Is a PHP Session acceptable with the new UK cookie law? - php

I am just looking for some advice on the new UK Cookie Law and how it affects PHP sessions. I understand that you do not need the users to opt in when a cookie is "strictly necessary" and the example given is adding an item to a shopping cart.
I am using similar functionality that remembers what you have stored in a contact form, which I feel is strictly necessary use of a session and therefore no opt in is required.
However the confusion for me arises because I have a session_start(); at the top of each page, which means the cookie is set straight away. Some users will not then go to use the contact form, so this means that the cookie is not strictly necessary for them.
I could remove session_start(); from the top of each page, but this functionality is used throughout a number of websites and it would be preferable if we could leave it in.
Could anyone shed any more light on this?

The simple answer is that you're probably going to be okay, the extent to which this law will even be enforced is massively up for debate anyway.
We will enforce the law proportionately. We’ll look at the risks if
and when customers complain to us. If a websites’ cookie and privacy
is a risk to many people, we may then take action.
There is a balance to be struck though, as not all cookies are equal,
and our enforcement approach will bear this in mind.
For example, someone may complain about a cookie placed without their
consent, but if it was just used to remember essential details rather
than to gather information to be used for marketing purposes, then it
may not be appropriate to act.
(Source: The ICO's Dave Evans on EU cookie law compliance)

From what I have heard, the ICO is going to be fairly liberal in the interpretation of the law, the most important thing to do is show that you are making changes to comply with the spirit of the law.
I think that as the form is essential to the site, you don't need to prove that it is essential to 100% of users.
In an ecommerce site it is being taken as read that it's ok to have cookies that relate to shopping bag without asking permission, as it is essential to the function of the site, even if a particular user doesnt actually add anything to their basket.

No, I think the php sessions donot fall under the Cookie Law. There is are a lot of differences between Cookie and Session.
For example, read here:
http://php.about.com/od/learnphp/qt/session_cookie.htm
Also, if you read the law:
http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/business-sectors/docs/i/10-1132-implementing-revised-electronic-communications-framework-consultation.pdf
It says,
"The provisions of the amended Article 5(3) refer to any attempt to
store information, or gain access to stored information, in a user’s
equipment" (pg 57)
So you see, it says "user's Equipment" and sessions are not stored there, they are stored at server http://ejvyas.blogspot.com/2010/02/where-is-stored-is-it-in-browser-or-at.html

If you're able to store a PHP session cookie on a user's computer to enable the 'essential' functionality of your website - what stops you then associating additional information with that visitor without their consent/knowledge..? (Apart from it being illegal.)
After all, all the information you store - except the cookie ID which is client side - is kept on the server side and the user can't do anything to view/modify this?
So in short, if the user 'allows' you to store a PHP session cookie on their computer there's nothing to stop you storing lots of other data about their visit? - IP, Browser, OS etc...

Having read GDPR and having knowledge of how sessions work in php I have to tell you this:
1. session_start() in php is called before headers because you cannot send additional headers (as php session does) after the page loads and headers have already finished.
2. Because this happens sessions in php is an essential thing of the language itself for the language to work properly so it is something you need. Not want.
3. A php session stores a cookie in the users machine with the session id to know the connection. Not the user. For example the server says "I have a request from someone. To not mix the requests from everyone keep an id of everyone". The person, ip, geolocation or any other data is not known at the time. To be clear of this session_start() not storing any other data but the session id is how the server side language php and the server itself works and it is not possible to have consent before you initialize it.
4. But: before storing any other data you have to inform. I believe you have to inform when you start doing it, how you do it, how long you do it and what you are storing. So no more tracking on guests. Third parties like google, facebook and other implementations on your page is another story. You should pretty much remove it for guests if third parties don't allready do.
Simple: starting a session before headers is mandatory for php. Storing data needs consent so when the user logs in, registers or any other interaction inform the user and store a consent in the database (for you) and in the cookie itself (for the user to know).

