- L'API vérifie ce `username` et ce `password`, et répond avec un « token » (nous n'avons encore rien implémenté de tout cela).
    - Un « token » n'est qu'une chaîne contenant des informations que nous pouvons utiliser plus tard pour vérifier cet utilisateur.
    - Normalement, un token est configuré pour expirer après un certain temps.

        int cmd2 = (int) commandField.get(req2);

        assertEquals(cmd1, cmd2);
        assertEquals(SMB2_TREE_DISCONNECT, cmd1);
    }

    @Test
    @DisplayName("Should properly implement wire format protocol")
    void testWireFormatProtocol() {
        // Given
        Configuration mockConfig = mock(Configuration.class);
        Smb2TreeDisconnectRequest request = new Smb2TreeDisconnectRequest(mockConfig);

   * exception. (The reason for this decision is lost to time, but the reason <i>might</i> be that
   * we wanted to support legacy classes that implement the raw type {@code Comparable} (instead of
   * implementing {@code Comparable<Foo>}) without producing warnings. If so, we would prefer today

## **FastAPI**'s `OAuth2PasswordBearer` { #fastapis-oauth2passwordbearer }

**FastAPI** provides several tools, at different levels of abstraction, to implement these security features.

In this example we are going to use **OAuth2**, with the **Password** flow, using a **Bearer** token. We do that using the `OAuth2PasswordBearer` class.

/// info

    class InterfaceImplementationTests {

        @Test
        @DisplayName("Should implement AllocInfo interface")
        void shouldImplementAllocInfo() {
            assertTrue(AllocInfo.class.isAssignableFrom(FileFsFullSizeInformation.class));
        }

        @Test
        @DisplayName("Should implement FileSystemInformation interface")
        void shouldImplementFileSystemInformation() {

Framing rules make it impractical to implement http/2 correctly on a single blocking thread. The flow-control features introduce feedback between reads and writes, requiring writes to acknowledge reads and reads to throttle writes.

Şöyle bir "Inactive user" hatası alırsınız:

```JSON
{
  "detail": "Inactive user"
}
```

## Özet { #recap }

Artık API’niz için `username` ve `password` tabanlı, eksiksiz bir güvenlik sistemi implement etmek için gerekli araçlara sahipsiniz.

Bu araçlarla güvenlik sistemini herhangi bir veritabanıyla ve herhangi bir user veya veri modeliyle uyumlu hale getirebilirsiniz.

   * exception. (The reason for this decision is lost to time, but the reason <i>might</i> be that
   * we wanted to support legacy classes that implement the raw type {@code Comparable} (instead of
   * implementing {@code Comparable<Foo>}) without producing warnings. If so, we would prefer today

 *
 * This class contains a Kotlin implementation of the pseudocode specified by RFC 3492. It includes
 * direct translation of the pseudocode presented there.
 *
 * Partner this class with [UTS #46] to implement IDNA2008 [RFC 5890] like most browsers do.
 *
 * [RFC 3492]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3492
 * [RFC 5890]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5890
 * [UTS #46]: https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr46/
 */

 * states it cannot ever leave them.
 *
 * <p>Implementors of this interface are strongly encouraged to extend one of the abstract classes
 * in this package which implement this interface and make the threading and state management
 * easier.
 *
 * @author Jesse Wilson
 * @author Luke Sandberg
 * @since 9.0 (in 1.0 as {@code com.google.common.base.Service})
 */