DongHyeonkaandClaude Opus 5
b2963105a8
The keycloak project ended with four open questions that design could not
settle. A two-VM lab was built to answer them by measurement, and this is
that material: 26 experiments, 125 raw command outputs, 22 browser captures.
Follows the import procedure in README.md.
source/ the originating repository verbatim — 78 documents, 28 SVGs,
8 manifests, plus .source-revision recording the commit
final/ the SSOT
document.md 729 lines written from the 29 experiment documents, not
concatenated: what was predicted, what was measured, and
where the measurement itself was wrong
evidence/raw 125 outputs, flattened to <experiment>__<file> because
the originals collided (01-baseline.txt appeared three
times) and the audit only globs the top level
evidence/meta one per raw file; command and exitCode are null and the
README says why rather than inventing them
evidence/browser 22 captures
assets/ three diagrams through techviz
.techviz/ their VizSpecs
A separate project rather than an addition to keycloak: the B-layer answers
that project's four questions, but the A, C and D layers are about cluster
failure, SSO and operations, and one document.md should hold one subject.
The four question records there can point here through 관계.
Recorded rather than papered over: only three of the 28 diagrams were
remade. The repository forbids hand-drawn SVG and forbids titles inside the
canvas; all 28 originals carry both, so converting them is redrawing, not
reformatting. They stay in source/ and the gap is written into the document.
verify-pipeline.py passes. audit-records.py reports no issues.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
16 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
16 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
### P3 — `messaging-policy` 의존이 import 0건이다
|
|
|
|
선언만 남아 있다. 제거 후보.
|
|
|
|
### P3 — 같은 인가 실패 코드가 세 파일에 문자열 리터럴로 흩어져 있다
|
|
|
|
`APPROVAL_OPERATION_MISMATCH`, `APPROVAL_SOURCE_MISMATCH`, `APPROVAL_PLAN_MISMATCH`, `APPROVAL_EXPIRED` 가 `HmacApprovalVerifier`, `DestructiveOperationGuard`, `ApprovedReplayPlan`, `ApprovedRedrivePlan` 에 각각 리터럴로 존재하며 메시지 문구가 서로 다르다. 검사의 3중화 자체는 의도된 심층 방어지만(§12.2 대조군 2), 코드 문자열은 상수 하나로 모으는 편이 집계와 검색에 낫다.
|
|
|
|
### 확인된 설계(문제 아님)
|
|
|
|
- **`VerifiedApproval` 의 unforgeable-token 패턴.** private 생성자 + package-private 팩토리 + 검증자만 호출. 타입을 쥔 것이 검증 증거다.
|
|
- **`Approved*Plan` 을 별도 타입으로 만든 것.** 인가를 컴파일러가 강제한다.
|
|
- **4-eyes 를 record 생성자에 둔 것.** 서명 대상 객체의 존재가 곧 통과 증거다.
|
|
- **길이 접두 정규 형식.** 구분자 밀반입을 원천 차단.
|
|
- **상수시간 HMAC 비교 + 256비트 키 하한 + 키 방어적 복사.**
|