I'd like to use the URL fetch service for app engine (java). I'm just sending a POST to one of my own servers from a servlet.
AppEngine -> post-to: https://www.myotherserver.com/scripts/log.php
I'm reading the url fetch doc:
Secure Connections and HTTPS
An app can fetch a URL with the HTTPS method to connect to secure servers. Request and response data are transmitted over the network in encrypted form.
The proxy the URL Fetch service uses cannot authenticate the host it is contacting. Because there is no certificate trust chain, the proxy accepts all certificates, including self-signed certificates. The proxy server cannot detect "man in the middle" attacks between App Engine and the remote host when using HTTPS.
I don't understand - the first paragraph makesit sound like everything that goes from the servlet on app engine, to my php script is going to be secure if I use https. The second paragraph makes it sound like the opposite, that it won't actually be secure. Which is it?
Thanks
There are two things HTTPS does for you. One is to encrypt your data so that as it travels over the internet, through various routers and switches, no one can peek at it. The second thing HTTPS does is authenticate that you are actually talking to a certain server. This is the part App Engine can't do. If you were trying to connect to www.myotherserver.com, it is possible that some bad guy named bob could intercept your connection, and pretend to be www.myotherserver.com. Everything you sent to bob would be encrypted on it's way to bob, but bob himself would be able to get the unencrypted data.
In your case, it sounds like you control both the sending server and the destination server, so you could encrypt your data with a shared secret to protect against this possibility.
The UrlFetch through https has been fixed allowing certificate server validation.
validate_certificate
A value of True instructs the application to send a request to the
server only if the certificate is
valid and signed by a trusted CA, and
also includes a hostname that matches
the certificate. A value of False
instructs the application to perform
no certificate validation. A value of
None defaults to the underlying
implementation of URL Fetch. The
underlying implementation currently
defaults to False, but will default to
True in the near future.
Related
From the request made in electron, I don't want the software like Fiddler to see how it should be done. Any help is very grateful
You can't. Such information is ultimately public (if the traffic is not encrypted by HTTPS, but Fiddler can also read this because it acts as a man in the middle), and there is even more sophisticated software, like Wireshark which lets you read any network traffic which is flowing through your LAN.
In case you are not using HTTPS: Use HTTPS with valid, non-self-signed certificates (like the free Let's Encrypt certificates) and enable certificate checking in Electron if you have it disabled (it's enabled by default) because Electron will then reject the self-signed certificate Fiddler uses for HTTPS traffic and thus will not make any request, which ultimately prevents Fiddler from reading them.
However, I would not bother about this issue at all. Anyone with access to the connection can sniff on it and even on HTTPS traffic if all secrets are accessible (i.e. the one sniffing sits on the same system or has access to it), so there really is no way to keep request/response information "secret" with some third party having access to all the secret stuff.
On configured AKS there is docker container with application that is using AAD authentication.
Based on this article there is also configured ingress. API is working well.
When I add to Azure Active Directory application registration reply URL with https prefix I receive error "The reply url specified in the request does not match the reply urls configured for the application". And I see that in browser address line redirect_uri is starting with http.
When I add reply URL that is starting with http, then I receive "Exception: Correlation failed".
What I have tried: Add to ingress.yaml setting ingress.kubernetes.io/force-ssl-redirect: "true"
May be there is some way to force ingress run https instead of http, or there might be some AAD redirect configuration? Any ideas?
UPDATE 2: Probably http redirect is because of ADAL.
PS: Was able to find similar topic without an answer
UPDATE3:
I have decided not to use nginx as ingress. Instead I am using now Load balancer. Soon it would be possible to use Azure Application Gateway Ingress Controller
Have you tried this?
By default the controller redirects HTTP clients to the HTTPS port 443 using a 308 Permanent Redirect response if TLS is enabled for that Ingress.
This can be disabled globally using ssl-redirect: "false" in the NGINX config map, or per-Ingress with the nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/ssl-redirect: "false" annotation in the particular resource.
More information on this on the Ingress documentation link.
You have to make a decision whether to use HTTPS or not. If this is just the start of a development cycle, start without it and get auth to work - but implement HTTPS as soon as possible.
AAD supports both http and https, but of course, the reply urls must be added to the application registration respectively.
As #mihail-stancescu says, ssl-redirect must be set to false, if you choose not to use HTTPS. In addition to this, you also have to ensure that your app does not make the redirect from HTTP to HTTPS.
Using curl with -L -k and -v options will give you a lot of information on what is actually happening with your requests.
When the http/https thing is solved, you have to remove any rewrite annotations you have in your ingress. (e.g. ingress.kubernetes.io/rewrite-target: / should be removed).
Now, if your ingress path to the service in question is e.g. /myservice, then the reply-url should also have that part of the path added ([host]/myservice/signin-oidc) - both in the AAD application registration and in the configuration of your app. (The path in the config should not contain the host)
If you are using https, then you must also have a proper certificate. You can use the free LetsEncrypt (https://letsencrypt.org/) in conjunction with KubeLego (https://github.com/jetstack/kube-lego), where you can find some nice examples on how to implement it.
