Skip to main content

Improve the security of your GraphQL API’s - Part 3–Authorization

As a GraphQL API gives you a lot of extra power and possibilities, it also introduces some new attack vectors. Nothing prevents the user of your (web) application to open the developer console and start creating and sending other queries to your GraphQL backend. By using the authentication token already available, he/she can call your API. So without further mitigations a user can create and run any query he/she can think of.

Luckily there are multiple ways to control this attack vector. I already talked about

Today I will focus on authorization.

Remark: I expect that you already have a kind of authentication built into your GraphQL API. So I'll ignore that part.

Doing an authorization check for a REST API is easy. As every REST call maps to a specific invocation requesting specific data, you have all the information you need to check if a user is allowed to fetch a specific set of data.

In ASP.NET Core this translates to the action level of a specific controller (or a specific endpoint if you are using minimal api's):

When using GraphQL you have a lot more flexibility at the query level so you don't know exactly what data will be fetched. Especially when you have created a rich graph, a lot of possible paths exist to get to a specific set of data.

So there is no single place where you can validate the authorization for the query the user wants to execute.

Authorization at the resolver level

A first option is to define authorization at the resolver level. In that case we use individual field resolvers to check user roles and make decisions as to what to return for each user.

HotChocolate builds further on the ASP.NET Core authorization middleware. It introduces an @authorize directive that can be applied to fields and types to denote that they require authorization.

If we do not specify any arguments to the @authorize directive, it will only enforce that the requestor is authenticated. But it is also possible to specify one or more roles or an an ASP.NET Core authorization policy:

Authorization at the business logic layer level

Doing authorization at the resolver level is fine for simple use cases. Thanks to the support for ASP.NET Core Authorization policies we can avoid duplication and decouple the authorization rules from the resolvers.

However you can go one step further and handle authorization at the business layer level. This helps to keep your resolvers thin, and put all of your business logic (including authorization) in one place.

Popular posts from this blog

Podman– Command execution failed with exit code 125

After updating WSL on one of the developer machines, Podman failed to work. When we took a look through Podman Desktop, we noticed that Podman had stopped running and returned the following error message: Error: Command execution failed with exit code 125 Here are the steps we tried to fix the issue: We started by running podman info to get some extra details on what could be wrong: >podman info OS: windows/amd64 provider: wsl version: 5.3.1 Cannot connect to Podman. Please verify your connection to the Linux system using `podman system connection list`, or try `podman machine init` and `podman machine start` to manage a new Linux VM Error: unable to connect to Podman socket: failed to connect: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:2655: connectex: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. That makes sense as the podman VM was not running. Let’s check the VM: >podman machine list NAME         ...

Azure DevOps/ GitHub emoji

I’m really bad at remembering emoji’s. So here is cheat sheet with all emoji’s that can be used in tools that support the github emoji markdown markup: All credits go to rcaviers who created this list.

VS Code Planning mode

After the introduction of Plan mode in Visual Studio , it now also found its way into VS Code. Planning mode, or as I like to call it 'Hannibal mode', extends GitHub Copilot's Agent Mode capabilities to handle larger, multi-step coding tasks with a structured approach. Instead of jumping straight into code generation, Planning mode creates a detailed execution plan. If you want more details, have a look at my previous post . Putting plan mode into action VS Code takes a different approach compared to Visual Studio when using plan mode. Instead of a configuration setting that you can activate but have limited control over, planning is available as a separate chat mode/agent: I like this approach better than how Visual Studio does it as you have explicit control when plan mode is activated. Instead of immediately diving into execution, the plan agent creates a plan and asks some follow up questions: You can further edit the plan by clicking on ‘Open in Editor’: ...