations put at the action, making it impossible to make actions more restrictive.
You'll also want to add the ValidateAntiForgeryToken attribute on the POST actions, to protect against CSRF attacks.
If you don't have a module that naturally associates its permissions with your service, you can create one just for that purpose, solely to expose itself as a permissions management utility.
Once you've figured out the authorization piece above, DNN will take care of authentication using your forms cookie (i.e. AJAX scenarios are taken care of automatically), or via basic or digest authentication (for non-AJAX scenarios). That said, if you're doing non-AJAX, you'll need to figure out a way to validate the anti-forgery token only when it applies.
The Services Framework in DNN is what you are after. It allows you to provide a REST API that plugs directly into DNN security.
Here are some articles to help you get started:
http://www.dotnetnuke.com/Resources/Wiki/Page/Services-Framework-WebAPI.aspx
http://www.dotnetnuke.com/Resources/Blogs/EntryId/3327/Getting-Started-with-DotNetNuke-Services-Framework.aspx
Note, there are some difference in DNN 6 and DNN 7 when using the Services Framework:
http://www.dotnetnuke.com/Resources/Blogs/EntryId/3514/Converting-Services-Framework-MVC-to-WebAPI.aspx
Just wanted to note that the DnnModuleAuthorize attribute takes a PermissionKey parameter for custom permissions so you can do stuff like this:
[DnnModuleAuthorize(PermissionKey = "DELETEDATA")]
[HttpPost]
public HttpResponseMessage DeleteData(FormDataCollection data)
It doesn't look like you can supply your own error message with this so you might to wrap your method body like this instead and leave off the custom permission attribute:
[DnnModuleAuthorize(AccessLevel = SecurityAccessLevel.View)]
[HttpPost]
public HttpResponseMessage DeleteData(FormDataCollection data)
{
var errorMessage = "Could not delete data";
if (ModulePermissionController.HasModulePermission(ActiveModule.ModulePermissions,"DELETEDATA"))
{
// do stuff here
}
else
{
errorMessage = "User does not have delete permission";
}
var error = new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest)
{
Content =
new StringContent(
errorMessage)
};
return error;
}
Just wanted to add to #Richards comment for using the [DnnModuleAuthorize(PermissionKey = "DELETEDATA")] for custom permissions.
The full attribute should be:
[DnnModuleAuthorize(PermissionKey = "DELETEDATA", AccessLevel = SecurityAccessLevel.Edit)]
Leaving it blank does nothing as shown here: https://github.com/dnnsoftware/Dnn.Platform/blob/f4a5924c7cc8226cfe79bbc92357ec1a32165ada/DNN%20Platform/Library/Security/Permissions/PermissionProvider.cs#L810
I guess you require a plugin that allows you to construct GET and POST APIs. you can use this plugin I found on the DNN store. https://store.dnnsoftware.com/dnn-rest-api-custom-api-authentication-authorization.
I am using iOS 6 Social framework for accessing user's Facebook data. I am trying to get likes of the current user within my app using ACAccount and SLRequest. I have a valid Facebook account reference of type ACAccount named facebook, and I'm trying to get user's likes this way:
SLRequest *req = [SLRequest requestForServiceType:SLServiceTypeFacebook requestMethod:SLRequestMethodGET URL:url parameters:nil];
req.account = facebook;
[req performRequestWithHandler:^(NSData *responseData, NSHTTPURLResponse *urlResponse, NSError *error) {
//my handler code.
}
where url is #"https://graph.facebook.com/me/likes?fields=name"; In my handler, I'm getting this response:
{
error = {
code = 2500;
message = "An active access token must be used to query information about the current user.";
type = OAuthException;
};
}
Shouldn't access tokens be handled by the framework? I've found a similar post Querying Facebook user data through new iOS6 social framework but it doesn't make sense to hard-code an access token parameter into the URL, as logically the access token/login checking should be handled automatically by the framework. In all examples that I've seen around no one plays with an access token manually:
http://damir.me/posts/facebook-authentication-in-ios-6
iOS 6 Facebook posting procedure ends up with "remote_app_id does not match stored id" error
etc.
I am using the iOS6-only approach with the built in Social framework, and I'm not using the Facebook SDK. Am I missing something?
Thanks,
Can.
You need to keep a strong reference to the ACAccountStore that the account comes from. If the store gets deallocated, it looks like it causes this problem.
Try running on an actual device instead of a simulator. This worked for me.
Ensure that your bundle id is input into your Facebook app's configuration. You might have a different bundle id for your dev/debug build.