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>
48 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
48 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
kind: CONCEPT
|
|
slug: adapter-outbound-notification-c05
|
|
title: SSRF 가드의 호출처 둘과 javadoc이 지목하는 둘이 다르다
|
|
topic: identity-and-value-contracts
|
|
project: clean-architecture-backend-template
|
|
status: 게시 전
|
|
sourceRevision: 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916
|
|
rootTreeNode: concept:adapter-outbound-notification-c05
|
|
evidenceCapturedOn: 2026-09-01
|
|
assets:
|
|
- key: adapter-outbound-notification-c05
|
|
file: ../../../final/evidence/rendered/adapter-outbound-notification-c05.svg
|
|
evidence:
|
|
- ../../../final/evidence/raw/adapter-outbound-notification-c05.txt
|
|
source:
|
|
- 원본 분석 절은 analysis/13-adapter-outbound-notification.md#L703 이다.
|
|
module: adapter-outbound-notification
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# SSRF 가드의 호출처 둘과 javadoc이 지목하는 둘이 다르다
|
|
|
|
`NotificationEndpoints.requireExternallyRoutable`의 프로덕션 호출처는 SES endpoint와 webhook target 둘이다. 가드 자신의 javadoc이 위험 대상으로 지목하는 것은 Web Push endpoint와 webhook target이고, Web Push는 호출처 목록에 없다.
|
|
|
|
## 본문
|
|
|
|
<!-- body:start -->
|
|
|
|
`NotificationEndpoints.requireExternallyRoutable`의 프로덕션 호출처는 **둘**뿐이다.
|
|
|
|
```text
|
|
.../ses/SesProviderProperties.java:27: NotificationEndpoints.requireExternallyRoutable(endpoint, "SES endpoint", true);
|
|
.../webhook/WebhookSubscription.java:49: NotificationEndpoints.requireExternallyRoutable(target, "webhook target", trusted);
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## javadoc이 위험 대상으로 지목하는 둘
|
|
|
|
> "**Web Push endpoints and webhook targets are supplied by clients**, which makes this a server-side request forgery primitive."
|
|
|
|
Web Push는 호출처 목록에 없다. §25.1.
|
|
|
|
## NotificationEndpoints 참조 위치
|
|
|
|
:::evidence key="adapter-outbound-notification-c05" alt="코드베이스에서 NotificationEndpoints 를 검색한 출력 17줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="NotificationEndpoints 코드베이스 검색 — 17줄 · exit 0" zoom="true"
|
|
:::
|
|
|
|
<!-- body:end -->
|