Anybody have an idea, why cookie in Cakephp always get deleted automatically after function ends?
I try to write a cookie in let say function abc, with following :
$this->Cookie->write('referal', $ref);
Before that, in app controller before filter, i have initialized the cookie as following :
$this->Cookie->name = 'renttycoons';
$this->Cookie->time = 604800; // or '1 week'
$this->Cookie->path = '/';
$this->Cookie->domain = 'rent.local';
$this->Cookie->key = 'qSI232qs*&sXOw!';
But once the execution of function ends, the cookie was empty. when i try to read the cookie before function abc ends, it was there. There was no delete cookie method anyway.
yes, because the way Cookie in Cake works: when you use Cookie->write(), it doesn't directly write to the cookie, because the cookie is in the user's browser. Only until the view is rendered that the cookie you wrote is sent. So when you redirect, (I would guess the cookie doesn't get sent and flushed out because the view isn't rendered) the new request has the old cookie data.
If you want to persist some shared data within cake app, and unique to each visitor, use SessionComponent. It looks pretty much the same as Cookie: $this->Session->write('referal', $ref); and $this->Session->read('referal');
Related
I am builing a member system with a lot of function like memo or post system...etc, so I think it's more safe to use JWT token, so I let my api return jwt token every time I sign in like below
{
"status": 200,
"message": "",
"data": "eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJfaWQiOiI2MGViYzI0MDRhNmVkNDU2NzUwOTk4YjEiLCJ1c2VybmFtZSI6ImpvaG4iLCJleHAiOjE2MjY5NTgwMzEuMjA3LCJpYXQiOjE2MjYzNTMyMzF9.3t_YzKPq4jk6UuIkzTgFaLoXD0Pq5ktmRFp7xg6dFYU"
}
And it contains userID and userName , but here's the problem , every time I have to use something else like userProfilePicture ,userFriend...etc , I have to make an API request, it's really meaningless to do
eventually I manage it like I used axio.interceptor to verify and before I assign my data to context state I fetch user's all data using this token and assign the data to state , Is'nt it the same way to just return all user's data without JWT?.
It seems to me that JWT Token is kind of useless, can anyone tell me that what's the real ,effiecent way to use JWT Token and what's the common managment?
Use can save your token JWT in localstorage... and call it in header of request (or fetch) when you call api...
But dont forget to set expired token of JWT to one week (or one month, or one year... its up to you)...
Or you can set configuration if your JWT, if your token is expired, it will still send the response to your app....
I'm building a custom Apache module (a hook, to be specific) that checks for a custom authorization cookie provided by an external service, and then either validates and decrypts the cookie to get user information, or if not valid redirects the user to our custom login service. The main function is pretty straightforward, looks something like this:
static int verifyRequest(request_rec* req) {
char* authCookie;
if (!req->main) {
authCookie = getAuthCookie(req);
if (isValidAuthCookie(authCookie, req)) {
/* do stuff, inject user data, etc... */
} else {
setLoginRedirect(req);
}
}
return OK;
}
So I want it to return OK if the user is authorized, I then inject user data (i.e. username) and do anything else, then I want the request to be processed by Apache as usual. However, if the user isn't valid I want to do a 302 redirect (by the way, if there's a better way to redirect the user from an Apache module let me know), as the setLoginRedirect function inserts our Login service's URL into the 'Location' field on the response header. If I try to return 302 from the else block, I get an empty response. If I declare an int at the top of the function and set it to OK (or 0) if valid and then set it to HTTP_TEMPORARY_REDIRECT (or 302) from the else block and then return the int at the bottom, I get an empty response. I've also tried using boolean values with an if statement at the bottom, and I've also tried doing the same thing by checking the header for the Location value at the bottom - both result in an empty response.
Any idea how to change the return value based on the if statement in the middle?
In documents it says 'client_id' part can actually be the token, however it doesn't work. Anyone know why?
https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/python/channel/functions
If the client_id parameter is actually a token returned by a create_channel call then send_message can be used for different versions of the app. For instance you could create the channel on the front end and then send messages from a backend of the app.
the reason i want to use this, is because i want to send messages to anonymous users as well, without requiring them to login. i don't know if it is possible to assign them a 'client_id' if token doesn't work.
this is how i am creating the token
user = users.get_current_user()
if user:
token = channel.create_channel(user.user_id())
else:
token = channel.create_channel(str(uuid.uuid4()))
then injecting into client
template_values = {
'token' : token,
}
on the client side open the channel
openChannel = function() {
var token = '{{ token }}';
var channel = new goog.appengine.Channel(token);
var handler = {
'onopen': onOpened,
'onmessage': onMessage,
'onerror': function() {},
'onclose': function() {}
};
var socket = channel.open(handler);
socket.onopen = onOpened;
socket.onmessage = onMessage;
}
now send a message
var xhr = new XMLHttpRequest();
xhr.open('POST', path, true);
xhr.send();
in the server,
when the message is received send back a message using the token
channel.send_message(token, someMessage)
back to client
onMessage = function(m) {
alert("you have some message");
}
this sequence works fine if client_id() is used instead of token when calling send_message
In response to btevfik's initial question: Allowing tokens or client_id in send_message is a feature released in 1.7.5 (very recently). Some people may not be familiar with it yet so therefore they suggest to use client_id. Both should work!
