Hinweis
Für den Zugriff auf diese Seite ist eine Autorisierung erforderlich. Sie können versuchen, sich anzumelden oder das Verzeichnis zu wechseln.
Für den Zugriff auf diese Seite ist eine Autorisierung erforderlich. Sie können versuchen, das Verzeichnis zu wechseln.
While investigating a customer issue, I needed code to impersonate a different user on the current thread. A quick search of the msdn blogs turned up this post, which got me most of the way there. I decided to wrap the code into a class that inherits from IDisposable just to make it easily usable in a using statement. Here is what I came up with:
using System;
using System.ComponentModel;
using System.Runtime.InteropServices;
using System.Security.Principal;
public class ImpersonatedUser : IDisposable
{
IntPtr userHandle;
WindowsImpersonationContext impersonationContext;
public ImpersonatedUser(string user, string domain, string password)
{
userHandle = IntPtr.Zero;
bool loggedOn = LogonUser(
user,
domain,
password,
LogonType.Interactive,
LogonProvider.Default,
out userHandle);
if (!loggedOn)
throw new Win32Exception(Marshal.GetLastWin32Error());
// Begin impersonating the user
impersonationContext = WindowsIdentity.Impersonate(userHandle);
}
public void Dispose()
{
if (userHandle != IntPtr.Zero)
{
CloseHandle(userHandle);
userHandle = IntPtr.Zero;
impersonationContext.Undo();
}
}
[DllImport("advapi32.dll", SetLastError = true)]
static extern bool LogonUser(
string lpszUsername,
string lpszDomain,
string lpszPassword,
LogonType dwLogonType,
LogonProvider dwLogonProvider,
out IntPtr phToken
);
[DllImport("kernel32.dll", SetLastError = true)]
static extern bool CloseHandle(IntPtr hHandle);
enum LogonType : int
{
Interactive = 2,
Network = 3,
Batch = 4,
Service = 5,
NetworkCleartext = 8,
NewCredentials = 9,
}
enum LogonProvider : int
{
Default = 0,
}
}
Comments
Anonymous
September 21, 2009
Would I be right in saying that as the ImpersonatedUser class does not have a finalizer there is no pint in calling "GC.SuppressFinalize(this);"? And there would be no point in adding a finalizer as it would run on a different thread?Anonymous
September 21, 2009
Gareth, I believe you are right about the SuppressFinalize call. I pounded this code out pretty quickly and didn't consider that fact. I have removed the unnecssary code. Thanks for the comment.