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>
2.6 KiB
kind, slug, title, topic, project, status, sourceRevision, rootTreeNode, evidenceCapturedOn, assets, evidence, source, module
| kind | slug | title | topic | project | status | sourceRevision | rootTreeNode | evidenceCapturedOn | assets | evidence | source | module | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CONCEPT | application-core-c08 | 검증 권한과 삭제 권한을 분리한 staged lifecycle | admission-budget-and-backpressure | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:application-core-c08 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
application-core |
검증 권한과 삭제 권한을 분리한 staged lifecycle
semantic objectstorage API는 provider/filesystem type을 노출하지 않고, lifecycle을 staged → verified → published로 분리하며, scanner 권한과 purge 권한을 나눠 검증 주체가 임의 삭제까지 할 수 없게 한다.
관계
- legacy storage/notification compatibility surface의 제거 조건 추적 같은 분석 리프에서 끌어낸 규칙이다.
본문
semantic objectstorage API는 provider/filesystem type을 노출하지 않는다. object identity/reference는 prefix + check digit를 포함한 opaque routed representation이고 redacted rendering을 제공한다. tampered/cross-prefix reference를 거부한다.
content I/O가 무한 루프로 가지 않는 이유
content I/O는 bounded pull/push callback context와 budget/cancellation/chunk contract를 사용하며 callback lifetime 밖에서 context를 재사용할 수 없다. zero-progress가 무한 loop로 이어지지 않도록 bounded 후 실패한다.
FullContentIdentity 참조 위치
:::evidence key="application-core-c08" alt="코드베이스에서 FullContentIdentity 를 검색한 출력 1줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="FullContentIdentity 코드베이스 검색 — 1줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
검증 주체가 삭제까지 하지 못하게 나눈다
lifecycle은 staged -> verified -> published를 분리한다. scanner verdict는 exact stage/version/operation/policy revision에 결합되고 publish/cleanup mutation은 exact-version/fencing을 요구한다. scanner 권한과 purge 권한은 분리돼 검증 주체가 임의 삭제까지 할 수 없게 한다.
상한과 신원 요구
transient bearer grant는 URI/header를 redaction하고 TTL은 최대 24시간으로 제한한다. multipart part count는 1..10000이고 completion은 expected content identity를 요구한다. FullContentIdentity는 SHA-256 기반으로 ETag를 content identity로 오인하지 않는다.