ASP.NET Core Identity - UserClaims, UserRoles and RoleClaims
I'm setting up an application using ASP.NET Core Identity, and despite reading thoroughly on the topic, I'm struggling to find the right fit for my requirements.
Users familiar with the subreddit concept of Reddit might understand my requirement well, as the concepts are very similar.
Essentially, I have a requirement where a user can be a moderator of one "area" (similar to a subreddit) and just be a "user" in another "area".
What it boils down to is that when a user logs in, I need to know their roles in every area.
I'm struggling with what this actually means in terms of ASP.NET Core Identity's AspNetUserClaims and AspNetRoles / AspNetUserRoles.
I'm considering defining AspNetRoles like so:
Id Name
1000 User
2000 Junior Moderator
3000 Senior Moderator
Then setting up AspNetUserClaims like so:
Id UserId ClaimType ClaimValue
1 1 area:public1 1000
2 1 area:private1 2000
This would mean that the user with ID 1 is a "user" of the area "public1" and a junior moderator of the area "private1".
I have a number of problems with this.
First, this breaks first normal form by trying to stuff two values into "ClaimType".
Second, there is no referential integrity in place.
Looking closer at AspNetUserRoles, I see a many-to-many relationship between users and roles. I don't see how this would work unless I define every possible role for every possible area as an AspNetRole. Even then, it's still unclear how I would tie this to AspNetUserClaims in a referentially-secure manner.
To complicate matters, it's unclear whether I just need Claims or a combination of Claims and Roles. The following question touches on the subject, but I'm not seeing a clear path based on my requirements:
Best Practices for Roles vs. Claims in ASP.NET Identity
There's no reason I can't solve the issues I'm experiencing by implementing a solution like the above with claims like "area:public1", but this goes against everything I understand about systems design.
Given the requirements described above, what would be the recommended implementation in ASP.NET Core Identity?
asp.net-core asp.net-identity
add a comment |
I'm setting up an application using ASP.NET Core Identity, and despite reading thoroughly on the topic, I'm struggling to find the right fit for my requirements.
Users familiar with the subreddit concept of Reddit might understand my requirement well, as the concepts are very similar.
Essentially, I have a requirement where a user can be a moderator of one "area" (similar to a subreddit) and just be a "user" in another "area".
What it boils down to is that when a user logs in, I need to know their roles in every area.
I'm struggling with what this actually means in terms of ASP.NET Core Identity's AspNetUserClaims and AspNetRoles / AspNetUserRoles.
I'm considering defining AspNetRoles like so:
Id Name
1000 User
2000 Junior Moderator
3000 Senior Moderator
Then setting up AspNetUserClaims like so:
Id UserId ClaimType ClaimValue
1 1 area:public1 1000
2 1 area:private1 2000
This would mean that the user with ID 1 is a "user" of the area "public1" and a junior moderator of the area "private1".
I have a number of problems with this.
First, this breaks first normal form by trying to stuff two values into "ClaimType".
Second, there is no referential integrity in place.
Looking closer at AspNetUserRoles, I see a many-to-many relationship between users and roles. I don't see how this would work unless I define every possible role for every possible area as an AspNetRole. Even then, it's still unclear how I would tie this to AspNetUserClaims in a referentially-secure manner.
To complicate matters, it's unclear whether I just need Claims or a combination of Claims and Roles. The following question touches on the subject, but I'm not seeing a clear path based on my requirements:
Best Practices for Roles vs. Claims in ASP.NET Identity
There's no reason I can't solve the issues I'm experiencing by implementing a solution like the above with claims like "area:public1", but this goes against everything I understand about systems design.
Given the requirements described above, what would be the recommended implementation in ASP.NET Core Identity?
asp.net-core asp.net-identity
add a comment |
I'm setting up an application using ASP.NET Core Identity, and despite reading thoroughly on the topic, I'm struggling to find the right fit for my requirements.
Users familiar with the subreddit concept of Reddit might understand my requirement well, as the concepts are very similar.
