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
1.0 KiB
Plaintext
16 lines
1.0 KiB
Plaintext
### 3.3 (8.3) 중복 메커니즘 — 인증과 예외 처리의 인터셉터 순서
|
|
|
|
`ServerInterceptors.intercept(service, exceptionInterceptor, authenticationInterceptor)` — gRPC 규약상 **마지막 인터셉터의 `interceptCall`이 먼저** 호출되므로 인증이 바깥, 예외 처리가 안쪽이다.
|
|
|
|
인증 인터셉터가 예외 처리 바깥에 있는데도 안전한 이유는 그것이 스스로 예외를 삼키기 때문이다:
|
|
|
|
```java
|
|
private boolean isAuthenticated(Metadata headers) {
|
|
try { return authenticationPolicy.isAuthenticated(headers); }
|
|
catch (RuntimeException ignored) { return false; }
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
CLAUDE.md의 약속("정책이 `false`를 반환하거나 예외를 던진 요청은 ... 안정적인 `UNAUTHENTICATED` status/code/category로 종료된다")이 코드와 일치하고, 두 경우 모두 같은 `call.close(Status.UNAUTHENTICATED.withDescription(OperationalError.UNAUTHENTICATED.code()), trailersFor(...))`로 끝난다. 정책 진단은 클라이언트에 닿지 않는다. 중복 아님.
|
|
|