Skip to main content

ASP.NET Core -Automatically add middleware through IStartupFilter

While browsing through the ASP.NET Core documentation, I accidently stumbled over the IStartupFilter interface. I had no idea what it did but it triggered my interest. Let's find out together in this post what this interface does and when it can be useful.

What is IStartupFilter?

IStartupFilter is an interface that allows you to intercept and modify how the application's request pipeline is built. It's particularly useful when you need to:

  • Ensure certain middleware runs before any other middleware
  • Add middleware consistently across multiple applications
  • Create reusable middleware configurations
  • Modify the order of middleware registration

Here's the interface definition:

How IStartupFilter Works

When ASP.NET Core builds the middleware pipeline, it executes all registered IStartupFilter instances in the order they were registered. Each filter can add middleware before and after calling the next delegate, creating a wrapper around the existing pipeline configuration.

Here's a practical example:

To use our IStartupFilter, we need register it in our Program.cs:

Remark: Multiple IStartupFilter implementations might interact with the same objects. If ordering is important, order their IStartupFilter service registrations to match the order that their middlewares should run.

When should I use it?

I don’t see that many use cases where you need the IStartupFilter. I think this is mostly useful for library authors that want to ensure that their middleware runs at the beginning (or end) of the middleware pipeline. For example,  you’ve create a custom error handling middleware. In that case you want a filter that ensures error handling middleware is always first in the pipeline across all your applications.

If you are using the IStartupFilter in some smart ways, please let me know. Always interested to learn from your experiences.

More information

Exploring IStartupFilter in ASP.NET Core

App startup in ASP.NET Core | Microsoft Learn

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         ...

Cache stampede: when our cache turned against us

While investigating some performance issues, we ran into an ASP.NET Core API that cached a fairly expensive aggregation query for 60 seconds. Under normal load, that was fine: one request rebuilds the cache, everyone else reads from it. Under peak load, dozens of requests would arrive in that same expiry window, all see a cache miss, and all fire the same expensive query in parallel. The database didn't like that. That was the moment when our caching layer stopped helping and started hurting. A burst of requests comes in at the same time, all miss the cache, and all go hammer the database or the downstream API at once. That's a cache stampede . The cache was supposed to protect our backend, and for a few hundred milliseconds it did the opposite. Why this happens IMemoryCache.GetOrCreate (and its async sibling) looks like it protects you, but it doesn't add any locking on its own. Look at the naive version: public async Task<Report> GetReportAsync(string key) ...

A complex system designed from scratch never works

A few years ago, I worked as an architect on a big mainframe rewrite. I still count it as one of my failures. Not because the technology was wrong, but because I couldn't convince the management team to simplify the approach. Years later, the organization is still struggling to get the new system up and running. I left the project at the time, because I couldn't put my name behind an approach that would take very long and cost a lot of money without a working system to show for it along the way. Gall’s Law That memory keeps coming back to me, because it's a textbook case of Gall's Law playing out in real life. Gall's Law , from John Gall's Systemantics , states it plainly: A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works, and it cannot be patched to make it work. You have to start over with a simple system that works. What does that mean in practice,...