Essentially, I have a requirement where a user can be a moderator of one "area" (similar to a subreddit) and just be a "user" in another "area".
What it boils down to is that when a user logs in, I need to know their roles in every area.
I'm struggling with what this actually means in terms of ASP.NET Core Identity's AspNetUserClaims and AspNetRoles / AspNetUserRoles.
I'm considering defining AspNetRoles like so:
Id Name
1000 User
2000 Junior Moderator
3000 Senior Moderator
Then setting up AspNetUserClaims like so:
Id UserId ClaimType ClaimValue
1 1 area:public1 1000
2 1 area:private1 2000
This would mean that the user with ID 1 is a "user" of the area "public1" and a junior moderator of the area "private1".
I have a number of problems with this.
First, this breaks first normal form by trying to stuff two values into "ClaimType".
Second, there is no referential integrity in place.
Looking closer at AspNetUserRoles, I see a many-to-many relationship between users and roles. I don't see how this would work unless I define every possible role for every possible area as an AspNetRole. Even then, it's still unclear how I would tie this to AspNetUserClaims in a referentially-secure manner.
To complicate matters, it's unclear whether I just need Claims or a combination of Claims and Roles. The following question touches on the subject, but I'm not seeing a clear path based on my requirements:
Best Practices for Roles vs. Claims in ASP.NET Identity
There's no reason I can't solve the issues I'm experiencing by implementing a solution like the above with claims like "area:public1", but this goes against everything I understand about systems design.
Given the requirements described above, what would be the recommended implementation in ASP.NET Core Identity?
asp.net-core asp.net-identity
I'm setting up an application using ASP.NET Core Identity, and despite reading thoroughly on the topic, I'm struggling to find the right fit for my requirements.
Users familiar with the subreddit concept of Reddit might understand my requirement well, as the concepts are very similar.
Essentially, I have a requirement where a user can be a moderator of one "area" (similar to a subreddit) and just be a "user" in another "area".
What it boils down to is that when a user logs in, I need to know their roles in every area.
I'm struggling with what this actually means in terms of ASP.NET Core Identity's AspNetUserClaims and AspNetRoles / AspNetUserRoles.
I'm considering defining AspNetRoles like so:
Id Name
1000 User
2000 Junior Moderator
3000 Senior Moderator
Then setting up AspNetUserClaims like so:
Id UserId ClaimType ClaimValue
1 1 area:public1 1000
2 1 area:private1 2000
This would mean that the user with ID 1 is a "user" of the area "public1" and a junior moderator of the area "private1".
I have a number of problems with this.
First, this breaks first normal form by trying to stuff two values into "ClaimType".
Second, there is no referential integrity in place.
Looking closer at AspNetUserRoles, I see a many-to-many relationship between users and roles. I don't see how this would work unless I define every possible role for every possible area as an AspNetRole. Even then, it's still unclear how I would tie this to AspNetUserClaims in a referentially-secure manner.
To complicate matters, it's unclear whether I just need Claims or a combination of Claims and Roles. The following question touches on the subject, but I'm not seeing a clear path based on my requirements:
Best Practices for Roles vs. Claims in ASP.NET Identity
There's no reason I can't solve the issues I'm experiencing by implementing a solution like the above with claims like "area:public1", but this goes against everything I understand about systems design.
Given the requirements described above, what would be the recommended implementation in ASP.NET Core Identity?
asp.net-core asp.net-identity
asp.net-core asp.net-identity
asked Nov 14 '18 at 23:17
Jon HallidayJon Halliday
205
205
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
This would mean that the user with ID 1 is a "user" of the area
"public1" and a junior moderator of the area "private1".
If you want to achieve the User with Id 1 has User
Role, and the User
Role has claims public1
as area
type.