Related

Is there any reliable way to identify the user machine in a unique way? [duplicate]

I need to figure out a way uniquely identify each computer which visits the web site I am creating. Does anybody have any advice on how to achieve this?
Because i want the solution to work on all machines and all browsers (within reason) I am trying to create a solution using javascript.
Cookies will not do.
I need the ability to basically create a guid which is unique to a computer and repeatable, assuming no hardware changes have happened to the computer. Directions i am thinking of are getting the MAC of the network card and other information of this nature which will id the machine visiting the web site.
Introduction
I don't know if there is or ever will be a way to uniquely identify machines using a browser alone. The main reasons are:
You will need to save data on the users computer. This data can be
deleted by the user any time. Unless you have a way to recreate this
data which is unique for each and every machine then your stuck.
Validation. You need to guard against spoofing, session hijacking, etc.
Even if there are ways to track a computer without using cookies there will always be a way to bypass it and software that will do this automatically. If you really need to track something based on a computer you will have to write a native application (Apple Store / Android Store / Windows Program / etc).
I might not be able to give you an answer to the question you asked but I can show you how to implement session tracking. With session tracking you try to track the browsing session instead of the computer visiting your site. By tracking the session, your database schema will look like this:
sesssion:
sessionID: string
// Global session data goes here
computers: [{
BrowserID: string
ComputerID: string
FingerprintID: string
userID: string
authToken: string
ipAddresses: ["203.525....", "203.525...", ...]
// Computer session data goes here
}, ...]
Advantages of session based tracking:
For logged in users, you can always generate the same session id from the users username / password / email.
You can still track guest users using sessionID.
Even if several people use the same computer (ie cybercafe) you can track them separately if they log in.
Disadvantages of session based tracking:
Sessions are browser based and not computer based. If a user uses 2 different browsers it will result in 2 different sessions. If this is a problem you can stop reading here.
Sessions expire if user is not logged in. If a user is not logged in, then they will use a guest session which will be invalidated if user deletes cookies and browser cache.
Implementation
There are many ways of implementing this. I don't think I can cover them all I'll just list my favorite which would make this an opinionated answer. Bear that in mind.
Basics
I will track the session by using what is known as a forever cookie. This is data which will automagically recreate itself even if the user deletes his cookies or updates his browser. It will not however survive the user deleting both their cookies and their browsing cache.
To implement this I will use the browsers caching mechanism (RFC), WebStorage API (MDN) and browser cookies (RFC, Google Analytics).
Legal
In order to utilize tracking ids you need to add them to both your privacy policy and your terms of use preferably under the sub-heading Tracking. We will use the following keys on both document.cookie and window.localStorage:
_ga: Google Analytics data
__utma: Google Analytics tracking cookie
sid: SessionID
Make sure you include links to your Privacy policy and terms of use on all pages that use tracking.
Where do I store my session data?
You can either store your session data in your website database or on the users computer. Since I normally work on smaller sites (let than 10 thousand continuous connections) that use 3rd party applications (Google Analytics / Clicky / etc) it's best for me to store data on clients computer. This has the following advantages:
No database lookup / overhead / load / latency / space / etc.
User can delete their data whenever they want without the need to write me annoying emails.
and disadvantages:
Data has to be encrypted / decrypted and signed / verified which creates cpu overhead on client (not so bad) and server (bah!).
Data is deleted when user deletes their cookies and cache. (this is what I want really)
Data is unavailable for analytics when users go off-line. (analytics for currently browsing users only)
UUIDS
BrowserID: Unique id generated from the browsers user agent string. Browser|BrowserVersion|OS|OSVersion|Processor|MozzilaMajorVersion|GeckoMajorVersion
ComputerID: Generated from users IP Address and HTTPS session key.
getISP(requestIP)|getHTTPSClientKey()
FingerPrintID: JavaScript based fingerprinting based on a modified fingerprint.js. FingerPrint.get()
SessionID: Random key generated when user 1st visits site. BrowserID|ComputerID|randombytes(256)
GoogleID: Generated from __utma cookie. getCookie(__utma).uniqueid
Mechanism
The other day I was watching the wendy williams show with my girlfriend and was completely horrified when the host advised her viewers to delete their browser history at least once a month. Deleting browser history normally has the following effects:
