Consider a method in a .NET assembly:
public static string GetSecurityContextUserName() { //extract the username from request string sUser = HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name; //everything after the domain sUser = sUser.Substring(sUser.IndexOf("\\") + 1).ToLower(); return sUser; }
I'd like to call this method from a unit test using the Moq framework. This assembly is part of a webforms solution. The unit test looks like this, but I am missing the Moq code.
//arrange string ADAccount = "BUGSBUNNY"; string fullADName = "LOONEYTUNES\BUGSBUNNY"; //act //need to mock up the HttpContext here somehow -- using Moq. string foundUserName = MyIdentityBL.GetSecurityContextUserName(); //assert Assert.AreEqual(foundUserName, ADAccount, true, "Should have been the same User Identity.");
Question:
MyIdentityBL.GetSecurityContextUserName()
? The Moq framework is an open source unit testing framework that works very well with . NET code and Phil shows us how to use it.
HttpContextBase was added later to address HttpContext being difficult to mock. The two classes are basically unrelated ( HttpContextWrapper is used as an adapter between them). Fortunately, HttpContext itself is fakeable just enough for you do replace the IPrincipal (User) and IIdentity .
Moq is a mocking framework built to facilitate the testing of components with dependencies. As shown earlier, dealing with dependencies could be cumbersome because it requires the creation of test doubles like fakes. Moq makes the creation of fakes redundant by using dynamically generated types.
Moq supports mocking protected methods. Changing the methods to protected , instead of private , would allow you to mock their implementation.
Webforms is notoriously untestable for this exact reason - a lot of code can rely on static classes in the asp.net pipeline.
In order to test this with Moq, you need to refactor your GetSecurityContextUserName()
method to use dependency injection with an HttpContextBase
object.
HttpContextWrapper
resides in System.Web.Abstractions
, which ships with .Net 3.5. It is a wrapper for the HttpContext
class, and extends HttpContextBase
, and you can construct an HttpContextWrapper
just like this:
var wrapper = new HttpContextWrapper(HttpContext.Current);
Even better, you can mock an HttpContextBase and set up your expectations on it using Moq. Including the logged in user, etc.
var mockContext = new Mock<HttpContextBase>();
With this in place, you can call GetSecurityContextUserName(mockContext.Object)
, and your application is much less coupled to the static WebForms HttpContext. If you're going to be doing a lot of tests that rely on a mocked context, I highly suggest taking a look at Scott Hanselman's MvcMockHelpers class, which has a version for use with Moq. It conveniently handles a lot of the setup necessary. And despite the name, you don't need to be doing it with MVC - I use it successfully with webforms apps when I can refactor them to use HttpContextBase
.
In general for ASP.NET unit testing, rather than accessing HttpContext.Current you should have a property of type HttpContextBase whose value is set by dependency injection (such as in the answer provided by Womp).
However, for testing security related functions I would recommend using Thread.CurrentThread.Principal (instead of HttpContext.Current.User). Using Thread.CurrentThread has the advantage of also being reusable outside a web context (and works the same in a web context because the ASP.NET framework always sets both values the same).
To then test Thread.CurrentThread.Principal I usually use a scope class that sets the Thread.CurrentThread to a test value and then resets on dispose:
using (new UserResetScope("LOONEYTUNES\BUGSBUNNY")) { // Put test here -- CurrentThread.Principal is reset when PrincipalScope is disposed }
This fits well with the standard .NET security component -- where a component has a known interface (IPrincipal) and location (Thread.CurrentThread.Principal) -- and will work with any code that correctly uses/checks against Thread.CurrentThread.Principal.
A base scope class would be something like the following (adjust as necessary for things like adding roles):
class UserResetScope : IDisposable { private IPrincipal originalUser; public UserResetScope(string newUserName) { originalUser = Thread.CurrentPrincipal; var newUser = new GenericPrincipal(new GenericIdentity(newUserName), new string[0]); Thread.CurrentPrincipal = newUser; } public IPrincipal OriginalUser { get { return this.originalUser; } } public void Dispose() { Dispose(true); GC.SuppressFinalize(this); } protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) { if (disposing) { Thread.CurrentPrincipal = originalUser; } } }
Another alternative is, instead of using the standard security component location, write your app to use injected security details, e.g. add an ISecurityContext property with a GetCurrentUser() method or similar, and then use that consistently throughout your application -- but if you are going to do this in the context of a web application then you might as well use the pre-built injected context, HttpContextBase.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With