Anti-Forgery Request Recipes For ASP.NET MVC And AJAX
Background (Normal scenario of form submitting)
To secure websites from cross-site request forgery (CSRF, or XSRF) attack, ASP.NET MVC provides an excellent mechanism:
- The server prints tokens to cookie and inside the form;
- When the form is submitted to server, token in cookie and token inside the form are sent in the HTTP request;
- Server validates the tokens.
To print tokens to browser, just invoke HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken():
<% using (Html.BeginForm())
{ %>
<%: this.Html.AntiForgeryToken(Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)%> <%-- Other fields. --%> <input type="submit" value="Submit" />
<% } %>
This invocation generates a token and writes it inside the form:
<form action="..." method="post">
<input name="__RequestVerificationToken" type="hidden" value="J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP" /> <!-- Other fields. --> <input type="submit" value="Submit" />
</form>
and also writes it into the cookie:
__RequestVerificationToken_Lw__=
J56khgCvbE3bVcsCSZkNVuH9Cclm9SSIT/ywruFsXEgmV8CL2eW5C/gGsQUf/YuP
When the above form is submitted, they are both sent to server.
In the server side, [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute is used to specify the controllers or actions to validate them:
[HttpPost]
[ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)]
public ActionResult Action(/* ... */)
{
// ...
}
This is very productive for form scenarios. But recently, when resolving security vulnerabilities for Web products, problems are encountered.
Turn on validation on controller (not on each action)
The server side problem is, one single [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute is expected to declare on controller, but actually a lot of attributes have be to declared on controller's each POST actions. Because POST actions are usually much more then controllers, the work would be a little crazy.
Problem
Usually a controller contains both actions for HTTP GET requests and actions for POST, and, usually validations are expected for only HTTP POST requests. So, if the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] is declared on the controller, the HTTP GET requests become invalid:
[ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)]
public class ProductController : Controller // One [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute.
{
[HttpGet]
public ActionResult Index() // Index() cannot work.
{
// ...
} [HttpPost]
public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */)
{
// ...
} [HttpPost]
public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */)
{
// ...
} // Other actions.
}
If browser sends an HTTP GET request by clicking a link: http://Site/Product/Index, validation definitely fails, because no token is provided (by http://Site/Product/Index?__RequestVerificationToken=???, for example).
As a result, many [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes have be distributed to each POST action:
public class ProductController : Controller // Many [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes.
{
[HttpGet]
public ActionResult Index() // Works.
{
// ...
} [HttpPost]
[ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)]
public ActionResult PostAction1(/* ... */)
{
// ...
} [HttpPost]
[ValidateAntiForgeryToken(Salt = Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)]
public ActionResult PostAction2(/* ... */)
{
// ...
} // Other actions.
}
This would be a little bit crazy, because one Web product can have a lot of POST actions.
Solution
To avoid a large number of [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attributes (one for each POST action), the following ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute wrapper class can be helpful, where HTTP verbs can be specified:
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method,
AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)]
public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter
{
private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs)
: this(verbs, null)
{
} public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt)
{
this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs);
this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute()
{
Salt = salt
};
} public void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext)
{
string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride();
if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase))
{
this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext);
}
}
}
Here only HTTP requests of the specified verbs are validated:
[ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper(HttpVerbs.Post, Constants.AntiForgeryTokenSalt)]
public class ProductController : Controller
{
// GET actions are not affected.
// Only HTTP POST requests are validated.
}
Now one single attribute on a controller turns on validation for all POST actions in that controller.
It would be nice if HTTP verbs can be specified on the built-in [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] attribute. And, this is very easy to implement.
Specify non-constant salt in runtime
By default, the salt should be a compile time constant, so it can be used for the [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] or [ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper] attribute.
Problem
One Web product might be sold to many clients. If a constant salt is evaluated in compile time, after the product is built and deployed to many clients, they all have the same salt. Of course, clients do not like this. Even some clients might expect a configurable custom salt. In these scenarios, salt is required to be a runtime value.
Solution
In the above [ValidateAntiForgeryToken] and [ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapper] attributes, the salt is passed through constructor. So one solution is to remove that parameter:
public class ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute : FilterAttribute, IAuthorizationFilter
{
public ValidateAntiForgeryTokenWrapperAttribute(HttpVerbs verbs)
{
this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs);
this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute()
{
Salt = Configurations.AntiForgeryTokenSalt
};
} // Other members.
}
But this smells bad because the injected dependency becomes a hard dependency. So the other solution to work around the limitation of attributes, is moving validation code into controller:
public abstract class AntiForgeryControllerBase : Controller
{
private readonly ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute _validator; private readonly AcceptVerbsAttribute _verbs; protected AntiForgeryControllerBase(HttpVerbs verbs, string salt)
{
this._verbs = new AcceptVerbsAttribute(verbs);
this._validator = new ValidateAntiForgeryTokenAttribute()
{
Salt = salt
};
} protected override void OnAuthorization(AuthorizationContext filterContext)
{
base.OnAuthorization(filterContext); string httpMethodOverride = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.GetHttpMethodOverride();
if (this._verbs.Verbs.Contains(httpMethodOverride, StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase))
{
this._validator.OnAuthorization(filterContext);
}
}
}
Then just make controller classes inheriting from this AntiForgeryControllerBase class. Now the salt is no long required to be a compile time constant.