Deletes history of visited websites.
Deletes cookies and window.localStorage (aww man).
Most modern browsers make this option readily available but fear not friends. For there is a solution. The browser has a caching mechanism to store scripts / images and other things. Usually even if we delete our history, this browser cache still remains. All we need is a way to store our data here. There are 2 methods of doing this. The better one is to use a SVG image and store our data inside its tags. This way data can still be extracted even if JavaScript is disabled using flash. However since that is a bit complicated I will demonstrate the other approach which uses JSONP (Wikipedia)
example.com/assets/js/tracking.js (actually tracking.php)
var now = new Date();
var window.__sid = "SessionID"; // Server generated
setCookie("sid", window.__sid, now.setFullYear(now.getFullYear() + 1, now.getMonth(), now.getDate() - 1));
if( "localStorage" in window ) {
window.localStorage.setItem("sid", window.__sid);
}
Now we can get our session key any time:
window.__sid || window.localStorage.getItem("sid") || getCookie("sid") || ""
How do I make tracking.js stick in browser?
We can achieve this using Cache-Control, Last-Modified and ETag HTTP headers. We can use the SessionID as value for etag header:
setHeaders({
"ETag": SessionID,
"Last-Modified": new Date(0).toUTCString(),
"Cache-Control": "private, max-age=31536000, s-max-age=31536000, must-revalidate"
})
Last-Modified header tells the browser that this file is basically never modified. Cache-Control tells proxies and gateways not to cache the document but tells the browser to cache it for 1 year.
The next time the browser requests the document, it will send If-Modified-Since and If-None-Match headers. We can use these to return a 304 Not Modified response.
example.com/assets/js/tracking.php
$sid = getHeader("If-None-Match") ?: getHeader("if-none-match") ?: getHeader("IF-NONE-MATCH") ?: "";
$ifModifiedSince = hasHeader("If-Modified-Since") ?: hasHeader("if-modified-since") ?: hasHeader("IF-MODIFIED-SINCE");
if( validateSession($sid) ) {
if( sessionExists($sid) ) {
continueSession($sid);
send304();
} else {
startSession($sid);
send304();
}
} else if( $ifModifiedSince ) {
send304();
} else {
startSession();
send200();
}
Now every time the browser requests tracking.js our server will respond with a 304 Not Modified result and force an execute of the local copy of tracking.js.
I still don't understand. Explain it to me
Lets suppose the user clears their browsing history and refreshes the page. The only thing left on the users computer is a copy of tracking.js in browser cache. When the browser requests tracking.js it recieves a 304 Not Modified response which causes it to execute the 1st version of tracking.js it recieved. tracking.js executes and restores the SessionID that was deleted.
Validation
Suppose Haxor X steals our customers cookies while they are still logged in. How do we protect them? Cryptography and Browser fingerprinting to the rescue. Remember our original definition for SessionID was:
BrowserID|ComputerID|randomBytes(256)
We can change this to:
Timestamp|BrowserID|ComputerID|encrypt(randomBytes(256), hk)|sign(Timestamp|BrowserID|ComputerID|randomBytes(256), hk)
Where hk = sign(Timestamp|BrowserID|ComputerID, serverKey).
Now we can validate our SessionID using the following algorithm:
if( getTimestamp($sid) is older than 1 year ) return false;
if( getBrowserID($sid) !== createBrowserID($_Request, $_Server) ) return false;
if( getComputerID($sid) !== createComputerID($_Request, $_Server) return false;
$hk = sign(getTimestamp($sid) + getBrowserID($sid) + getComputerID($sid), $SERVER["key"]);
if( !verify(getTimestamp($sid) + getBrowserID($sid) + getComputerID($sid) + decrypt(getRandomBytes($sid), hk), getSignature($sid), $hk) ) return false;
return true;
Now in order for Haxor's attack to work they must:
Have same ComputerID. That means they have to have the same ISP provider as victim (Tricky). This will give our victim the opportunity to take legal action in their own country. Haxor must also obtain HTTPS session key from victim (Hard).
Have same BrowserID. Anyone can spoof User-Agent string (Annoying).
Be able to create their own fake SessionID (Very Hard). Volume atacks won't work because we use a time-stamp to generate encryption / signing key so basically its like generating a new key for each session. On top of that we encrypt random bytes so a simple dictionary attack is also out of the question.
We can improve validation by forwarding GoogleID and FingerprintID (via ajax or hidden fields) and matching against those.
if( GoogleID != getStoredGoodleID($sid) ) return false;
if( byte_difference(FingerPrintID, getStoredFingerprint($sid) > 10%) return false;
These people have developed a fingerprinting method for recognising a user with a high level of accuracy:
https://panopticlick.eff.org/static/browser-uniqueness.pdf
We investigate the degree to which modern web browsers
are subject to “device fingerprinting” via the version and configuration information that they will transmit to websites upon request. We
implemented one possible fingerprinting algorithm, and collected these
