Activities of "enisn"

Hi,

Recently I dropped an article about the login page customization, you can check it for more detailed information: https://abp.io/community/articles/you-do-it-wrong-customizing-abp-login-page-correctly-bna7wzt5

As I understand you need to customize account layout.

• First, I suggest you to get source-code of the leptonx theme to a folder:

abp get-source Volo.Abp.LeptonXTheme

• Find /Themes/LeptonX/Layouts/Account/Default.cshtml file in the source code and copy it to the exact same folder structure in your AuthServer project.
  • It's located in Volo.Abp.AspNetCore.Mvc.UI.Theme.LeptonX project in the source code.

And get one of the login page html structure from https://x.leptontheme.com/ website and apply it to that original file you copied to the project.

LeptonX theme MVC implementation doesn't have it built-in, you'll need to replace and implement it manually in that page

Hi,

• Which themes they're using currently?

• Do you need to customize the Login Page? or Account Layout?

I wrote an article for this recently: https://dev.to/enisn/you-do-it-wrong-customizing-abp-login-page-correctly-l2k

Here is the main takeaway from the article:

• What exactly do I want to change? Is it the overall look and feel (branding, colors, background) or the structure of the login form itself?
• Can this be achieved with CSS? Often, targeted CSS rules leveraging theme-specific layout classes are sufficient and the least intrusive method. This should be your first consideration for visual tweaks.
• Do I need to alter the content around the login form? If yes, overriding the Account Layout (e.g., Themes/Basic/Layouts/Account.cshtml or its LeptonX equivalent) is the correct approach. This gives you control over headers, footers, and surrounding content without touching the core login mechanism.
• Do I need to change the login form fields or its core submission logic? Only then should you consider overriding the Login Page component itself (e.g., Pages/Account/Login.cshtml) from the Account Module.

If you need to customize Login page, yes you could do for both applications in the same way. But if you need to customize Account layout, it won't be that easy, you'll need to override each theme manually. If you provide me more information about your both application's themes, I can share some sample code to customize it

You link in the https://pms.ntouch.ai/ returns 500 right now not 502. Probably you fixed something on your side.

Right now the only thing you can do is checking docker container logs and determine the problem that occurs in the application.

Here is the possible problems:

• Missing libs folder, make sure abp install-libs abp CLI command is executed in the publish pipeline.
• Missing AuthServer.pfx file. This file is auto-generated for your solution once while you creating it and it's ignored from the git. So you should mount that file to your container or include it in the image.

For the further actions, we'll need to see your application server logs

Can you please provide your solution structure and build logs here?

Does dotnet CLI say Menucontributor not found? Or you did not found it?

build operation doesn't look for a specific file unless you define its name in the csproj file. You can check the related project's csproj file if there is a pbysMenuContributor.cs file defined.

Or like other hand, if you cannot find it in the project, you can create a new one that implements the IMenuContributor and configure it in the Module.cs file

Configure<AbpNavigationOptions>(options =>
{
    options.MenuContributors.Add(new MyProjectMenuContributor());
});

Hi,

I found its registration like below:

await context.ServiceProvider
            .GetRequiredService<IBackgroundWorkerManager>()
            .AddAsync(context.ServiceProvider.GetRequiredService<ExpiredAuditLogDeleterWorker>());

It works as background worker.

It resolves ExpiredAuditLogDeleterOptions in the main ExpiredAuditLogDeleterWorker service. And that option class is like below:

public class ExpiredAuditLogDeleterOptions
{
    /// <summary>
    /// Default: Everyday once.
    /// </summary>
    public int Period { get; set; } = (int)TimeSpan.FromDays(1).TotalMilliseconds;
}

Unfortunately, there is no a CRON-like condiguration that identifies exact time to work right now. Here a suggestion about how you can do it manually:

• Add Cronos libraryo to parse a CRON expressions:

dotnet add package Cronos

• Then create your own ExpiredAuditLogDeleterWorker service to replace the original one.