Submit token via AJAX
For browser side, once server side turns on anti-forgery validation for HTTP POST, all AJAX POST requests will fail by default.
Problem
In AJAX scenarios, the HTTP POST request is not sent by form. Take jQuery as an example:
$.post(url, {
productName: "Tofu",
categoryId: 1 // Token is not posted.
}, callback);
This kind of AJAX POST requests will always be invalid, because server side code cannot see the token in the posted data.
Solution
Basically, the tokens must be printed to browser then sent back to server. So first of all, HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() need to be called somewhere. Now the browser has token in both HTML and cookie.
Then jQuery must find the printed token in the HTML, and append token to the data before sending:
$.post(url, {
productName: "Tofu",
categoryId: 1,
__RequestVerificationToken: getToken() // Token is posted.
}, callback);
To be reusable, this can be encapsulated into a tiny jQuery plugin:
/// <reference path="jquery-1.4.2.js" />
(function ($) {
$.getAntiForgeryToken = function (tokenWindow, appPath) {
// HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() must be invoked to print the token.
tokenWindow = tokenWindow && typeof tokenWindow === typeof window ? tokenWindow : window;
appPath = appPath && typeof appPath === "string" ? "_" + appPath.toString() : "";
// The name attribute is either __RequestVerificationToken,
// or __RequestVerificationToken_{appPath}.
var tokenName = "__RequestVerificationToken" + appPath;
// Finds the <input type="hidden" name={tokenName} value="..." /> from the specified window.
// var inputElements = tokenWindow.$("input[type='hidden'][name=' + tokenName + "']");
var inputElements = tokenWindow.document.getElementsByTagName("input");
for (var i = 0; i < inputElements.length; i++) {
var inputElement = inputElements[i];
if (inputElement.type === "hidden" && inputElement.name === tokenName) {
return {
name: tokenName,
value: inputElement.value
};
}
}
};
$.appendAntiForgeryToken = function (data, token) {
// Converts data if not already a string.
if (data && typeof data !== "string") {
data = $.param(data);
}
// Gets token from current window by default.
token = token ? token : $.getAntiForgeryToken(); // $.getAntiForgeryToken(window).
data = data ? data + "&" : "";
// If token exists, appends {token.name}={token.value} to data.
return token ? data + encodeURIComponent(token.name) + "=" + encodeURIComponent(token.value) : data;
};
// Wraps $.post(url, data, callback, type) for most common scenarios.
$.postAntiForgery = function (url, data, callback, type) {
return $.post(url, $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data), callback, type);
};
// Wraps $.ajax(settings).
$.ajaxAntiForgery = function (settings) {
// Supports more options than $.ajax():
// settings.token, settings.tokenWindow, settings.appPath.
var token = settings.token ? settings.token : $.getAntiForgeryToken(settings.tokenWindow, settings.appPath);
settings.data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(settings.data, token);
return $.ajax(settings);
};
})(jQuery);
In most of the scenarios, it is Ok to just replace $.post() invocation with $.postAntiForgery(), and replace $.ajax() with $.ajaxAntiForgery():
$.postAntiForgery(url, {
productName: "Tofu",
categoryId: 1
}, callback); // The same usage as $.post(), but token is posted.
There might be some scenarios of custom token, where $.appendAntiForgeryToken() is useful:
data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, token);
// Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery().
$.post(url, data, callback);
or $.ajaxAntiForgery() can be used:
$.ajaxAntiForgery({
type: "POST",
url: url,
data: {
productName: "Tofu",
categoryId: 1
},
success: callback, // The same usage as $.ajax(), supporting more options.
token: token // Custom token.
});
And there are special scenarios that the token is not in the current window. For example:
- An HTTP POST request can be sent from an iframe, while the token is in the parent window or top window;
- An HTTP POST request can be sent from an popup window or a dialog, while the token is in the opener window;
etc. Here, token's container window can be specified for $.getAntiForgeryToken():
data = $.appendAntiForgeryToken(data, $.getAntiForgeryToken(window.parent));
// Token is already in data. No need to invoke $.postAntiForgery().
$.post(url, data, callback);
or $.ajaxAntiForgery() can be used:
$.ajaxAntiForgery({
type: "POST",
url: url,
data: {
productName: "Tofu",
categoryId: 1
},
success: callback, // The same usage as $.ajax(), supporting more options.
tokenWindow: window.parent // Token is in another window.
});
If you have better solution, please do tell me.
Anti-Forgery Request Recipes For ASP.NET MVC And AJAX的更多相关文章
- ASP.NET MVC 实现AJAX跨域请求方法《1》
ASP.NET MVC 实现AJAX跨域请求的两种方法 通常发送AJAX请求都是在本域内完成的,也就是向本域内的某个URL发送请求,完成部分页面的刷新.但有的时候需要向其它域发送AJAX请求,完成数据 ...
