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>
2.7 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-web-c04 | publicPaths가 먼저 등록되어 제한 경로 규칙을 덮는다 | security-and-trust-boundaries | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:adapter-inbound-web-c04 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
adapter-inbound-web |
publicPaths가 먼저 등록되어 제한 경로 규칙을 덮는다
SecurityConfig가 publicPaths를 RestrictedPathRule보다 먼저 등록한다. Spring Security는 첫 일치가 이기므로, 주석이 말하는 순서는 anyRequest()에 대해서만 성립하고 publicPaths에 대해서는 반대다.
본문
매처가 등록되는 순서는 이렇다.
// SecurityConfig.java:83-94
.authorizeHttpRequests(auth -> {
if (publicPaths.length > 0) { auth.requestMatchers(publicPaths).permitAll(); } // ← 먼저
for (RestrictedPathRule rule : restricted) { // ← 나중
auth.requestMatchers(rule.pathPattern()).hasAnyAuthority(rule.authorities());
}
auth.anyRequest().authenticated();
})
매처가 등록되는 순서
:::evidence key="adapter-inbound-web-c04-diagram" alt="공개 경로 매처와 제한 경로 규칙과 인증 요구 매처가 왼쪽에서 오른쪽으로 이어지고 화살표에 등록 순서가 붙은 구조" caption="매처가 등록되는 순서" zoom="false" :::
Spring Security는 첫 일치가 이긴다. 주석은 "Ordered before the authenticated catch-all: a management path must be refused at the transport"라고 하는데, 그 순서는 anyRequest()에 대해서만 성립하고 publicPaths에 대해서는 반대다. §12.3.
RestrictedPathRule 참조 위치
:::evidence key="adapter-inbound-web-c04" alt="코드베이스에서 RestrictedPathRule 를 검색한 출력 8줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="RestrictedPathRule 코드베이스 검색 — 8줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
실제로 등록되는 값
프로덕션 RestrictedPathRule 생산자는 하나다 — FileserverAdminPlaneConfiguration:36이 fileserver 관리 경로를 등록한다. publicPaths의 기본값은 ${SECURITY_PUBLIC_PATHS:${PRESENTATION_API_BASE_PATH:/v1}/healthcheck}로, 환경변수 하나로 전체가 대체된다.