You can expose the service in two different endpoints.
the SOAP one can use the binding that support SOAP e.g. basicHttpBinding, the RESTful one can use the webHttpBinding. I assume your REST service will be in JSON, in that case, you need to configure the two endpoints with the following behaviour configuration
<endpointBehaviors>
<behavior name="jsonBehavior">
<enableWebScript/>
</behavior>
</endpointBehaviors>
An example of endpoint configuration in your scenario is
<services>
<service name="TestService">
<endpoint address="soap" binding="basicHttpBinding" contract="ITestService"/>
<endpoint address="json" binding="webHttpBinding" behaviorConfiguration="jsonBehavior" contract="ITestService"/>
</service>
</services>
so, the service will be available at
Apply [WebGet] to the operation contract to make it RESTful.
e.g.
public interface ITestService
{
[OperationContract]
[WebGet]
string HelloWorld(string text)
}
Note, if the REST service is not in JSON, parameters of the operations can not contain complex type.
Reply to the post for SOAP and RESTful POX(XML)
For plain old XML as return format, this is an example that would work both for SOAP and XML.
[ServiceContract(Namespace = "http://test")]
public interface ITestService
{
[OperationContract]
[WebGet(UriTemplate = "accounts/{id}")]
Account[] GetAccount(string id);
}
POX behavior for REST Plain Old XML
<behavior name="poxBehavior">
<webHttp/>
</behavior>
Endpoints
<services>
<service name="TestService">
<endpoint address="soap" binding="basicHttpBinding" contract="ITestService"/>
<endpoint address="xml" binding="webHttpBinding" behaviorConfiguration="poxBehavior" contract="ITestService"/>
</service>
</services>
Service will be available at
REST request
try it in browser,
http://www.example.com/xml/accounts/A123
SOAP request
client endpoint configuration for SOAP service after adding the service reference,
<client>
<endpoint address="http://www.example.com/soap" binding="basicHttpBinding"
contract="ITestService" name="BasicHttpBinding_ITestService" />
</client>
in C#
TestServiceClient client = new TestServiceClient();
client.GetAccount("A123");
Another way of doing it is to expose two different service contract and each one with specific configuration. This may generate some duplicates at code level, however at the end of the day, you want to make it working.
How to handle authentication in a RESTful Client-Server architecture is a matter of debate.
Commonly, it can be achieved, in the SOA over HTTP world via:
- HTTP basic auth over HTTPS;
- Cookies and session management;
- Token in HTTP headers (e.g. OAuth 2.0 + JWT);
- Query Authentication with additional signature parameters.
You'll have to adapt, or even better mix those techniques, to match your software architecture at best.
Each authentication scheme has its own PROs and CONs, depending on the purpose of your security policy and software architecture.
HTTP basic auth over HTTPS
This first solution, based on the standard HTTPS protocol, is used by most web services.
GET /spec.html HTTP/1.1
Host: www.example.org
Authorization: Basic QWxhZGRpbjpvcGVuIHNlc2FtZQ==
It's easy to implement, available by default on all browsers, but has some known drawbacks, like the awful authentication window displayed on the Browser, which will persist (there is no LogOut-like feature here), some server-side additional CPU consumption, and the fact that the user-name and password are transmitted (over HTTPS) into the Server (it should be more secure to let the password stay only on the client side, during keyboard entry, and be stored as secure hash on the Server).
We may use Digest Authentication, but it requires also HTTPS, since it is vulnerable to MiM or Replay attacks, and is specific to HTTP.
Session via Cookies
To be honest, a session managed on the Server is not truly Stateless.
One possibility could be to maintain all data within the cookie content. And, by design, the cookie is handled on the Server side (Client, in fact, does even not try to interpret this cookie data: it just hands it back to the server on each successive request). But this cookie data is application state data, so the client should manage it, not the server, in a pure Stateless world.
GET /spec.html HTTP/1.1
Host: www.example.org
Cookie: theme=light; sessionToken=abc123
The cookie technique itself is HTTP-linked, so it's not truly RESTful, which should be protocol-independent, IMHO. It is vulnerable to MiM or Replay attacks.
Granted via Token (OAuth2)
An alternative is to put a token within the HTTP headers so that the request is authenticated. This is what OAuth 2.0 does, for instance. See the RFC 6749:
GET /resource/1 HTTP/1.1
Host: example.com
Authorization: Bearer mF_9.B5f-4.1JqM
In short, this is very similar to a cookie and suffers to the same issues: not stateless, relying on HTTP transmission details, and subject to a lot of security weaknesses - including MiM and Replay - so is to be used only over HTTPS. Typically, a JWT is used as a token.