fingerprints from a large sample of browsers that visited our test side,
panopticlick.eff.org. We observe that the distribution of our finger-
print contains at least 18.1 bits of entropy, meaning that if we pick a
browser at random, at best we expect that only one in 286,777 other
browsers will share its fingerprint. Among browsers that support Flash
or Java, the situation is worse, with the average browser carrying at least
18.8 bits of identifying information. 94.2% of browsers with Flash or Java
were unique in our sample.
By observing returning visitors, we estimate how rapidly browser fingerprints might change over time. In our sample, fingerprints changed quite
rapidly, but even a simple heuristic was usually able to guess when a fingerprint was an “upgraded” version of a previously observed browser’s
fingerprint, with 99.1% of guesses correct and a false positive rate of only
0.86%.
We discuss what privacy threat browser fingerprinting poses in practice,
and what countermeasures may be appropriate to prevent it. There is a
tradeoff between protection against fingerprintability and certain kinds of
debuggability, which in current browsers is weighted heavily against privacy. Paradoxically, anti-fingerprinting privacy technologies can be self-
defeating if they are not used by a sufficient number of people; we show
that some privacy measures currently fall victim to this paradox, but
others do not.
It's not possible to identify the computers accessing a web site without the cooperation of their owners. If they let you, however, you can store a cookie to identify the machine when it visits your site again. The key is, the visitor is in control; they can remove the cookie and appear as a new visitor any time they wish.
A possibility is using flash cookies:
Ubiquitous availability (95 percent of visitors will probably have flash)
You can store more data per cookie (up to 100 KB)
Shared across browsers, so more likely to uniquely identify a machine
Clearing the browser cookies does not remove the flash cookies.
You'll need to build a small (hidden) flash movie to read and write them.
Whatever route you pick, make sure your users opt IN to being tracked, otherwise you're invading their privacy and become one of the bad guys.
There is a popular method called canvas fingerprinting, described in this scientific article: The Web Never Forgets:
Persistent Tracking Mechanisms in the Wild. Once you start looking for it, you'll be surprised how frequently it is used. The method creates a unique fingerprint, which is consistent for each browser/hardware combination.
The article also reviews other persistent tracking methods, like evercookies, respawning http and Flash cookies, and cookie syncing.
More info about canvas fingerprinting here:
Pixel Perfect: Fingerprinting Canvas in HTML5
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canvas_fingerprinting
You may want to try setting a unique ID in an evercookie (it will work cross browser, see their FAQs):
http://samy.pl/evercookie/
There is also a company called ThreatMetrix that is used by a lot of big companies to solve this problem:
http://threatmetrix.com/our-solutions/solutions-by-product/trustdefender-id/
They are quite expensive and some of their other products aren't very good, but their device id works well.
Finally, there is this open source jquery implementation of the panopticlick idea:
https://github.com/carlo/jquery-browser-fingerprint
It looks pretty half baked right now but could be expanded upon.
Hope it helps!
There is only a small amount of information that you can get via an HTTP connection.
IP - But as others have said, this is not fixed for many, if not most Internet users due to their ISP's dynamic allocation policies.
Useragent String - Nearly all browsers send what kind of browser they are with every request. However, this can be set by the user in many browsers today.
Collection of request fields - There are other fields sent with each request, such as supported encodings, etc. These, if used in the aggregate can help to ID a user's machine, but again are browser dependent and can be changed.
Cookies - Setting a cookie is another way to identify a machine, or more specifically a browser on a machine, but as others have said, these can be deleted, or turned off by the users, and are only applicable on a browser, not a machine.
So, the correct response is that you cannot achieve what you would live via the HTTP over IP protocols alone. However, using a combination of cookies, as well as IP, and the fields in the HTTP request, you have a good chance at guessing, sort of, what machine it is. Users tend to use only one browser, and often from one machine, so this may be fairly relieable, but this will vary depending on the audience...techies are more likely to mess with this stuff, and use more machines/browsers. Additionally, this could even be coupled with some attempt to geo-locate the IP, and use that data as well. But in any case, there is no solution that will be correct all of the time.
There are flaws with both cookie and non-cookie approaches. But if you can forgive the shortcomings of the cookie approach, here's an idea.