- [代码示例]用Fine Uploader+ASP.NET MVC实现ajax文件上传
原文 [代码示例]用Fine Uploader+ASP.NET MVC实现ajax文件上传 Fine Uploader(http://fineuploader.com/)是一个实现 ajax 上传文件 ...
- Asp.Net MVC 使用 Ajax
Asp.Net MVC 使用 Ajax Ajax 简单来说Ajax是一个无需重新加载整个网页的情况下,可以更新局部页面或数据的技术(异步的发送接收数据,不会干扰当前页面). Ajax工作原理 Ajax ...
- ASP.NET MVC之Ajax如影随行
一.Ajax的前世今生 我一直觉得google是一家牛逼的公司,为什么这样说呢?<舌尖上的中国>大家都看了,那些美食估计你是百看不厌,但是里边我觉得其实也有这样的一个哲学:关于食材,对于种 ...
- ASP.NET MVC 实现 AJAX 跨域请求
ASP.NET MVC 实现AJAX跨域请求的两种方法 和大家分享下Ajax 跨域的经验,之前也找了好多资料,但是都不行,后来看到个可行的修改了并测试下 果然OK了 希望对大家有所帮助! 通常发送 ...
- asp.net mvc 使用ajax请求 控制器 (PartialViewResult)分部的action,得到一个分部视图(PartialView)的HTML,进行渲染
在asp.net mvc 使用ajax请求获取数据的时候,我们一般是返回json或者xml,然后解析这些数据进行渲染,这样会比较麻烦,可以请求一个 分部action,返回一个分部视图 直接可以渲染,不 ...
- 在Asp.Net MVC中用Ajax回调后台方法
在Asp.Net MVC中用Ajax回调后台方法基本格式: var operData = ...; //传递的参数(action中定义的) var type = ...; //传递的参数(action ...
- Asp.Net MVC Unobtrusive Ajax
1. Unobtrusive JavaScript介绍 说到Unobtrusive Ajax,就要谈谈UnobtrusiveJavaScript了,所谓Unobtrusive JavaScript ...
- ASP.NET MVC 学习笔记-7.自定义配置信息 ASP.NET MVC 学习笔记-6.异步控制器 ASP.NET MVC 学习笔记-5.Controller与View的数据传递 ASP.NET MVC 学习笔记-4.ASP.NET MVC中Ajax的应用 ASP.NET MVC 学习笔记-3.面向对象设计原则
ASP.NET MVC 学习笔记-7.自定义配置信息 ASP.NET程序中的web.config文件中,在appSettings这个配置节中能够保存一些配置,比如, 1 <appSettin ...
随机推荐
- 一个小框架,基于rx_retrofit2_mvp
离职在即,也没什么事情做,就鼓捣了一下.任意搭建了一个小框架,看看以后能不能搞出自己的一个model,好了.不说别的,上代码 1,先上依赖库 compile 'io.reactivex:rxandro ...
- 使用Robot Framework做接口测试
http://chuansong.me/n/1858477 1.RF框架 1.1 RF框架介绍Robot Framework 框架是一个通用的测试框架,一直是由诺西网络(Nokia Siemens N ...
- 刷完OpenWrt在浏览器无法访问的解决办法
其实问题很明显. 是因为刷了trunk版固件. 并没有集成luci. 那接下来就是装luci.但是装luci需要联网(不过其实不联网其实也是可以安装的.) 我说的联网是让路有联网.而不是网线接路由,路 ...
- wdcp下nginx+apache混合模式的主机配置
/www/wdlinux/httpd-2.2.22/conf/vhost/xxx.xxx.com.conf <VirtualHost *:88>DocumentRoot /www/web/ ...
- LabVIEW上位机与串口通信
渊源 大一的时候,学校开了门公共选修课,叫LabVIEW编程,当时的我当然还不知道LabVIEW是啥东东,但还是选了.上课的老师是机械学院的一个副教授.他给我们展示了好几个用LabVIEW做的项目.譬 ...
- Your account already has a signing certificate for this machine but it is not present in your keycha
转载自:https://blog.csdn.net/csdn2314/article/details/73124117 Your account already has a signing certi ...
- Swift语言精要-闭包(Closure)
闭包(Closure)这个概念如果没学过Swift的人应该也不会陌生. 学过Javascript的朋友应该知道,在Javascript中我们经常会讨论闭包,很多前端工程师的面试题也会问到什么是闭包. ...
- c++ windows下读取大文件(内存映射)
关于内存映射的基本知识以及一些函数的原型说明,参考博客:http://blog.csdn.net/wcyoot/article/details/7363393 下面是我对于读取一个104M文件大小,使 ...
- hadoop multipleoutputs
http://grepalex.com/2013/05/20/multipleoutputs-part1/ http://grepalex.com/2013/07/16/multipleoutputs ...
- Java多线程之ReadWriteLock读写锁简介与使用教程
转载请注明原文地址:http://www.cnblogs.com/ygj0930/p/6558073.html 普通的锁在对某一内容加锁后,其他线程是不能访问的.但是我们要考虑这种情况:如果当前加锁 ...