Remote_User visible in ASP but not ASPX

[Matt]

I'm trying to convert a site to ASP.Net and I noticed that when I try to
use the Request.ServerVariable("REMOTE_USER") value with the ASPX page I
get a generic value. If I use the same code on an ASP page and place it
in the .Net website directory I get my NT login (which is what I want).

I saw one post that said to use <identity impersonate="true"/> in my
web.config but this had no effect for me. My guess is that it's
something in the web.config but I don't know what.

I have verified that my old ASP site and the new ASP.Net site are
configured identically in IIS (basic & integrated).

Any ideas?

 

[Naveen K Kohli]

Turn off Anonymous authentication from IIS and then make the following
change in web.config
<authorization>
<deny users="?" />
</authorization>

 

[Matt]

I tried that and still no luck.

Something is very different about the way the authorization information
is gathered when using ASPX vs ASP.

We use a password authorization program for our local intranet to
"log-in". Our ASP sites can get the ID you use to log in with using the
REMOTE_USER or AUTH_USER. But with ASPX I get a generic DOMAIN/USERID
value. I just noticed that the ASP pages have this same generic
DOMAIN/USERID in the LOGON_USER variable.

So for some reason, ASPX uses the LOGON_USER value and places that in
the AUTH_USER and REMOTE_USER. This is different than what ASP does.

I still hope this is just a configuration issue. I will gladly try any
other suggestions.

 

[Matt]

Some more information ...

When testing locally on my XP machine everything works. When testing on
the target 2000 remote server it fails.

I created a simple page to dump some key values. I noticed the following
for my user.identity.authenicationtype :

local --> negotiate
remote -> basic

IIS is configured basic for both sites in IIS so I'm not sure what I did
to get it to be "negotiate" on my local machine. I'm not even sure that
is the problem but I wanted to include it in case it helps.

 

[Matt]

Could this be an issue with the version of the framework? The problem
server is version 1.0.