If you're already using Google Analytics on your site, then you don't need to write code to track unique users yourself. Google Analytics does that for you via the __utma cookie value, as described in Google's documentation. And by reusing this value you're not creating additional cookie payload, which has efficiency benefits with page requests.
And you could write some code easily enough to access that value, or use this script's getUniqueId() function.
As with the previous solutions cookies are a good method, be aware that they identify browsers though. If I visited a website in Firefox and then in Internet Explorer cookies would be stored for both attempts seperately. Some users also disable cookies (but more people disable JavaScript).
Another method to consider would be I.P. and hostname identification (be aware these can vary for dial-up/non-static IP users, AOL also uses blanket IPs). However since this only identifies networks this might not work as well as cookies.
The suggestions to use cookies aside, the only comprehensive set of identifying attributes available to interrogate are contained in the HTTP request header. So it is possible to use some subset of these to create a pseudo-unique identifier for a user agent (i.e., browser). Further, most of this information is possibly already being logged in the so-called "access log" of your web server software by default and, if not, can be easily configured to do so. Then, a utlity could be developed that simply scans the content of this log, creating fingerprints of each request comprised of, say, the IP address and User Agent string, etc. The more data available, even including the contents of specific cookies, adds to the quality of the uniqueness of this fingerprint. Though, as many others have stated already, the HTTP protocol doesn't make this 100% foolproof - at best it can only be a fairly good indicator.
When i use a machine which has never visited my online banking web site i get asked for additional authentification. then, if i go back a second time to the online banking site i dont get asked the additional authentification...i deleted all cookies in IE and relogged onto my online banking site fully expecting to be asked the authentification questions again. to my surprise i was not asked. doesnt this lead one to believe the bank is doing some kind of pc tagging which doesnt involve cookies?
This is a pretty common type of authentication used by banks.
Say you're accessing your bank website via example-isp.com. The first time you're there, you'll be asked for your password, as well as additional authentication. Once you've passed, the bank knows that user "thatisvaliant" is authenticated to access the site via example-isp.com.
In the future, it won't ask for extra authentication (beyond your password) when you're accessing the site via example-isp.com. If you try to access the bank via another-isp.com, the bank will go through the same routine again.
So to summarize, what the bank's identifying is your ISP and/or netblock, based on your IP address. Obviously not every user at your ISP is you, which is why the bank still asks you for your password.
Have you ever had a credit card company call to verify that things are OK when you use a credit card in a different country? Same concept.
Really, what you want to do cannot be done because the protocols do not allow for this. If static IPs were universally used then you might be able to do it. They are not, so you cannot.
If you really want to identify people, have them log in.
Since they will probably be moving around to different pages on your web site, you need a way to keep track of them as they move about.
So long as they are logged in, and you are tracking their session within your site via cookies/link-parameters/beacons/whatever, you can be pretty sure that they are using the same computer during that time.
Ultimately, it is incorrect to say this tells you which computer they are using if your users are not using your own local network and do not have static IP addresses.
If what you want to do is being done with the cooperation of the users and there is only one user per cookie and they use a single web browser, just use a cookie.
You can use fingerprintjs2
new Fingerprint2().get(function(result, components) {
console.log(result) // a hash, representing your device fingerprint
console.log(components) // an array of FP components
//submit hash and JSON object to the server
})
After that you can check all your users against existing and check JSON similarity, so even if their fingerprint mutates, you still can track them
Because i want the solution to work on all machines and all browsers (within reason) I am trying to create a solution using javascript.
Isn't that a really good reason not to use javascript?
As others have said - cookies are probably your best option - just be aware of the limitations.
I guess the verdict is i cannot programmatically uniquely identify a computer which is visiting my web site.
I have the following question. When i use a machine which has never visited my online banking web site i get asked for additional authentification. then, if i go back a second time to the online banking site i dont get asked the additional authentification. reading the answers to my question i decided it must be a cookie involved. therefore, i deleted all cookies in IE and relogged onto my online banking site fully expecting to be asked the authentification questions again. to my surprise i was not asked. doesnt this lead one to believe the bank is doing some kind of pc tagging which doesnt involve cookies?