Query Authentication
Query Authentication consists in signing each RESTful request via some additional parameters on the URI. See this reference article.
It was defined as such in this article:
All REST queries must be authenticated by signing the query parameters
sorted in lower-case, alphabetical order using the private credential
as the signing token. Signing should occur before URL encoding the
query string.
This technique is perhaps the more compatible with a Stateless architecture, and can also be implemented with a light session management (using in-memory sessions instead of DB persistence).
For instance, here is a generic URI sample from the link above:
GET /object?apiKey=Qwerty2010
should be transmitted as such:
GET /object?timestamp=1261496500&apiKey=Qwerty2010&signature=abcdef0123456789
The string being signed is /object?apikey=Qwerty2010×tamp=1261496500
and the signature is the SHA256 hash of that string using the private component of the API key.
Server-side data caching can be always available. For instance, in our framework, we cache the responses at the SQL level, not at the URI level. So adding this extra parameter doesn't break the cache mechanism.
See this article for some details about RESTful authentication in our client-server ORM/SOA/MVC framework, based on JSON and REST. Since we allow communication not only over HTTP/1.1, but also named pipes or GDI messages (locally), we tried to implement a truly RESTful authentication pattern, and not rely on HTTP specificity (like header or cookies).
Later Note: adding a signature in the URI can be seen as bad practice (since for instance it will appear in the http server logs) so it has to be mitigated, e.g. by a proper TTL to avoid replays. But if your http logs are compromised, you will certainly have bigger security problems.
In practice, the upcoming MAC Tokens Authentication for OAuth 2.0 may be a huge improvement in respect to the "Granted by Token" current scheme. But this is still a work in progress and is tied to HTTP transmission.
Conclusion
It's worth concluding that REST is not only HTTP-based, even if, in practice, it's also mostly implemented over HTTP. REST can use other communication layers. So a RESTful authentication is not just a synonym of HTTP authentication, whatever Google answers. It should even not use the HTTP mechanism at all but shall be abstracted from the communication layer. And if you use HTTP communication, thanks to the Let's Encrypt initiative there is no reason not to use proper HTTPS, which is required in addition to any authentication scheme.
Best Answer
I think that the answer to your question depends on the purpose of your service and the type of applications that are going to consume it.
If you have an existing ASP .Net application and you want to expose part of its functionality as a RESTfull service which you would be able to consume client side using AJAX, then WCF might not be the best option. In this particular case you already have an authentication user inside the web application and you want that authentication to get propagated during the AJAX calls. Implementing this is actually quite simple.
ASP .Net Forms authentication is based on authentication cookies which are generated and passed to the browser after a successful login. Each call made from the browser to any URL on the same domain as your application will also contain the authentication cookie. In ASP .Net MVC you can simply implement your service methods as Controller actions which require authorization and everything will happen for you behind the scenes.
In classic ASP .Net you can use PageMethods to implement your service methods and again the cookie will be sent and validated behind scenes for you (examples of PageMethods here and here).
On the other hand, if your service is going to be consumed outside the browser (for example from desktop or mobile applications), then WCF might indeed be the right tool for implementing the service. However, ASP .Net forms authentication is not the best choice for implementing security. The main purpose of REST services is simplicity so that clients can easily be implemented on every platform and the cookie based mechanism of ASP .Net forms authentication is not the most straight forward.
One protocol, specifically build for user authentication in the context of web services, is OAuth. It's second version is still in draft (find the specs here), but most probably this is the version you will want to use, since it is much simpler than OAuth 1.0. Facebook has already implemented its API Authentication over OAuth 2.0 (details here) and you might want to check their implementation for inspiration.
Besides user authentication, OAuth also ensures consuming application (service client) authentication and also makes sure that the user will never enter its credentials directly inside the client application. If that is a bit too much that what you actually need, you might create a custom implementation inspired from OAuth 2.0.
First of all you will need to expose your service over HTTPS so that all the communication between the service and client is encrypted. Second you will need to create a login method in the service like the following:
On a successful login, the above method will return an authentication token. The authentication token will then be used and validated on all the other methods. For example:
In the above architecture, the authToken has the same role as the authentication cookie in ASP .Net forms authentication, but it is passed as a simple parameter. You will be responsible to implement the algorithm of generating the tokens (they must be long enough and unique, with an algorithm like here) and also storing and validating them.