Re: [security-dev] PLINK-84 - Login can be bypassed with any user after a first successful login

I see no reason why someone would call login again on an already authenticated session. I believe that Seam 2.x used to catch this and throw an exception (though I could be misremembering). Personally, I would prefer an exception over silently ignoring the call or an option such as the one below.

Unless there is a valid reason to call .login again?

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Anil Saldhana" <Anil.Saldhana(a)redhat.com (mailto:Anil.Saldhana@redhat.com)> > To: security-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:security-dev@lists.jboss.org) > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 7:31:33 PM > Subject: Re: [security-dev] PLINK-84 - Login can be bypassed with any user after a first successful login > > > > Actually, I do not see a problem in customizing the behavior of > repeated login() method calls: > > something like: > > identity.setOption(Option.LOGIN_REPEAT); > credential.setCredential(x); > identity.login(); > credential.setCredential(y); > identity.login(); > > If the option is set, then the second call of login() will > authenticate again. > > By default, we want to maintain the session behavior. But if Aerogear > wants repeated login() logic, they should be able to set it in the > option? > > Feedback? > > On 01/30/2013 11:47 AM, Bruno Oliveira wrote: > > > > I still don't agree with it, we're giving the benefit of the doubt to > developers. If I have a method which is invoked twice for example > via HTTP request with the following code: > > > > > > credential.setCredential(x); > > identity.login(); > Login should > > > be validate it again, but if you think that is not a problem, > > > I'm fine. > > > > > > Anil, could you please provide the final solution for it? Examples of > usage? > -- > "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato > - > @abstractj > - > Volenti Nihil Difficile > > > > On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Anil Saldhana wrote: > > > On 01/30/2013 09:33 AM, Bruno Oliveira wrote: > > > > So if I'm a bank where the user account is logged in, this user > > > has just forgot to 'logout'. Another person using his computer > > > can just bypass the login, because the session still exists? > > > Banks get over this by frequently being proactive using > > > Javascript. If the user has been idle for a minute, they give > > > out a warning and if there is no response, they log out the > > > user. > > > > > > > > > > Another scenario, I'm at the same network of John, running my > > > whatever-sniffer, then is just a matter of grab the current > > > session ID and login? Am I wrong? Because If understood > > > correctly, after user login, even if I invoke this method for a > > > second time, what really matters is the session ID. https/ssl > > > should be mandatory for all critical web applications. Just have > > > a HTTP Header agent installed for your browser. Your passwords > > > are in the clear in the http header agent if you do not use > > > https. > > > > > > > > > I'm confused. > > -- "The measure of a man is what he does with > > > power" - Plato - @abstractj - Volenti Nihil Difficile On > > > Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Anil Saldhana wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 01/29/2013 08:08 PM, Douglas Campos wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 05:19:23PM -0600, Anil Saldhana > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shane, > > > this is not a bug rather a feature > > > > > > > > > request. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's a bug > > > > > > > > Aerogear has the > > > > > > > > > > > following sequence: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credential.setCredential(x); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > identity.login(); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > credential.setCredential(y); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > identity.login(); > > > > > > Aerogear wants > > > > > > > > > > > PicketLink to reauthenticate during the second > > > > > > > > > > > login() > > > call. Currently > > > it will not > > > > > > > > > > > because the first login() established a User > > > > > > > > > > > instance and > > > subsequent login() > > > > > > > > > > > > > > calls will just bypass the auth process. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If my API doesn't do the login process on the > > > > > > > > > > > login() call, am I not > > failing with the > > > > > > > > > > > "least surprise principle"? If it doesn't do all > > > > > > > > > > > the > > login procedure when called, better > > > > > > > > > > > rename it then: mayLogin(), > > > > > > > > > > > > > loginWithCaching() or anything like this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your usage: > > User user = null; > AuthenticationResult > > > > > > > result = identity.login(); > if(result == > > > > > > > AuthenticationResult.SUCCESS){ > user = > > > > > > > identity.getUser(); > } else { > throw new > > > > > > > RuntimeException("Authentication Failed"); > } > > //Now > > > > > > > identity has an user > //Irrespective of what you want > > > > > > > to put in credential, you are > authenticated already > > > > > > > until you logout > result = identity.login(); > //result > > > > > > > is always SUCCESS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMO, this is not only wrong, but I think it can be > > > > > > > > > used as a potential > > attack vector. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How? > > > > > > > > > > > > -- qmx > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > security-dev mailing list > security-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:security-dev@lists.jboss.org) ( > > > > > mailto:security-dev@lists.jboss.org ) ( > > > > > mailto:security-dev@lists.jboss.org ) > > > > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/security-dev > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > security-dev mailing list > security-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:security-dev@lists.jboss.org) > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/security-dev _______________________________________________ security-dev mailing list security-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:security-dev@lists.jboss.org) https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/security-dev