further, after much googling today i found the following company who claims to sell a solution which does uniquely identify machines which visit a web site. http://www.the41.com/products.asp.
i appreciate all the good information if you could clarify further this conflicting information i found i would greatly appreciate it.
I would do this using a combination of cookies and flash cookies. Create a GUID and store it in a cookie. If the cookie doesn't exist, try to read it from the flash cookie. If it's still not found, create it and write it to the flash cookie. This way you can share the same GUID across browsers.
I think cookies might be what you are looking for; this is how most websites uniquely identify visitors.
Cookies won't be useful for determining unique visitors. A user could clear cookies and refresh the site - he then is classed as a new user again.
I think that the best way to go about doing this is to implement a server side solution (as you will need somewhere to store your data). Depending on the complexity of your needs for such data, you will need to determine what is classed as a unique visit. A sensible method would be to allow an IP address to return the following day and be given a unique visit. Several visits from one IP address in one day shouldn't be counted as uniques.
Using PHP, for example, it is trivial to get the IP address of a visitor, and store it in a text file (or a sql database).
A server side solution will work on all machines, because you are going to track the user when he first loads up your site. Don't use javascript, as that is meant for client side scripting, plus the user may have disabled it in any case.
Hope that helps.
I will give my ideas starting from simpler to more complex.
In all the above you can create sessions and the problem essentialy translates to match session with request.
a) (difficulty: easy) use client hardware to store explicitely a session id/hash of some sort (there are quite some privace/security issues so make sure you hash anything you store ), solutions include:
cookies storage
browser storage/webDB/ (more exotic browser solutions )
extensions with permission to store things in files.
The above suffer from the fact the the user can just empty his cache in case he doesn want.
b) (difficulty: medium) Login based authentication.
Most modern web frameworks provide such solution the core idea is you let the user voluntarily identify himself, quite straghtforward but adds complexity in the architecture.
The above suffer from additional complexity and making essentially non public content.
c)(difficulty: hard -R&D) Identification based on metadata, (browser ip/language /browser / and other privace invasice stuff so make sure you let your users know or you miay get sued )
non perfect solution can get more complicated (a user typing with specific frequency or using mouse with specific patterns ? you even apply ML solutions ).
The claimed solutions
The most powerful since the user even without wanting explicitely he can be identified. It is straight invasion of privacy(see GDPR) and not perfect eg. ip can change .
Assuming you don't want the user to be in control, you can't. The web doesn't work like that, the best you can hope for is some heuristics.
If it is an option to force your visitor to install some software and use TCPA you may be able to pull something off.
My post might not be a solution, but I can provide an example, where this feature has been implemented.
If you visit the signup page of www.supertorrents.org for the first time from you computer, it's fine. But if you refresh the page or open the page again, it identifies you've previously visited the page. The real beauty comes here - it identifies even if you re-install Windows or other OS.
I read somewhere that they store the CPU ID. Although I couldn't find how do they do it, I seriously doubt it, and they might use MAC Address to do it.
I'll definitely share if I find how to do it.
A Trick:
Create 2 Registration Pages:
First Registration Page: without any email or security check (just with username and password)
Second Registration Page: with high security level (email verification request and security image and etc.)
For customer satisfaction, and easy registration, default
registration page should be the (First Registration Page) but in the
(First Registration Page) there is a hidden restriction. It's IP
Restriction. If an IP tried to register for second time, (for example less than 1 hour) instead of
showing the block page. you can show the (Second Registration Page)
automatically.
in the (First Registration Page) you can set (for example: block 2
attempts from 1 ip for just 1 hour or 24 hours) and after (for example) 1 hour, you can open access from that ip automatically
Please note: (First Registration Page) and (Second Registration Page) should not be in separated pages. you make just 1 page. (for example: register.php) and make it smart to switch between First PHP Style and Second PHP Style

