The scenario is as follows. I start an instance of MVC app to debug it. The app uses simple membership and I log in during this run. Then I go back to VS change something and start the instance again. It doesn't happen really often but sometimes at this moment membership starts acting odd. As the app starts, some action, that is behind [Authorize] attribute (to be exact the attribute is on the controller), is called. However the action fails because WebSecurity.CurrentUserId is equal -1 (the action in question just loads some user information based on WebSecurity.CurrentUserId).
If I clear cookies in browser, everything is fine, but I can't expect users to do the same when they encounter the problem.
My colleague explaind to me that it's (probably) happening because my local IIS decided to restart and some of session cookies became invalid, but if this can happen on local instance of IIS, wouldn't it be possible to also happen on the remote server?
Other important fact, the action that fails is called (more like redirected to) by a custom filter that we wrote. This filter is applied to all actions (but doesn't affect the one mentioned). Can this filter somehow make MVC ignore [Authorize] attribute?
I have a dirty workaround for this problem that should work (with this specific app), but I would prefer to prevent the problem from appearing int the first place.
I think this is related to this. Basically when the server gets reset authentication cookies die. They get recreated right away, except my app doesn't really have access to them till the page is reloaded (just like with logging in).
I partially solved the problem described above (a redirect is preformed somewhere on the way) so the application no longer gets stuck. However, if someone was logged in during the time the server restarted and he tries to preform a post after that, his post will not work and he will be redirected to a get action with the same name as the post action (our custom filter is to blame for that). Unfortunately I cannot fix the filter, because I would need user id for that and at the point at which the filter is called, it's still -1.