The mesh composes the accounts; the module owns its server

The delivery question, decided. The alternative was a manifest field enumerating
the server's ports, TLS paths and store directory so the controller could write a
whole configuration file. That is wrong: those are properties of the container the
module raises, they live in its image and its mounts, and the controller would
have to be kept in step with a Dockerfile it never sees. So the mesh writes only
what only the mesh knows — who may connect — and the module's own configuration
includes it.

`ComposeAccounts` is that file. A test says what must *not* be in it as plainly as
what must: no port, no tls block, no store_dir. Each of those in the mesh's file
is a value the controller would then own, and the module could no longer change
its own image without the mesh agreeing.

`bus-users` is where a module wants it written, and **asking is not enough to
receive it**: the file holds every user's password hash, so a module that could ask
for it could read every credential on the bus. The claim on `mesh-broker`
authorises it, checked from the manifest alone. A holder with nothing composed is
refused rather than given an empty file, for the reason a certificate is — a bus
with no user list refuses every connection in the mesh and looks like a machine
problem.

Six claims checked against a running server before any of this was committed to,
and two of them changed what got written:

**An absolute include path is resolved relative to the including file's
directory.** `include /etc/nats/accounts.conf` from /etc/nats-server/nats.conf
makes the server look for /etc/nats-server/etc/nats/accounts.conf and refuse to
start. So both files share one directory, and the module declares its own as a
file resource beside the mesh's.

**`verify: true` was refusing every connection in the mesh.** It makes the server
demand a *client* certificate, and nothing in the mesh presents one: a host pins
this server's exact certificate and authenticates with the password the mesh
minted, and so does a module's runtime. Every connection died at the TLS handshake
before any password was looked at, with an error — "client didn't provide a
certificate" — that reads as a fault in the client. Removed. TLS is still
required; verify only decides whether client certificates are checked.

The other four: a user in an included file authenticates, an unknown user is
refused so the include is the whole authority rather than an addition, a publish
outside a grant is refused, and rewriting the mesh's half alone makes a new user
appear — noticed by the module's own watcher, with no signal from outside, and
without dropping the connection the mesh already had. That last one is task 1.2's
payoff, collected.

internal/broker/users_test.go

@@ -154,3 +154,50 @@ func TestRecordsComposeIntoAFile(t *testing.T) {
 		}
 	}
 }
+
+// The accounts block alone is what the mesh writes, and it holds nothing about the server.
+//
+// **The split is the whole design decision** (ComposeAccounts): ports, TLS paths and a store
+// directory are properties of the container the module raises, and a controller that wrote them
+// would have to be kept in step with a Dockerfile it never sees. So this test says what must not be
+// in the file as plainly as what must.
+func TestWhatTheMeshWritesIsUsersAndNothingAboutTheServer(t *testing.T) {
+	users, err := Users(someRecords())
+	if err != nil {
+		t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+	hashes := map[string]string{}
+	for _, u := range users {
+		hashes[u.Username()] = "$2a$11$" + strings.Repeat("x", 22)
+	}
+	filled, missing := WithPasswords(users, hashes)
+	if len(missing) != 0 {
+		t.Fatalf("users with no password: %v", missing)
+	}
+	got, err := ComposeAccounts(filled)
+	if err != nil {
+		t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+
+	for _, want := range []string{"accounts {", `user: "controller"`, `user: "one.telegram"`} {
+		if !strings.Contains(got, want) {
+			t.Errorf("the accounts file does not contain %s", want)
+		}
+	}
+	// None of the server's own settings. Each of these in the mesh's file is a value the controller
+	// would then own, and the module could no longer change its own image without the mesh agreeing.
+	for _, absent := range []string{"port:", "http:", "jetstream", "tls {", "store_dir", "cert_file"} {
+		if strings.Contains(got, absent) {
+			t.Errorf("the accounts file contains %q, which belongs to the module that raises the "+
+				"server, not to the mesh", absent)
+		}
+	}
+}
+
+// A user with no password is refused here too, not only by the whole-file composition: this is the
+// function the controller actually calls, and a user without a password is a user anybody is.
+func TestTheAccountsFileRefusesAUserWithNoPassword(t *testing.T) {
+	if _, err := ComposeAccounts([]Principal{{Kind: KindController}}); err == nil {
+		t.Fatal("a user with no password hash was written")
+	}
+}