Security through different programming language

There is any way to check the login status through different programming language?
Right now I'm using three session (same name) that starts at the same time after the login process, using ajax.
Right now, the login.html form is processed on three files: login.aspx, login.asp and login.php but it's seems too slow and weird. I'm combining three different services from the same company into one, after re-building the users and others common tables in mysql, everything seems to work fine, but I'm really scared about security bugs.
Just to let you you know, I have to check the login session status before any ajax callback, so if the user is working on an ASP page calling PHP through Ajax, may be that the session is still active on the ASP, but expired on the php file.
Any valid method to check all in one time? I can also accept a cookie solution but how to make it readable between php, asp and .net?
This sounds like single sign-on to me. Let's try to split the problem.
There is any way to check the login status through different programming language?
You're not really interested in the language used. Any language, given the same info and algorithm, would decode with success the same encrypted data. I guess you're instead having problems because PHP's application logic regarding this point is different from the ASP's one.
So for the first point, you can
Implement / normalize the same session checking logic among all of your apps. This is probably unfeasible, because you might be using Laravel here, and ASP.Net on the other, and the two are probably slightly different in this regard. If you can, do this, or...
Look into JSON Web Tokens. I won't go into detail, but these were more or less designed to solve this class of problems. They are also easy to handle, but be aware, there are aspects you have to take care of when using them for user authentication.
[...] Just to let you you know, I have to check the login session status before any ajax callback, so if the user is working on an ASP page calling PHP through Ajax, may be that the session is still active on the ASP, but expired on the php file.
Not to be that guy, but some concepts are somewhat deformed here. Sessions don't expire on files; they normally are setup with a given expiration time and a given domain. So generally speaking, a session opened from a PHP app, and stored on a cookie, then read from an ASP one shouldn't change, given that no difference exists between the two app's session handling logic.
Any valid method to check all in one time? I can also accept a cookie solution but how to make it readable between php, asp and .net?
For both of the solutions i suggested above is, especially for the cookie one, it's important you make the apps absolutely identical in respect to session handling. While this is trivial with JWT (as there's barely any logic on the app's side), this may prove to be harder with cookies if the authentication logic comes from some one else's code (as in a framework).
I haven't asked about single sign-out, and at this point i'm afraid to ask :). But these are some guidelines:
If going the cookie route, be aware of cookie's domain. A cookie is normally valid for every request coming from the website domain (name.com), but you may have some of your apps under a subdomain (like, phpapp.name.com). In this case, be sure the cookie created from the given app is valid for the whole domain, and not just the subdomain. And make the apps available at subdomains / pages under the same domain. Cookies don't work cross-domain, and you have to deal with that, since cookie domain policy is enforced at browser level.
Launching three AJAX calls means triggering three login procedures. I suppose all of these would terminate, at some point in the future, and all of those would be storing / rewriting the cookie. If the apps understand the same cookie, it's mandatory you open the login process on just one of them. This would store the cookie, which would then be automatically picked app from, say, a page in the second app, giving you a seamless transition into a logged-state in the second app.
JWT would normally require some JS work, which you may like since the same script can easily be loaded in all of your apps. On the other side, you can be sure that different server libraries handling JWT would all work the same for you, thus ensuring compatibility.
Personally, i would look into JSON Web Tokens.
You can develop your own session provider which stores data in a separate place (for ex. in database or files). Then everything you need to do is write some code in every environment to handle your session information from that provider. Because you use only one source to store session information there will be no problem with synchronization between any of yours environment.
If you need then you can use a webservice for exchange session information between every environment and session provider. Every application can use security connection to get and set information about session from that session webservice.
I think you can do this!You can create provider which stores data into database. Then Write some cool code to manage your provider.You can also use webapp or sevice.Every service use security to get and put information.

Cookie vs MySQL Save

I guess this is more of just a personal preference questions, but I'm really concerned with performance. I'm working on a little project and one thing that people can do is RSVP to events. Now I know the option that people choose (attend or not attend) must be stored in a database, but to make the site look a little better, I also want the button that allows someone to attend switch to not attend when they click it.
At this point I'm thinking of three options, either query the database, figure out if the person is attending, and display the appropriate button. -OR- I could save the information in a cookie and just pray that the user doesn't delete the information. -OR- I could save the information in a cookie, if the cookie is present then display whatever the cookies says, if not then query the database. Option 3 seems the best to me.
I always kind of inspect major sites and look at some of the techniques they use. They tend to keep the cookie count under 20. Is there anything bad about option 3, or is it the way I should go. Thanks!
If you use cookie, you can expect that there is some other person who uses the same machine, the same user account, the same browser, the same settings. There can be also a person who uses different browsers. There can be also two persons who share two computers.
If the users log in you can use sessions, it is cookie, of course, but you can identify the user, so he knows "it's not me".
And about performance: if you set your cookie, it takes also time to get it and then send it, via http headers and responses. But the best idea would be to benchmark this. Because of the small time to access db and for the reasons I stated before, I would use the db.
Store it in the db. If the user logs in on a 2nd machine and changes the status, the wrong status will show when they go back to the 1st machine.
Without the details on how people access the site, whether they are logged in or not, it is hard to say but I would agree with you on the 3rd option - query the cookie first if there i nothing, query the database - which works as long as no two people use the same computer session.
Another option that may work (or not depending on your web app) is to have individualized links. This can work nicely if people come to your site from email links with a url similar to this http://example.com/[eventid]/[uniquecode]