You could try code below to configure the data.
public class HomeController : Controller
{
private readonly UserManager<IdentityUser> _userManager;
private readonly RoleManager<IdentityRole> _roleManager;
public HomeController(UserManager<IdentityUser> userManager
, RoleManager<IdentityRole> roleManager)
{
_userManager = userManager;
_roleManager = roleManager;
}
public async Task<IActionResult> Prepare()
{
var userRole = await _roleManager.CreateAsync(new IdentityRole("User"));
var role = await _roleManager.FindByNameAsync("User");
var roleClaims = await _roleManager.AddClaimAsync(role, new Claim("area", "public1"));
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync("UserName");
var roleToUser = await _userManager.AddToRoleAsync(user, "User");
return Ok("ok");
}
Then, get the claims for the user by
public async Task<IActionResult> Index()
{
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync("UserName");
var roles = await _userManager.GetRolesAsync(user);
var roleClaims = new List<Claim>();
foreach (var roleName in roles)
{
var role = await _roleManager.FindByNameAsync(roleName);
var claims = await _roleManager.GetClaimsAsync(role);
roleClaims.AddRange(claims);
}
return View();
}
For above code, you need to configure .AddRoles<IdentityRole>()
services.AddDefaultIdentity<IdentityUser>()
.AddRoles<IdentityRole>()
.AddEntityFrameworkStores<ApplicationDbContext>();
Would it be considered good practice to have foreign keys pointing back to the AspNetRoleClaims table? Is this even possible? The reason is that I have an Area table that represents Areas with their own IDs, so behind the scenes "public1" might have an AreaId of 6. So I'd like to have a relationship between Area and RoleClaim in that case. Does this make sense?
– Jon Halliday
Nov 16 '18 at 13:59
@JonHalliday of course, it is possible, but it is not recommended, otherwise, you will need to implement your ownRoleManager
to retrive thepublic1
by id6
– Tao Zhou
Nov 16 '18 at 14:27
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53310202%2fasp-net-core-identity-userclaims-userroles-and-roleclaims%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This would mean that the user with ID 1 is a "user" of the area
"public1" and a junior moderator of the area "private1".
If you want to achieve the User with Id 1 has User
Role, and the User
Role has claims public1
as area
type.
You could try code below to configure the data.
public class HomeController : Controller
{
private readonly UserManager<IdentityUser> _userManager;
private readonly RoleManager<IdentityRole> _roleManager;
public HomeController(UserManager<IdentityUser> userManager
, RoleManager<IdentityRole> roleManager)
{
_userManager = userManager;
_roleManager = roleManager;
}
public async Task<IActionResult> Prepare()
{
var userRole = await _roleManager.CreateAsync(new IdentityRole("User"));
var role = await _roleManager.FindByNameAsync("User");
var roleClaims = await _roleManager.AddClaimAsync(role, new Claim("area", "public1"));
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync("UserName");
var roleToUser = await _userManager.AddToRoleAsync(user, "User");
return Ok("ok");
}
Then, get the claims for the user by
public async Task<IActionResult> Index()
{
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync("UserName");
var roles = await _userManager.GetRolesAsync(user);
var roleClaims = new List<Claim>();
foreach (var roleName in roles)
{
var role = await _roleManager.FindByNameAsync(roleName);
var claims = await _roleManager.GetClaimsAsync(role);
roleClaims.AddRange(claims);
}
return View();
}
For above code, you need to configure .AddRoles<IdentityRole>()
services.AddDefaultIdentity<IdentityUser>()
.AddRoles<IdentityRole>()
.AddEntityFrameworkStores<ApplicationDbContext>();
Would it be considered good practice to have foreign keys pointing back to the AspNetRoleClaims table? Is this even possible? The reason is that I have an Area table that represents Areas with their own IDs, so behind the scenes "public1" might have an AreaId of 6. So I'd like to have a relationship between Area and RoleClaim in that case. Does this make sense?
– Jon Halliday
Nov 16 '18 at 13:59
@JonHalliday of course, it is possible, but it is not recommended, otherwise, you will need to implement your ownRoleManager
to retrive thepublic1
by id6
– Tao Zhou
Nov 16 '18 at 14:27
add a comment |
This would mean that the user with ID 1 is a "user" of the area
"public1" and a junior moderator of the area "private1".