I am currently designing a web application using AngularJS. In this I am fetching and posting data via Rest API(s) with different methods. The data I retrieving is fetched in the form of JSON.
Problem:
Issue here is, while I am using https, the data sent and received via HTTP requests can still be seen in proxy tool or traffic monitors. All the JSON can be easily read from this.
Each of my request has a token attached in it's header which takes care of authentication. However, once authorized, there is some part I don't want to be displayed in/ caught in such monitoring tools.
Question:
This data is stored in an encrypted way in database and all, however while coming via HTTP request, it is first decrypted and then sent. How can I hide/protect this data?
You can't.
If you give it to the client, then the client has to be able to see it.
If the user has configured their browser to proxy requests, then the proxy is the client.
Once the data leaves your server in an HTTP response then anyone/anything thing the user of the client wants to trust with that data can access it. You don't have control at that point.
proxy tool or traffic monitors will see https data only if the client has accepted the man-in-the-middle (MITM) by installing the ssl certificate used by the MITM:
To see the content (other than the host name) of an https connection, someone who is neither the client or the server must do a MITM.
If someone do a MITM with a certificate not trusted by the client, the client will reject the connection.
WARNING: If the server do NOT use HSTS, the person doing the MITM can do an SSLSTRIP attack if the first connection is http. In that case, the MITM do not need a trusted certificate because the connection will stay in plain text (http)
I have developed a single page AngularJS application. For data retrieval/storage, it communicates with REST APIs over https. As per client requirement, i need to implement Client Authentication. i.e., As the application is based on REST APIs, how can we ensure that the request made to API is from a valid client and not from fiddler or a tempered client.
the current approach is:
1> configure a client secret and a key in the angular app.
2> authenticate the client by requesting a token from server using this client secret and key.
3> server checks this secret and key, if validates, responds with a newly generated token.
4> all further requests from angularjs app would carry this token in header, to ensure that the request is from a valid client.
But it is not good enough, as attacker can easily capture the requests using fiddler and also can easily read the client secret and key. or can debug using firebug.
Is there any secure way to authenticate the client app?
No security possible in the case if your REST API call is been shield by any User Authentication. I mean if User need to put Username/Password then they are able to call those API then you can implement some security.
But if your requirement like follows :
Any GUEST user with any browser open your application pages, which intern call your REST API.
Then there is no security. Since any attacker can intercept your Request/Response and call it further.
Note : From security prepective, Whatever a Browser can do, any good attacker can do the same.
But if you shield REST CALL Pages with username/password validation, then you can restrict the calls from server side with proper session validation.
JSON Web Tokens (JWT - pronounced jot) might be what you're looking for. Auth0 has a swell blog post that specifically addresses AngularJS + JWT.
You cannot trust the client to validate anything. If the user is using Firebug or Fiddler to "trick" your application then all you can do is verify the information server side to ensure it is valid.
You can trust the client to keep the user's session safe (to some extent), but if you can't trust the user then you can't trust anything the client sends to you.
If you need to ensure the integrity of a piece of data that is held client side you can use a MAC (Message Authentication Code) which is effectively a hash of the message appended to a server-side secret key that can be later verified. Sometimes this is (incorrectly) called signing. JWTs are the current standard to accomplish this.
It depends at the end of the day what threat you are trying to keep your application safe against - if it is a game with high scores that runs on the client, there's not much you can do to prevent the user from altering their score before it is sent to the server. If you need to trust such data, run it server side.
A simple question, I think.
If I use the google users accounts in appengine
from google.appengine.api import users
to authenticate my users, how secure is the rest of my app under http (not https), ie. where are the weak points of such a setup?
Thanks
Assume that anything you send over http can be intercepted and examined by an attacker. This includes whatever token you are storing in their browser to authenticate them - the attackers can see this too, and use it to fake requests.
If this sounds like a "theortical" vulnerability that you don't need to worry about, then you shouldn't do anything that involves safeguarding user data until you read up on FireSheep and understand how it works and how you would prevent something similar. (This is just one example of an attack you need to understand. It is not the only possible attack.)
In short, the weak points of such a setup are all the points where you are using http to send anything you want to keep private.
Your question is unclear, but if you're asking whether authenticating users with Google Accounts on an HTTP app could potentially expose passwords to an attacker, the answer is no.
Even though your app is not using SSL, passwords are never transmitted in plain text. When authentication starts, users are redirected to a secure page at google.com to enter their credentials. Credentials are posted via SSL, and if authentication succeeds, Google generates an authentication token that is passed back to your app and stored in a cookie. The Users API makes an internal RPC to resolve this token back into Google credentials.
The most that an attacker could do is intercept the authentication token and spoof the user for the duration of the token's validity (1 day by default; configurable up to 2 weeks). They would never have access to passwords. To prevent spoofing, you'd need to make sure all logged in activity happens on HTTPS and the auth cookie is never stored via HTTP.