Problems with Login over EntraID regarding rights

dfernandez · November 28, 2024, 12:40pm

Hello! So, we have the following issue. We have configured SSO with entra ID and everything is working as expected (so far). For now it was tested only with users with administration rights (to all collections). But now we are working on “real” users with limited rights to an collections and i “got stuck”.

To replicate the issue i have done following:

Create an user that has Limited Access to an Collection → OK
Invite the user via Invite-Link → OK
At this Point the user clicks on the invite link (in a Private windows just to be sure), does his authentication, comes back to specify, is logged in and has access to the stuff that he needs to see. → OK

It looks like this:

Now comes “the bug” Part: User closes Browser. User Open a Browser (again in a Private window) user opens specify in Browser, clicks on Login with OICD (or whatever that button is named), makes authentication in EntraID, will be redirected back to specify after succesfull auth and does NOT see what he should see. I Would expect the same specify as first time. Instead he gets a json output with an error. This looks like this:

So, my first idea is that some rights are screwed or something so i doublecked everything but looks fine. So i set a password to this user to be able to login localy instead with External Identity Provider. So again, loged in “localy” and Bam, everything is working like it should.

If i give the User rights to the collection 4 (see second screenshot) then its working also with OIDC, BUT, he should not be able to do stuff in Collection “4”. He has no rights for it. So i “assume” he goes for collection 4 because its the first collection in database or something like this? All other collections have higher IDs.

So, i think i found a bug or is there any setting regarding this behavior?

Heryk · November 28, 2024, 1:46pm

Hi @dfernandez,
Just to confirm,
Could you check if there are any duplicate user entries in the “spuserexternalid” database table?
See this post for more info: SSO Authentication Issue with Duplicate User Entries in spuserexternalid Table - Get Help - Specify Community Forum

dfernandez · November 28, 2024, 3:30pm

Yes, there are none, this happens if the user clicks more than once on the invitation link, i allready know this behavior, but is not the case here. There is only one with the right specifyuser_id and it matches with the id in the table specifyuser.

I just wondering where the collectionid = 4 is coming in my case.

markp · November 28, 2024, 5:19pm

This is the same bug we had! Even collectionid 4 is the same! Thought it was such a weird fluke that I decided to close it, but I was also able to replicate across 2 users.

github.com/specify/specify7

NoMatchingRuleException: SSO redirects user to collection id that they do not have access to

opened 04:50PM - 10 Oct 24 UTC

closed 04:49PM - 21 Oct 24 UTC

mpitblado

1 - Bug

**Describe the bug** A user is successfully able to setup and link a Specify ac…count with an identity broker, and *complete a successful sign in through SSO once*. The next time they go to sign in (on a different machine), they receive the following error. `{"NoMatchingRuleException": [{"collectionid": 4, "userid": 8, "resource": "/system/sp7/collection", "action": "access"}]}` Interpreting the error seems straightforward, `userid 8` is trying to access `collectionid 4`, which they do not have access to. The question is why SSO is directing them there in the first place. SSO should return a user to the same collection they left off at (because the session is still active application side), but they never would have been able to have access to this collection, and thus could not previously have been in it. ``` Division 1: [Collection] [Collection] [Collection] <- collection id 4 ... Division 2: [Collection] <- user id 8 has access here, and only here ``` When the user *is* given read-only access to `collectionid 4` SSO works just fine, confirming the above interpretation. Note that through this process #2405 comes into play, but I will keep those details out of this report and see if they have been documented there. **To Reproduce** My hunch is that this error is related to #2405, as all other users have worked fine except for this user, which is the only one in a separate division. At this point, I am not certain on how to reproduce this, and am opening this issue because we have the opportunity to narrow down what can be causing this (as we have several users left who haven't been setup yet in that division). The first thing that I will pay attention to for the next user, is whether the collection/division that the admin is in when creating the invite link matters. Perhaps if the admin is in division 1, while creating a link for a user in division 2, then the wires get crossed. I do not have a hypothesis for why their first SSO sign-in worked the first time for them, before they were given read-only access to `collectionid 4`. I do not know why SSO routed to `collectionid 4` specifically out of the other available options. **Expected behavior** The user is able to sign in through SSO and will always be placed into the one collection that they have access to (if that is the case), regardless of division. **Screenshots** N/A. Error message appears as black text on blank web browser window. **Crash Report** N/A Please, also fill out the following information manually: - Specify 7 Version: 7.9.6.2 - Database Name: beaty **Reported By** Beaty Biodiversity Museum **Additional context**

markp · November 28, 2024, 6:08pm

I wonder if it is these lines that are causing it. @dfernandez, in your situation, does the user only have access to one other collection?