[Dependency(ReplaceServices = true)]
[ExposeServices(typeof(ExpiredAuditLogDeleterWorker))]
public class MyCustomExpiredAuditLogDeleterWorker : ExpiredAuditLogDeleterWorker
{
    // Your expression here:
    public const string Expression = "0 23 * * *";
    public MyCustomExpiredAuditLogDeleterWorker(
        AbpAsyncTimer timer,
        IServiceScopeFactory serviceScopeFactory,
        IOptions<ExpiredAuditLogDeleterOptions> options) : base(timer, serviceScopeFactory, options)
    {
        // Cron expressions resolution is 1 minute, so we need to set the period to 1 minute
        // Each minute, the worker will check if there are any expired audit logs and delete them
        timer.Period = (int)TimeSpan.FromMinutes(1).TotalMilliseconds;
    }

    protected override async Task DoWorkAsync(PeriodicBackgroundWorkerContext workerContext)
    {
        var cronExpression = CronExpression.Parse(Expression);
        var now = DateTimeOffset.UtcNow;
        var nextOccurrence = cronExpression.GetNextOccurrence(now.AddSeconds(-1), TimeZoneInfo.Utc);

        // If the next occurrence is within this minute, run the job
        if (nextOccurrence.HasValue && 
            nextOccurrence.Value > now.AddSeconds(-60) && 
            nextOccurrence.Value <= now)
        {
            await base.DoWorkAsync(workerContext);
        }
        // else: do nothing, wait for the next tick
    }
}

It seems it's better to use background jobs instead background worker, but it's what it's right now. You can use this workaround and I'll inform the ABP team about it. They may want to make an enhancement

Hi,

Our @designteam will answer on this topic

Hi,

When you create a new project, it it's not tiered, they're configured to host IdentityServer in the same application. So they use their own as IdentityServer. You'll need to remove OpenIdDict packages from the application and add configure it to use your existing authentication server.

You can create a new Tiered project and check how it's differently configured to consume a separate AuthServer, you can remove .AuthServer, configure the appsettings.json to use your existing AuthServer and sztart using.

Here how you can process manually:

• Make sure Volo.Abp.Http.Client.IdentityModel.Web package is installed,
• And configured in the appsettings.json:

 "AuthServer": {
    "Authority": "https://localhost:44385",
    "RequireHttpsMetadata": true,
    "ClientId": "AbpSolution2741_Web",
    "ClientSecret": "1q2w3e*"
  },

Hi,

It might be false-positive detection but we have to be sure about it. Can you export a detailed report from this threat detection? Or can you share Quarantined Files? It'll help to determine the real problem or behaviour of the application that triggers anti-virüs programs

Hi,

Service Account Authentication

The best practice for server-to-server communication mostly depends on security, scalability, and maintainability requirements. Instead of using the default admin user you can use separate users and specific permissions for your each application. So you can easily track in audit logs and separately manage their permissions etc. You can use dedicated account for each service.

Instead of using an admin user account, it's recommended to use OAuth 2.0 Client Credentials Flow, where the server authenticates itself using a client ID and secret rather than a user’s credentials. Since ABP does not implement OpenID flows itself and uses OpenIddict open source library, you can check its own documentation from here: https://documentation.openiddict.com/guides/choosing-the-right-flow.html

Integration Services

The current approach is not anti-pattern or a bad-practise, but as an alternative we recommend using Integration Service in ABP Framework but it'll bring some extra development cost, you'll create similar integration services for all of your application services. Against this development cost, you can consume your existing app services as an user from your other servers.

ApiKey Authentication

There is another alternative approach which is Api-Key approach. This is widely used in the web, but ABP doesn't have a built-in api-key management system, you can use hard-coded API-keys and validate them in a middleware. But this brings much more development cost since ABP doesn't help you on this topic.

Hi,

does it have anything to do with the fact that im using the basic ui template?

I posted an article about that topic, you may want to follow this one for the basic theme: https://abp.io/community/articles/you-do-it-wrong-customizing-abp-login-page-correctly-bna7wzt5#gsc.tab=0