Streamlining Authentication Testing with Rust: A QA Engineer’s Unconventional Approach

In the fast-paced landscape of software development, automation plays a crucial role in maintaining quality and reducing manual effort, especially for complex flows like user authentication. Recently, I faced the challenge of automating authentication flows within our application, but the catch was the lack of comprehensive documentation for the existing processes. Relying solely on code and system behavior, I turned to Rust for its performance, safety, and ecosystem support.

Why Rust?

Rust's reputation as a systems programming language is well-earned, with advantages such as zero-cost abstractions, powerful pattern matching, and rich async support, making it ideal for building fast, reliable automation tools. Its strong type system and ownership model help prevent common bugs, which is critical when automating security-sensitive flows like authentication.

Approach Overview

Without detailed documentation, the key was to understand the auth flow by observing network traffic, reverse-engineering the API, and then scripting the interactions in Rust. The primary goal was to simulate user login, session management, and token refresh processes reliably.

Setting Up the Environment

First, I set up a new Rust project:

cargo new auth_flow_automation
cd auth_flow_automation

I relied on crates like reqwest for HTTP requests, serde for JSON serialization/deserialization, and tokio for asynchronous execution:

[dependencies]
reqwest = { version = "0.11", features = ["json", "blocking"] }
serde = { version = "1.0", features = ["derive"] }
tokio = { version = "1", features = ["full"] }

Building the Authentication Automation

The core of the script is to simulate a login, handle redirects, and manage tokens. I began by crafting a function to perform the login request:

use reqwest::Client;
use serde::Deserialize;

#[derive(Deserialize)]
struct AuthResponse {
    access_token: String,
    refresh_token: String,
}

async fn login(username: &str, password: &str) -> Result<AuthResponse, reqwest::Error> {
    let client = Client::new();
    let resp = client.post("https://api.example.com/auth/login")
        .json(&serde_json::json!({"username": username, "password": password}))
        .send()
        .await?;

    let auth_response = resp.json::<AuthResponse>().await?;
    Ok(auth_response)
}

This function performs a POST request to the login endpoint with the user credentials. Since the API wasn't well documented, I monitored network calls to reverse-engineer parameters, response structure, and error handling.

Next, to handle token refresh and session management, I implemented similar functions that re-use the reqwest client and manage tokens securely:

async fn refresh_token(refresh_token: &str) -> Result<AuthResponse, reqwest::Error> {
    let client = Client::new();
    let resp = client.post("https://api.example.com/auth/refresh")
        .json(&serde_json::json!({"refresh_token": refresh_token}))
        .send()
        .await?;
    let auth_response = resp.json::<AuthResponse>().await?;
    Ok(auth_response)
}

Handling the Authentication Flow

Using async functions, I orchestrated login, token refresh, and session validation. The main function would follow this pattern:

#[tokio::main]
async fn main() {
    match login("user", "pass").await {
        Ok(auth) => {
            println!("Access Token: {}", auth.access_token);
            // Proceed with authenticated requests
        },
        Err(e) => println!("Login failed: {}", e),
    }
}

This approach allowed me to automate login and session validation even with minimal initial insights. It was essential to perform iterative reverse engineering, monitor network calls, and adapt the scripts accordingly.

Best Practices and Considerations

• Security: Store tokens securely using environment variables or encrypted secrets management.
• Error Handling: Implement comprehensive error handling to manage API failures or network issues.
• Logging: Add detailed logging to troubleshoot flow issues without relying on documentation.
• Test Environment: Test against staging environments that mirror production, especially for flows involving rate limits or security constraints.

Conclusion

Leveraging Rust for automating auth flows without documentation is challenging yet rewarding. Its performance and safety make it an excellent choice for creating reliable, maintainable automation scripts. This experience underscores the importance of exploratory development, reverse engineering, and robust code to succeed in uncharted technical territories.

By continuously refining scripts with observed behaviors and system insights, QA engineers can develop powerful tools to ensure system security and reliability in a documentation-sparse landscape.

---

🛠️ QA Tip

I rely on TempoMail USA to keep my test environments clean.