db scheme for persistent login

I want to compare the key of a cookie with a key found in the database so as to let a returning visitor login to the site automatically,this means that the key in the db and the cookie will be associated with a specific user.
My question is what is better, storing the key to a table where the username is stored along
with their password, or create a separate table there will be the username with the associated key and timestamp of course.
Complexity is an issue here-furthermore I am trying to find a if innodb or Isam is better for the above.
What complicates the matter more is the fact that it is difficult to project from now
how big the application is going to be and how that might impact the design of the database.
The sooner I come to a sound solution the better
I am going to answer this with some thoughts and ideas on how to approach this.
Now what you should consider first when doing this is how other site do it:
Amazon allow you to browse the site under a persistent cookie however they do not allow the placing of orders or the changing of details without being forced to login again. However that being said this still has a serious security flaw. If you allow one click ordering and then some one else uses your computer and clicks on a link in a campaign email from Amazon (an Ad for example) there is still a chance that the order can be placed on the other guys account without having to actually be logged in (yep I found this out by accident, thankfully).
Facebook takes a similar approach to Amazon. From personal experience I think they demand a relogin every two days to edit account details etc.
Stackoverflow from what I can gather has no such security measures. Once you are logged in your logged in for a specified duration.
Google houses a 2+ year cookie and once every week or so asks you to re-login to validate yourself.
So as you can see many sites do not just allow persistent logins to control their user interactions and actually a returning persistent login rare even logs a person in fully. Instead what most sites implement is a 2 tier system of login where by you can view the site as the cookie user however you cannot edit anything without having to login again.
You will immediately notice once thing here. Many of these sites do not care for cookie expiration only for browser session expiration. Persistent cookies rarely have a short term expiration so this point is kind of useless. As #pyruva states it is easy to steal someones cookie and view a site as them, this happens on Facebook all the time (you can even find video tutorials on how to do it).
So the first thing to remember is that a persistent login, by nature, is insecure. The way to make it secure is normally within your application logic by implementing something such as a 2 tier authentication system.
The one thing you should never do is store some personally identifiable information about the user within that cookie such as the username or password, even in hashed form. A better way is to use a randomly generated token (think of OAuth2 here) to handshake with the server initially.
Of course one other thing you will need to consider is protecting your cookies in general. You can find a lot of resources on Google about this however here is one link that should help a lot: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2008/08/protecting-your-cookies-httponly.html
So hopefully that should give you some direction and hints on how to tackle this.
Edit
Every user that comes to your site has effectively two sessions when it comes to cookies. They have a browser session which, when the browser is closed, will delete the cookies from their browser (normally denoted as 0 expire time within HTTP headers).
Then there is the persistent session. The one you are tying to implement now, where cookies can last years before they actually expire.
This is what I mean by browser expiration. So most sites house temporary cookies which will be removed once you close the browser. These cookies are normally used to keep your session yours.
If sites cared about cookie expiration then they wouldn't house cookies which are valid for 2 years on your computer. Let's face it if some one is gonna use expired cookies to abuse your account they are kinda out of luck since the cookies are still perfectly valid. This is a greater security threat but it does prove my point.

Session management in propiearatory webserver

I have been tasked with attempting to fix a problem with session management in a webserver. The code is written in c and is pretty old. Sessions are limited to creating a folder for a new session and a little php script runs on top and checks the SID is valid for a logged in user.
However the way the program works the SID is stored in the URL! so any copy pastes result in session hijacking. Now I've been told its not possible to change the fact that the SID is stored in the URL. It is not possible to use cookies as some customers have high security settings in their browsers and this also cannot be changed. The only things I can think of are URL rewriting storing the SID in a hidden field but I am still waiting for information from my manager, I don't think it will be possible as the HTML files are pre written and I don't think it is possible to add hidden fields to them, maybe this can be done on the fly by the server program, I'm not sure. And my last idea was to use tokens, or just to start a new session if a different IP address or User-Agent string is found even if it has a valid SID.
I don't really know much about web security I am on a placement year from University and mainly C programming but have been given this task as a little side project which I would like to try and accomplish something with.
Do any of you have any pointers?
I know I've been vague and I'm not allowed to post any code :( sorry
Thanks for you help in advance though.
Even with already existing session managers, the only way to avoid session hijacking is to also validate against the client's IP address and optionally the user agent string as well. Any of the other suggestions can be done just for obscurity, but won't have any effect if somebody decides to try hacking into your app.

Categories