github.com

specify/specify7/blob/da4f46f35666aca6b9640b1b72f964976ce1ac97/specifyweb/accounts/views.py#L371C1-L373C29


      
          if len(available_collections) == 1:
              set_collection_cookie(redirect_resp, available_collections[0].id)
              return redirect_resp

dfernandez · December 2, 2024, 7:41am

Hello @markp !

Yes! We have 4-5 Collections and the user is only allowed to exactly 1 Collection. We don’t use divisions at all. But its same behavior you described in the github issue.

dfernandez · December 2, 2024, 7:45am

Blockquote
I wonder if it is these lines that are causing it.

available_collections[0].id

Maybe system should check the first avaiable collection for the given user? Im really not a programmer but my first avaiable collection IS 4 just not for the given user

markp · December 2, 2024, 6:40pm

Thank you for this, this provides evidence that it is not related to Cannot set batch of agents for collection access · Issue #2405 · specify/specify7 · GitHub. Based on the only agents we had encountered the error with being in the one isolated division, I thought this was related, but it appears not to be.

I guess this brings about two questions:

What is it about the users that it is occurring with that are different than others? We have had other users that only have access to one collection be able to login through SSO just fine, so I don’t think it is the indexing ([0]) or the condition being the issue then.
I’ll have to ask our two users who have experienced the error, but presumably if I were to revoke their read-only access to collectionid 4, they would be able to login? Maybe I’ll work with them today to see about that

dfernandez · December 3, 2024, 7:52am

I would also ask: Why its working the first time sending an invititation link perfectly but not a second time when user does actually a login with sso. And why it is working perfectly when same userrecord is logged in with a local password. Specify has all needed information but it looks like in “SSO Login” case is not “initialised” right.

Maybe some parameter missing in callbackurl or something? Just a idea.

Another idea: When i log in “localy”, there is a screen where i need to select the collection. This specific screen is not showing up when i do SSO login. On this screen i need to select my collection “accounts/choose_collection/?next=”

This is the notable difference in the 2 ways of login.

markp · December 3, 2024, 6:56pm

So I worked with one of the two users this morning, once given, the read-only access to collectionid 4 can then be revoked, and they are able to login fine through SSO. So as a workaround if this user really needed to get setup, and if its possible in the constraints of your access model, the read-only access could be given and then immediately revoked as soon as they switch back to their normal collection via the collection picking in the nav. They just need to be able to complete that route once. As I just did it this morning, time will tell if any session or cookie expiring messes things up, but I think it should be fine for them from here on out.

Your idea about the parameter seems plausible, I’ll look at the code some more today and see if I can spot anything. After working with the user above, it further supports that this bug will only present itself the second time a user logs in (with the first being the login immediately after setup). After the second time, they will end up going to the one collection they have access to just fine, which is what enables the permission to collectionid 4 to be revoked.

markp · January 15, 2025, 10:14pm

3rd instance of this error today, with one new thing to add.

User had previously signed in many times with SSO successfully (a few months of usage at this point), so this is not only an issue during initial setup. This means that this bug may present itself even after users have been migrated to SSO.

markp · January 29, 2025, 10:50pm

Specify version: 7.9.6.2

Some further updates on this:

The error is propagating. Currently, I cannot determine a pattern of what is causing certain users to experience the collectionid 4 error while others are not, but we are up to 7.

I mention the below because the affected user was one of those 7, however at this time it is uncertain if connected. There may be three factors in play, (all linked by some common cause?), issue #5323, issue #5326, and the new information from below, not yet a GitHub issue.

For the first time today, a user experienced an unlinking of their specifyuser_id with the spuserexternalid. On the login screen, they received the unknownOicUser message. Their name and details from the {providerName:string} were loaded correctly. The time since they last logged in was one week. This timing could be important because the remedial actions taken for SSO Authentication Issue with Duplicate User Entries in spuserexternalid Table - #3 by markp were performed 7 days ago, but on a different user, so cause and effect there is murky. As other users are able to sign in, it seems unlikely that is the cause at this time.

