feat: security overhaul (proxy ssrf fix, streaming sanitization, docker optimization)

This commit is contained in:
Michael committed 2026-01-07 08:43:33 +01:00
1 parent 6d87ada2b8
commit 8df9a37baa
810 files changed
+131090 -151

No files matched your search

@@ -0,0 +1,220 @@
# Quick-Dev - Flexible Game Development Workflow
<workflow>
<critical>Communicate in {communication_language}, tailored to {user_skill_level}</critical>
<critical>Execute continuously until COMPLETE - do not stop for milestones</critical>
<critical>Game-specific: Consider performance (60fps), feel, and player experience</critical>
<critical>ALWAYS respect {project_context} if it exists - it defines project standards</critical>
<checkpoint-handlers>
<on-select key="a">Load and execute {advanced_elicitation}, then return</on-select>
<on-select key="p">Load and execute {party_mode_exec}, then return</on-select>
<on-select key="r">Load and execute {quick_prototype_workflow}</on-select>
</checkpoint-handlers>
<step n="1" goal="Load context and determine execution mode">
<action>Check if {project_context} exists. If yes, load it - this is your foundational reference for ALL implementation decisions (patterns, conventions, architecture).</action>
<action>Parse user input:
**Mode A: Tech-Spec** - e.g., `quick-dev tech-spec-combat.md`
→ Load spec, extract tasks/context/AC, goto step 3
**Mode B: Direct Instructions** - e.g., `implement player jump...`
→ Evaluate complexity, offer planning choice
**Mode C: Prototype Reference** - e.g., `quick-dev from prototype...`
→ Load prototype code, productionize
</action>
<check if="Mode A">
<action>Load tech-spec, extract tasks/context/AC</action>
<goto>step_3</goto>
</check>
<check if="Mode C">
<action>Load prototype reference, identify production requirements</action>
<goto>step_2</goto>
</check>
<check if="Mode B">
<action>Evaluate complexity against game development signals:
**Triggers planning** (if 2+ signals present):
- Multiple game systems (e.g., combat + inventory + UI)
- Performance-critical code (e.g., game loop, rendering, physics)
- Cross-platform considerations
- Multiplayer/networking
- Save system integration
**Simple enough for direct execution:**
- Single mechanic adjustment
- UI tweak
- Bug fix
- Asset integration
- Config/balance change
</action>
<check if="complex task">
<ask>This looks like a significant game feature.
**[t] Plan first** - Create tech-spec then implement (recommended)
**[r] Prototype first** - Test the idea before committing
**[w] Use full BMGD workflow** - For larger features
**[e] Execute directly** - Start implementation now</ask>
<check if="t">
<action>Create lightweight tech-spec with tasks and AC</action>
<goto>step_3</goto>
</check>
<check if="r">
<action>Load and execute {quick_prototype_workflow}</action>
<action>Return here after prototype complete</action>
</check>
<check if="w">
<action>Load and execute {workflow_init}</action>
<action>EXIT quick-dev - user routed to full workflow</action>
</check>
<check if="e">
<goto>step_2</goto>
</check>
</check>
<check if="simple task">
<ask>**[e] Execute directly** - Start now
**[t] Quick plan** - Brief task breakdown first</ask>
<check if="e">
<goto>step_2</goto>
</check>
<check if="t">
<action>Create quick task list</action>
<goto>step_3</goto>
</check>
</check>
</check>
</step>
<step n="2" goal="Quick context gathering">
<action>Identify scope:
- Files to modify
- Game systems affected
- Performance considerations
- Existing patterns to follow
</action>
<action>Create mental plan:
- Tasks to complete
- Acceptance criteria
- Test approach (manual playtest, unit tests, etc.)
</action>
</step>
<step n="3" goal="Execute implementation" id="step_3">
<action>For each task:
1. **Load Context** - Read relevant files, understand integration points
2. **Implement** - Follow patterns, consider performance, handle edge cases
3. **Test** - Run game, verify behavior, check frame rate impact
4. **Mark Complete** - Check off task [x], continue
</action>
<action>Game-specific checks during implementation:
**Performance:**
- Avoid allocations in hot paths
- Use object pooling where appropriate
- Profile if frame time increases
**Feel:**
- Test input responsiveness
- Verify visual/audio feedback
- Check timing and pacing
**Integration:**
- Verify save/load compatibility
- Check multiplayer sync (if applicable)
- Test on target platform
</action>
<action if="3 failures">HALT and request guidance</action>
<action if="tests fail">Fix before continuing</action>
<action if="frame rate drops">Profile and optimize before continuing</action>
<critical>Continue through ALL tasks without stopping</critical>
</step>
<step n="4" goal="Verify and complete">
<action>Verify completion:
- All tasks [x]
- Game runs without errors
- Feature works as specified
- Performance acceptable (target frame rate maintained)
- Patterns followed
</action>
<check if="using tech-spec">
<action>Update tech-spec status to "Completed", mark all tasks [x]</action>
</check>
<output>**Implementation Complete!**
**Summary:** {{implementation_summary}}
**Files Modified:** {{files_list}}
**Tests:** {{test_summary}}
**Performance:** {{performance_notes}}
**AC Status:** {{ac_status}}
---
**Recommended: Playtest the changes**
Run the game and verify:
- Feature works as expected
- No regressions in related systems
- Performance is acceptable
- Feel is right
**Before committing: Consider a code review**
```
You are a senior game developer reviewing code for a game project. These changes were just implemented. Look for:
1. Performance issues (allocations in loops, unnecessary calculations)
2. Game feel problems (timing, feedback, responsiveness)
3. Integration issues (save system, multiplayer, platform)
4. Code quality (patterns, readability, maintainability)
Find at least 3 issues or improvements.
```
</output>
<action>Explain what was implemented based on {user_skill_level}</action>
</step>
</workflow>