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>
55 lines
2.4 KiB
Markdown
55 lines
2.4 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
kind: CONCEPT
|
|
slug: messaging-claim-check-c01
|
|
title: 위협은 실패가 아니라 잘못된 성공이다
|
|
topic: state-machines-and-ownership
|
|
project: clean-architecture-backend-template
|
|
status: 게시 전
|
|
sourceRevision: 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916
|
|
rootTreeNode: concept:messaging-claim-check-c01
|
|
evidenceCapturedOn: 2026-09-01
|
|
assets:
|
|
- key: messaging-claim-check-c01
|
|
file: ../../../final/evidence/rendered/messaging-claim-check-c01.svg
|
|
- key: messaging-claim-check-c01-diagram
|
|
file: ../../../final/assets/diagrams/messaging-claim-check-c01.svg
|
|
evidence:
|
|
- ../../../final/evidence/raw/messaging-claim-check-c01.txt
|
|
source:
|
|
- 원본 분석 절은 analysis/messaging/messaging-claim-check.md#L57 이다.
|
|
module: messaging-claim-check
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# 위협은 실패가 아니라 잘못된 성공이다
|
|
|
|
브로커 한계를 넘는 payload를 객체 저장소에 두고 메시지는 참조만 나른다. 위협 모델은 "decode perfectly into the wrong object"다.
|
|
|
|
## 관계
|
|
|
|
- **leaf의 각 public 클래스는 자기 레인에 테스트를 갖는다**
|
|
같은 분석 리프에서 끌어낸 규칙이다.
|
|
- **같은 튜닝 값이 두 계층에 있으면 어느 쪽이 이기는지 정한다**
|
|
같은 분석 리프에서 끌어낸 규칙이다.
|
|
|
|
## 본문
|
|
|
|
<!-- body:start -->
|
|
|
|
**Claim Check 패턴** — 브로커 한계를 넘는 payload를 객체 저장소에 두고 메시지는 참조만 나른다. `messaging-reliability-api`의 `ClaimCheckReference`(storageKey·sizeBytes·sha256·expiresAt)를 값 타입으로 쓰고, 이 leaf가 그것을 만들고 검증하는 동작을 소유한다.
|
|
|
|
## payload가 지나는 경로
|
|
|
|
:::evidence key="messaging-claim-check-c01-diagram" alt="payload 와 객체 저장소와 참조와 메시지가 왼쪽에서 오른쪽으로 이어지고 화살표마다 무엇이 넘어가는지 붙은 구조" caption="payload 가 지나는 경로" zoom="false"
|
|
:::
|
|
|
|
## ClaimCheckReference 참조 위치
|
|
|
|
:::evidence key="messaging-claim-check-c01" alt="코드베이스에서 ClaimCheckReference 를 검색한 출력 33줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="ClaimCheckReference 코드베이스 검색 — 33줄 · exit 0" zoom="true"
|
|
:::
|
|
|
|
## 이 리프의 위협 모델
|
|
|
|
경계 진술이 두 클래스에 있다. **"decode perfectly into the wrong object"**가 이 leaf의 위협 모델이다 — 실패가 아니라 잘못된 성공.
|
|
|
|
<!-- body:end -->
|