To complete a login, the user needed to use the local authentication (user/pass), which is a problem, because after transitioning to SSO (in our case, but probably in the case of others) the users will no longer know their password, they will be set to some strong random value. This means for any further users that experience this, they won’t be able to login until I can reset their password for them.

My first step was to look in the database to see if there were any issues with the specifyuser_id field in the spuserexternalid table. There is a record for this user like any other. and it points to the correct specifyuser_id. However, after today, now there are two records for this user in the specifyexternalid table, which will presumably trigger #5362 on their next login.

I have setup a development environment of specify with a freshly created dummy database, building from the source code (currently using the 7.9.6.2 tag). I am going to see if I can replicate any of this in a consistent way through a test keycloak instance. I believe that the only file that needs to be looked at is specify7/specifyweb/accounts/views.py at production · specify/specify7 · GitHub, and will start there.

markp · January 30, 2025, 10:40pm

Okay, I can replicate #5323 (this issue)! I thought it would take a while, but it actually occurred on the second login attempt. Below are some details of the setup

Setup

Fresh database created with Specify 6.8.03, schema 2.10
Two collections, Test Collection 1, Test Collection 2. Confirmed that Test Collection 1 has id=4
Standard development docker compose, 7.9.6.2 tag checked out
Keycloak service running in the same docker compose

Users

Alice is admin. Should never experience #5323 because they have access to all collections
Bob. Only has access to Test Collection 2. Read-only access to everything in collection 2.

Tests

indicates that the user can login
indicates that the user experiences the NoMatchingRuleException error.

Test 1: Ensure Alice can log in through SSO

Alice can log in as expected via keycloak, and specify asks to associate external provider with local account as expected.

Test 2: Ensure Bob can log in through SSO

Bob can log in as expected via keycloak, and specify asks to associate external provider with local account as expected.

Test 3: Bob attempts second login attempt through SSO

Bob doesn’t log out of specify via the logout button. Instead, browser is closed and new private browser window is spawned. Bob attempts to log in through SSO. Recieves the following error

NoMatchingRuleException:
  0:
    collectionid: 4
    userid: 2
    resource: "/system/sp7/collection"
    action: "access"

Docker logs for the specify container read as follows. I have substituted the long random values for parameters to shorten things:

"GET /accounts/login/?next=/specify/ HTTP/1.0" 200 771
"POST /accounts/login/?next=/specify/ HTTP/1.0" 302 0
"GET /accounts/oic_callback/?state={value}&session_state={value}&iss={value} HTTP/1.0" 302 0
"GET /specify HTTP/1.0" 301 0
[WARNING] [django.request:224] Forbidden: /specify/
"GET /specify/ HTTP/1.0" 403 121
"GET /favicon.ico HTTP/1.0" 302 0

On the keycloak side, I see 2 sessions open for bob, and one for alice

User	Type	Started	Last Access	IP address	Clients
bob	REGULAR	1/30/2025 1:20:42 PM	1/30/2025 1:20:42 PM	172.18.01	specify
alice	REGULAR	1/30/2025 1:14:22 PM	1/30/2025 1:18:13 PM	172.18.01	specify
bob	REGULAR	1/30/2025 1:19:28 PM	1/30/2025 1:19:28 PM	172.18.01	specify

Test 4: Redo test 3 (test reproducibility)

New private window, same result.

Test 5: See if bob logging out of Specify through logout button changes things

Bob opens up a fresh private window. Instead of using keycloak, bob logs in through local auth. Bob presses “Log out”. Bob closes window. Bob opens up fresh private window, signs in through keycloak, no error.