If you want to achieve the User with Id 1 has User
Role, and the User
Role has claims public1
as area
type.
You could try code below to configure the data.
public class HomeController : Controller
{
private readonly UserManager<IdentityUser> _userManager;
private readonly RoleManager<IdentityRole> _roleManager;
public HomeController(UserManager<IdentityUser> userManager
, RoleManager<IdentityRole> roleManager)
{
_userManager = userManager;
_roleManager = roleManager;
}
public async Task<IActionResult> Prepare()
{
var userRole = await _roleManager.CreateAsync(new IdentityRole("User"));
var role = await _roleManager.FindByNameAsync("User");
var roleClaims = await _roleManager.AddClaimAsync(role, new Claim("area", "public1"));
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync("UserName");
var roleToUser = await _userManager.AddToRoleAsync(user, "User");
return Ok("ok");
}
Then, get the claims for the user by
public async Task<IActionResult> Index()
{
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync("UserName");
var roles = await _userManager.GetRolesAsync(user);
var roleClaims = new List<Claim>();
foreach (var roleName in roles)
{
var role = await _roleManager.FindByNameAsync(roleName);
var claims = await _roleManager.GetClaimsAsync(role);
roleClaims.AddRange(claims);
}
return View();
}
For above code, you need to configure .AddRoles<IdentityRole>()
services.AddDefaultIdentity<IdentityUser>()
.AddRoles<IdentityRole>()
.AddEntityFrameworkStores<ApplicationDbContext>();
Would it be considered good practice to have foreign keys pointing back to the AspNetRoleClaims table? Is this even possible? The reason is that I have an Area table that represents Areas with their own IDs, so behind the scenes "public1" might have an AreaId of 6. So I'd like to have a relationship between Area and RoleClaim in that case. Does this make sense?
– Jon Halliday
Nov 16 '18 at 13:59
@JonHalliday of course, it is possible, but it is not recommended, otherwise, you will need to implement your ownRoleManager
to retrive thepublic1
by id6
– Tao Zhou
Nov 16 '18 at 14:27
add a comment |
This would mean that the user with ID 1 is a "user" of the area
"public1" and a junior moderator of the area "private1".
If you want to achieve the User with Id 1 has User
Role, and the User
Role has claims public1
as area
type.
You could try code below to configure the data.
public class HomeController : Controller
{
private readonly UserManager<IdentityUser> _userManager;
private readonly RoleManager<IdentityRole> _roleManager;
public HomeController(UserManager<IdentityUser> userManager
, RoleManager<IdentityRole> roleManager)
{
_userManager = userManager;
_roleManager = roleManager;
}
public async Task<IActionResult> Prepare()
{
var userRole = await _roleManager.CreateAsync(new IdentityRole("User"));
var role = await _roleManager.FindByNameAsync("User");
var roleClaims = await _roleManager.AddClaimAsync(role, new Claim("area", "public1"));
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync("UserName");
var roleToUser = await _userManager.AddToRoleAsync(user, "User");
return Ok("ok");
}
Then, get the claims for the user by
public async Task<IActionResult> Index()
{
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync("UserName");
var roles = await _userManager.GetRolesAsync(user);
var roleClaims = new List<Claim>();
foreach (var roleName in roles)
{
var role = await _roleManager.FindByNameAsync(roleName);
var claims = await _roleManager.GetClaimsAsync(role);
roleClaims.AddRange(claims);
}
return View();
}
For above code, you need to configure .AddRoles<IdentityRole>()
services.AddDefaultIdentity<IdentityUser>()
.AddRoles<IdentityRole>()
.AddEntityFrameworkStores<ApplicationDbContext>();
This would mean that the user with ID 1 is a "user" of the area
"public1" and a junior moderator of the area "private1".
