Add can trip circuit breaker override

[derek-ho]

Description

Adds override that security APIs should not trip the circuit breaker

Issues Resolved

Fix: #4687
Is this a backport? If so, please add backport PR # and/or commits #, and remove backport-failed label from the original PR.
No

Do these changes introduce new permission(s) to be displayed in the static dropdown on the front-end? If so, please open a draft PR in the security dashboards plugin and link the draft PR here
No

Testing

None

Check List

• New functionality includes testing
• New functionality has been documented
• New Roles/Permissions have a corresponding security dashboards plugin PR
• API changes companion pull request created
• Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 67.94%. Comparing base (830b341) to head (c81ee08).
Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4697      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.98%   67.94%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         310      310              
  Lines       20924    20927       +3     
  Branches     3318     3322       +4     
==========================================
- Hits        14225    14218       -7     
- Misses       4951     4958       +7     
- Partials     1748     1751       +3     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...arch/security/dlic/rest/api/AbstractApiAction.java	83.39% <100.00%> (+0.06%)	⬆️

... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes

[cwperks]

Thank you @derek-ho. This looks like an innocuous change that would enhance the security of a cluster. For instance, if a cluster has a single user eating up resources, this change will ensure that an admin can take actions to mitigate w/o running into the circuit breaker.

[derek-ho]

Thank you @derek-ho. This looks like an innocuous change that would enhance the security of a cluster. For instance, if a cluster has a single user eating up resources, this change will ensure that an admin can take actions to mitigate w/o running into the circuit breaker.

Agree! Are there any APIs not covered by this that you think should also not trip the circuit breaker?

[cwperks]

Agree! Are there any APIs not covered by this that you think should also not trip the circuit breaker?

No, I think this single change in the Abstract class covers the most important endpoints around internalusers, roles, roles mappings, etc.