Test 6: Bob doesn’t log out through Specify (confirm reproducibility)

Bob experiences error again

Solution

I think I found the problem? The collection cookie is not being set in these lines of code. Since this is using django’s auth, I believe that is the reason why the local logout had the effect it did.

github.com/specify/specify7

specifyweb/accounts/views.py

171c3ff9b


      
          login(request,
                cast(AbstractBaseUser, spuserexternalid.specifyuser),
                backend='django.contrib.auth.backends.ModelBackend')
          return http.HttpResponseRedirect('/specify')

If I implement a crude fix, by manually setting the collection cookie to what I know bob needs, bob is able to login just fine.

login(request, cast(AbstractBaseUser, spuserexternalid.specifyuser), backend='django.contrib.auth.backends.ModelBackend')
response = http.HttpResponseRedirect('/specify')
response = set_cookie('collection', '32768', max_age=3600)
return response

dfernandez · April 2, 2025, 9:10am

Nice Ressearch on this topic @markp !
I can follow your testing and i agree. Will be there a real fix in a next release?

markp · April 2, 2025, 4:20pm

@dfernandez I’ve created a PR with a fix that I believe should do the trick, however not sure if it is being targeted for the next release or not.

github.com/specify/specify7

Pass SSO users through choose_collection to assign needed collection cookie

production ← mpitblado:production

opened 10:44PM - 06 Feb 25 UTC

mpitblado

+1 -1

Fixes #5323 > As an external contributor, please feel free to let me know if …outside PRs are not preferred, and happy to close. Appreciate any and all feedback Currently, it appears that users who go through the `oic_callback` flow can experience an error in which they do not have the necessary permissions to access collection id 4. I believe this is due to a collection cookie not being set. Fixing this would involve either implementing something similar to what `choose_collections` does in `oic_callback`, but to avoid duplication, it seems easier to just pass the user through `choose_collection`. Passing the user through `choose_collection` is done elsewhere, such as the invite_token flow. With the switch, I have thought about potential duplication of spuserexternalid entries. In `oic_callback`, `request.session['external_user']` should only be created if the id does not already exist. Thus, the if condition in `choose_collection` should not trigger, and another id should not be created. Condition for adding external_user to the session https://github.com/specify/specify7/blob/4be07f55ff35e45e0b7ea606de8738c345de1169/specifyweb/accounts/views.py#L211-L221 Condition in `choose_collection`, checks for `external_user` in session before creating new entry in spuserexternalid https://github.com/specify/specify7/blob/4be07f55ff35e45e0b7ea606de8738c345de1169/specifyweb/accounts/views.py#L350-L361 The rest of `choose_collection` handles the cookie, and collection form, and should cause no issue. As a result of this PR, users of SSO would now no longer enter straight into their last used collection unless they only have access to one collection, instead they would have to pick the collection, with the last used collection being selected as default (similar to those using local login). ### Checklist - [x] Self-review the PR after opening it to make sure the changes look good and self-explanatory (or properly documented) - [ ] Add automated tests (N/A) - [ ] Add relevant issue to release milestone (N/A) - [ ] Add relevant documentation (Tester - Dev) (N/A) - [ ] Add a reverse migration if a migration is present in the PR (N/A) ### Testing instructions I have tested the below on 7.9.6.2 with a local keycloak instance with the changes in this PR applied. - Confirm that user with access to all collections can login through SSO - Confirm that user without access to `collection id=4` can log in through SSO. - Confirm that user without access to `collection id=4` can log in through SSO after not logging out through Specify's logout button and clearing cookies (such as through a private window or by manually deleting cookies). - Confirm that a new user can link their specify account with an external provider (user presses SSO button after having a local account created). Note, this is not the invite_link flow.

system · July 23, 2025, 5:26pm

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

Topic		Replies	Views
Login with EntraID (Azure) Get Help	29	744	October 4, 2024
How to use the Specify API as a generic webservice Technical Docs Specify-7	15	1039	December 3, 2024
Specify7 Login error for one user Get Help	27	486	February 29, 2024
Confusing management of user access to collections Get Help	11	387	February 23, 2023
Simultaneous KeyError for `oauth_login`, 500, and 403 for SSO user Get Help	2	17	February 12, 2025

Problems with Login over EntraID regarding rights

Setup

Users

Tests

Test 1: Ensure Alice can log in through SSO

Test 2: Ensure Bob can log in through SSO

Test 3: Bob attempts second login attempt through SSO

Test 4: Redo test 3 (test reproducibility)

Test 5: See if bob logging out of Specify through logout button changes things

Test 6: Bob doesn’t log out through Specify (confirm reproducibility)

Solution

Related topics