If you want to achieve the User with Id 1 has User
Role, and the User
Role has claims public1
as area
type.
You could try code below to configure the data.
public class HomeController : Controller
{
private readonly UserManager<IdentityUser> _userManager;
private readonly RoleManager<IdentityRole> _roleManager;
public HomeController(UserManager<IdentityUser> userManager
, RoleManager<IdentityRole> roleManager)
{
_userManager = userManager;
_roleManager = roleManager;
}
public async Task<IActionResult> Prepare()
{
var userRole = await _roleManager.CreateAsync(new IdentityRole("User"));
var role = await _roleManager.FindByNameAsync("User");
var roleClaims = await _roleManager.AddClaimAsync(role, new Claim("area", "public1"));
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync("UserName");
var roleToUser = await _userManager.AddToRoleAsync(user, "User");
return Ok("ok");
}
Then, get the claims for the user by
public async Task<IActionResult> Index()
{
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync("UserName");
var roles = await _userManager.GetRolesAsync(user);
var roleClaims = new List<Claim>();
foreach (var roleName in roles)
{
var role = await _roleManager.FindByNameAsync(roleName);
var claims = await _roleManager.GetClaimsAsync(role);
roleClaims.AddRange(claims);
}
return View();
}
For above code, you need to configure .AddRoles<IdentityRole>()
services.AddDefaultIdentity<IdentityUser>()
.AddRoles<IdentityRole>()
.AddEntityFrameworkStores<ApplicationDbContext>();
answered Nov 16 '18 at 5:52
Tao ZhouTao Zhou
6,50831331
6,50831331
Would it be considered good practice to have foreign keys pointing back to the AspNetRoleClaims table? Is this even possible? The reason is that I have an Area table that represents Areas with their own IDs, so behind the scenes "public1" might have an AreaId of 6. So I'd like to have a relationship between Area and RoleClaim in that case. Does this make sense?
– Jon Halliday
Nov 16 '18 at 13:59
@JonHalliday of course, it is possible, but it is not recommended, otherwise, you will need to implement your ownRoleManager
to retrive thepublic1
by id6
– Tao Zhou
Nov 16 '18 at 14:27
add a comment |
Would it be considered good practice to have foreign keys pointing back to the AspNetRoleClaims table? Is this even possible? The reason is that I have an Area table that represents Areas with their own IDs, so behind the scenes "public1" might have an AreaId of 6. So I'd like to have a relationship between Area and RoleClaim in that case. Does this make sense?
– Jon Halliday
Nov 16 '18 at 13:59
@JonHalliday of course, it is possible, but it is not recommended, otherwise, you will need to implement your ownRoleManager
to retrive thepublic1
by id6
– Tao Zhou
Nov 16 '18 at 14:27
Would it be considered good practice to have foreign keys pointing back to the AspNetRoleClaims table? Is this even possible? The reason is that I have an Area table that represents Areas with their own IDs, so behind the scenes "public1" might have an AreaId of 6. So I'd like to have a relationship between Area and RoleClaim in that case. Does this make sense?
– Jon Halliday
Nov 16 '18 at 13:59
Would it be considered good practice to have foreign keys pointing back to the AspNetRoleClaims table? Is this even possible? The reason is that I have an Area table that represents Areas with their own IDs, so behind the scenes "public1" might have an AreaId of 6. So I'd like to have a relationship between Area and RoleClaim in that case. Does this make sense?
– Jon Halliday
Nov 16 '18 at 13:59
@JonHalliday of course, it is possible, but it is not recommended, otherwise, you will need to implement your own
RoleManager
to retrive the public1
by id 6
– Tao Zhou
Nov 16 '18 at 14:27
@JonHalliday of course, it is possible, but it is not recommended, otherwise, you will need to implement your own
RoleManager
to retrive the public1
by id 6
– Tao Zhou
Nov 16 '18 at 14:27
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53310202%2fasp-net-core-identity-userclaims-userroles-and-roleclaims%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown