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>
1.8 KiB
1.8 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 | messaging-rabbit-c02 | 자격증명은 연결 시도마다 해석된다 | security-and-trust-boundaries | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:messaging-rabbit-c02 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
messaging-rabbit |
자격증명은 연결 시도마다 해석된다
RabbitMQ 클라이언트 연결은 오래 살고 스스로 재연결하므로, 시작 시점의 자격증명을 들고 있는 팩토리는 폐기된 자격증명으로 계속 재연결한다. 재연결 시점이 곧 회전된 자격증명이 적용되어야 할 시점이다.
본문
자격증명을 연결 시도마다 다시 해석하는 이유가 적혀 있다.
"RabbitMQ client connections are long-lived and reconnect on their own, so a factory holding a credential from startup will happily reconnect with a revoked one for as long as the process runs — the reconnect is exactly the moment a rotated credential should take effect."
AmqpCredentials가 record가 아닌 이유
비밀을 지우려면 가변이어야 하고, record 가 char[] 를 동등성에 쓰면 같은 자재를 가진 둘이 서로 다르다고 판정된다.
AmqpCredentials 참조 위치
:::evidence key="messaging-rabbit-c02" alt="코드베이스에서 AmqpCredentials 를 검색한 출력 9줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="AmqpCredentials 코드베이스 검색 — 9줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::