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>
2.4 KiB
2.4 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 | adapter-inbound-graphql-c01 | off 계약의 두 절반과 리터럴 404를 피한 단언 | security-and-trust-boundaries | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:adapter-inbound-graphql-c01 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
adapter-inbound-graphql |
off 계약의 두 절반과 리터럴 404를 피한 단언
꺼짐 계약이 두 절반으로 나뉜다 — 이 leaf의 빈을 막는 절반과 프레임워크가 발행하는 라우트를 막는 절반. 뒤쪽 테스트는 리터럴 404가 아니라 매핑된 적 없는 경로의 상태 코드와 같은지를 본다.
본문
꺼짐 계약이 두 절반으로 나뉜다.
| 절반 | 무엇을 막는가 | 검증 |
|---|---|---|
GraphQlRootAutoConfiguration의 @ConditionalOnProperty |
이 leaf의 39개 빈 | GraphQlShippedAndGatedTest.graphQlOffHoldsNothing — 빈 인벤토리 |
GraphQlOffAutoConfigurationImportFilter |
프레임워크가 발행하는 /graphql 라우트 |
GraphQlShippedAndGatedTest.graphQlOffPublishesNoEndpoint — 실제 포트 |
리터럴 404를 단언하지 않는 이유
두 번째 테스트가 특히 정교하다. 리터럴 404를 단언하지 않고, 매핑된 적 없는 경로의 상태 코드와 같은지를 본다 — 주석이 그 이유를 적는다: "Asserting a literal 404 would have been wrong: the security filter chain runs before ...".
그 테스트가 app-bootstrap에 있는 이유
그리고 그 테스트는 이 leaf가 아니라 app-bootstrap에 있다. off 계약은 출하 조립에서만 검증할 수 있으므로 옳은 위치다.
분석 원문의 두 절반 표
:::evidence key="adapter-inbound-graphql-c01" alt="분석 문서 analysis/16-adapter-inbound-graphql.md 에서 이 기록의 근거 절을 그대로 잘라낸 15줄. 코드베이스를 측정한 것이 아니라 원본 판정이 무엇을 적었는지를 보여 준다." caption="analysis/16-adapter-inbound-graphql.md 발췌 — 15줄" zoom="true" :::