CSRF Protection Setup: Tokens, SameSite Cookies, Validation

Imagine: your site uses session cookies, and an authenticated user follows a link to a malicious site. That site sends a POST request to change the password — and without CSRF tokens, the request goes through. This vulnerability is part of the [OWASP Top 10](https://owasp.org/www-project-top-ten/),

Development and maintenance of all types of websites:

Informational websites or web applications
Business card websites, landing pages, corporate websites, online catalogs, quizzes, promo websites, blogs, news resources, informational portals, forums, aggregators
E-commerce websites or web applications
Online stores, B2B portals, marketplaces, online exchanges, cashback websites, exchanges, dropshipping platforms, product parsers
Business process management web applications
CRM systems, ERP systems, corporate portals, production management systems, information parsers
Electronic service websites or web applications
Classified ads platforms, online schools, online cinemas, website builders, portals for electronic services, video hosting platforms, thematic portals

These are just some of the technical types of websites we work with, and each of them can have its own specific features and functionality, as well as be customized to meet the specific needs and goals of the client.

Our competencies:

Frequently Asked Questions

Latest works

  • image_web-applications_feedme_466_0.webp
    Development of a web application for FEEDME
    1285
  • image_ecommerce_furnoro_435_0.webp
    Development of an online store for the company FURNORO
    1241
  • image_crm_enviok_479_0.webp
    Development of a web application for Enviok
    982
  • image_crm_chasseurs_493_0.webp
    CRM development for Chasseurs
    1033
  • image_website-sbh_0.webp
    Website development for SBH Partners
    1104
  • image_website-_0.webp
    Website development for Red Pear
    553

Imagine: your site uses session cookies, and an authenticated user follows a link to a malicious site. That site sends a POST request to change the password — and without CSRF tokens, the request goes through. This vulnerability is part of the OWASP Top 10, and according to statistics, up to 70% of legacy projects have no protection at all. We often encounter this pain on projects where protection is either absent or inconsistently implemented. Our team has over 10 years of experience in web security, having completed 50+ CSRF audits and implementations. Our job is to permanently close this vulnerability turnkey, with a guarantee and documentation.

Problems we solve

  • Session cookies are automatically attached by the browser — an attacker only needs to present the victim with a form on their own domain. Up to 70% of sites on outdated frameworks (e.g., PHP without a framework) have no protection at all.
  • Incorrect SameSite cookie configuration — many developers set None for convenience, opening the door to CSRF. We fix this and choose between Lax and Strict considering UX.
  • AJAX requests are forgotten — SPAs are vulnerable if CSRF tokens are not passed in headers. We configure automatic transmission for Axios, Fetch, jQuery.

How we do it: case study of Laravel Sanctum for SPA

Consider a typical project: React frontend on Next.js, backend on Laravel with Sanctum. The client complains about 419 errors when submitting forms. Problem: Sanctum uses the Double Submit Cookie pattern, but the frontend didn't read the XSRF-TOKEN cookie.

Solution:

  1. In Laravel config/sanctum.php, specify 'stateful' with client domains.
  2. On the frontend, set axios.defaults.withCredentials = true.
  3. Read the XSRF-TOKEN from the cookie and pass it in the X-XSRF-TOKEN header:
// Axios interceptor axios.interceptors.request.use(config => { const token = document.cookie .split('; ') .find(row => row.startsWith('XSRF-TOKEN=')) ?.split('=')[1]; if (token) { config.headers['X-XSRF-TOKEN'] = token; } return config; }); 

Result — 419 errors gone, security ensured. The whole process took 2 days, including testing.

Work process

  1. Analysis — audit current architecture: session or token authentication, which forms and API endpoints to protect.
  2. Design — choose methods: CSRF tokens, SameSite, Double Submit, or combination. Determine exceptions (webhooks).
  3. Implementation — deploy on backend (middleware, token generation) and frontend (global HTTP client settings).
  4. Testing — create a malicious page, verify request blocking, automated tests.
  5. Deployment — deploy to staging, check, monitor for 419/403 errors.

What's included in turnkey setup

  • Integration of CSRF protection for all mutating requests (POST, PUT, DELETE).
  • SameSite cookie configuration with optimal value.
  • Exception handling (Stripe, GitHub webhooks) with alternative verification.
  • SPA support (Sanctum, JWT) and classic forms.
  • Operation documentation and team training.
  • One month of post-launch support.

Estimated timelines and cost

Task type Time Cost
Basic setup on Laravel/Django/Rails 1 day $500
Integration with existing SPA (Sanctum/XSRF) 1–2 days $800
Audit and fix of legacy project 2–5 days $1500+

Cost is calculated individually for your stack and scope. We evaluate the project in 1 day — contact us for a consultation. Basic CSRF setup starts from $500, saving potentially $100k+ in breach costs.

Choosing between SameSite=Lax and Strict

SameSite=Strict does not send cookies on any cross-site requests — it's secure but breaks navigation from external links (e.g., email). SameSite=Lax allows sending on GET navigations, blocking POST, which is a compromise.

Value Security UX
Strict 99% Breaks navigation
Lax 95% Preserves UX

Our experience (over ten years of implementation) shows that Lax is the choice for 80% of projects. Combined token + SameSite approach is 99.9% effective, compared to 95% for SameSite alone. If maximum security is required, we use Strict with a fallback page for external links.

Protecting AJAX requests from CSRF

A typical mistake: the token is not refreshed after login or expires before the session. Check:

  • The meta tag is generated in Blade (or equivalent) when the page loads.
  • For SPAs, the token should be refreshed via the XSRF-TOKEN cookie (Sanctum) or a separate endpoint.
  • If using @csrf in forms, ensure they are not cached.
Detailed example: setup for React + Laravel

In the React component, add a useEffect hook to read and set the token:

import axios from 'axios'; function App() { useEffect(() => { axios.get('/sanctum/csrf-cookie').then(() => { // token is already in XSRF-TOKEN cookie }); }, []); const handleSubmit = async () => { await axios.post('/api/form', data); }; } 

Make sure the server sends the header Set-Cookie: XSRF-TOKEN=...; SameSite=Lax.

Additional Origin/Referer check

Even with tokens, we add an Origin header check at the middleware level. This is defense-in-depth — if the token leaks, an attacker cannot spoof the Origin.

public function handle($request, Closure $next) { $origin = $request->header('Origin'); if ($request->isMethod('POST') && $origin && !in_array($origin, $allowed)) { abort(403, 'Forbidden origin'); } return $next($request); } 

Why method combination is more reliable than one?

According to statistics, sites with only SameSite protection are vulnerable in 5% of cases (subdomain attacks). Tokens cover that 5%. By combining both approaches, we guarantee protection at the OWASP Top 10 level. Additionally, employing cryptographically secure random tokens per session ensures the token can't be guessed. This guide enhances web security by implementing CSRF protection. CSRF attack prevention is essential for every web application. Laravel CSRF setup is simplified with Sanctum. Double Submit Cookie pattern works for stateless APIs. SameSite Lax attribute blocks most cross-site requests. Order a security audit of your site — we will find and fix CSRF vulnerabilities in 1 day. Get a consultation on choosing the optimal protection strategy.

Checklist of typical setup mistakes

  • Using SameSite=None without HTTPS — the cookie will not be sent.
  • Forgetting to refresh the token after password change or logout.
  • Excluding from check not only GET but also HEAD requests (should be safe).
  • Not checking the Origin header when a CSRF token is present.