The only thing that I can see in your code is the fact that you should not rely on token variable to be correct in between two requests. They may not even land on the same instance of the app. If you share your code with more details I may be able to spot something. The proper way would be to either store the token in the datastore or pass it from the client as a parameter when you send the message that will trigger a message back.
The purpose of this feature was to allow people to send messages from backends (or other versions). Before was not possible whereas now you can do it if you use directly the tokens instead of the client_id.
Long time this post has been around, but just curious about your usage of the token global variable?
I don't see this code:
global token
before you set the token
user = users.get_current_user()
if user:
token = channel.create_channel(user.user_id())
else:
token = channel.create_channel(str(uuid.uuid4()))
If that code is missing, then token will be set in the local scope of the function above and not globally. So, the token value used later will be None (or to what ever the token was initialised with.)
Just a thought, if its still relevant.
I don't think you actually have a problem here.
You are able to send messages to users that are logged in or not.
The problem you are having I think is knowing that there are multiple ways to use the channel API re: tokens.
https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/python/channel/overview#Life_of_a_Typical_Channel_Message
In this example, it shows the JavaScript client explicitly requests a token and sends its Client ID to the server. In contrast, you could choose to design your application to inject the token into the client before the page loads in the browser, or some other implementation if preferred.
This diagram shows the creation of a channel on the server. In this
example, it shows the JavaScript client explicitly requests a token
and sends its Client ID to the server. In contrast, you could choose
to design your application to inject the token into the client before
the page loads in the browser, or some other implementation if
preferred.
Here's my demo implementation, hope it helps somehow: https://github.com/Paul1234321/channelapidemo.git
Here's the code for creating the channel on GAE:
client_id = str(uuid.uuid4()).replace("-",'')
channel_token = channel.create_channel(client_id)
And in the JS:
channel = new goog.appengine.Channel('{{ token }}');
Have a look at it in action: http://pppredictor.appspot.com/
You shouldn't store request-specific values in global variables. Store them in a cookie or pass them as a request parameter instead.
In my application I need do some kind of "auto login" logic at the beginning of app work. In this "auto login" function I do many actions, and one of them - setting cookie, using CookieComponent.
When I use this autoLogin in controller or component - all is fine, BUT cookies are NOT set when I do the same from dispatcher filter.
I dig deep into CakePHP code, and found that when I try set cookie from dispatcher filter, $_cookies property of CakeResponse are empty. So it's looks like dispatcher filter creates own CakeResponse, and it resets later, so cookie are not set.
My filter looks like this:
class UserLoadFilter extends DispatcherFilter
{
public $priority = 8;
public function beforeDispatch($event) {
App::uses('AuthComponent', 'Controller/Component');
if (!AuthComponent::user()) {
App::uses('CustomAuthComponent', 'Controller/Component');
//$controller = new AppController($event->data['request'], $event->data['response']);
$auth = new CustomAuthComponent(new ComponentCollection(), Configure::read('Auth'));
$auth->autoLogin();
}
}
}
I also tried set cookie directly in beforeDispatch method in this way:
App::uses('CookieComponent', 'Controller/Component');
$cookie = new CookieComponent(new ComponentCollection());
$cookie->write('test', 'TEST!', false, "1 day");
but this has no sense too.
What do I do wrong? Maybe I just don't see some simple things, but I spent many time and still can't fix this. Is it's possible at all to set cookie from this place?
Sure I can try just use setcookie, or write own cookie wraper, but I want to do it in CakePHP style, using cookie component.
This looks just wrong to me. 2.x uses authentication and authorization objects so no CustomAuthComponent - meaning the component part - is needed. Instead you create customized authentication and authorization objects.
I see no reason why this has to be done in beforeDispatcher(). So what exactly is your goal? What kind of auth are you trying to implement?
Edit based on your comment:
Simply redirect after you identified the user as Boris said and your locale gets set (if you did it right). So just read the uuid from the cookie in beforeFilter(), get the user record based on that and use the user record to do a "manual" login and then redirect.
What have you modified in the AuthComponent?
today i tried to get django-piston and ExtJS working. I used the ExtJS restful example and the piston example to create a little restful webapp. Everything works fine except the authentication.
Whats the best way to get Basic/Digest/OAuth authentication working with ExtJS?
Atm I'm not sure where to set the Username/Password.
Thanks
If you want to use piston with ExtJS, I would suggest writing an anonymous handler that checks the user is logged in via standard auth.
Try this:
class AnonymousUserProfileHandler(BaseHandler):
fields = ('title', 'url', 'affiliation')
model = UserProfile
def read(self, request, nickname):
profile = UserProfile.objects.get(nickname=nickname)
if request.user == profile.user:
return profile
class UserProfileHandler(BaseHandler):
anonymous = AnonymousUserProfileHandler
allowed_methods = ('GET')
fields = ('title', 'url', 'affiliation')
model = UserProfile
def read(self, request, nickname):
profile = UserProfile.objects.get(nickname=nickname)
return profile
In this example, when UserProfileHandler is called, without any authorization, it delegates to the anonymous handler. The anonymous handler checks whether the user is logged in via the usual request.user mode. If there is a valid user, it returns their profile object. You would then, obviously, mark the view calling this as requiring login.
The point is: when extJS makes its JSON call, it will send authentication data via the usual cookie. If you use an "anonymous" handler in Piston, but manually check the user is logged in before returning the data, then you essentially use traditional auth for your own site.