Finish revoking a device, instead of half of it

ForgetDeviceAsync stopped this machine unlocking without a passphrase and left
the server's row exactly where it was, so the account went on listing a device
nobody could account for. ADR 0007 recorded that as a deliberate gap needing an
endpoint. This is the endpoint, and the two things that turned up behind it.

DELETE /api/v1/me/devices/{id}. The device row is not the dangerous half: a
kind=device wrap is the user's identity bundle sealed to a key somebody may be
holding, and that is what has to go. It goes on the foreign key's cascade rather
than a second statement, and RevokeDevice_TakesItsWrapWithIt asserts the cascade
rather than trusting the configuration to keep saying so.

Scoped to the caller's own account, which is the only authorisation check there
is. The id is an unguessable v7 GUID, but unguessable is not a permission —
without the scope one user could withdraw another's device key by pasting an id
they saw once, and the victim's next launch would ask for a passphrase with no
explanation. 404 rather than 403 for somebody else's device, so a stranger does
not learn the id exists.

Never refused for being the last device. ADR 0001 makes an enrolled device a
recovery path, so removing the last one does cost the user something — but the
machine being revoked is most likely the one they have just lost, and a server
that argued about it would be refusing the one request that has to work
immediately. The passphrase wrap is untouched either way, which
RevokeDevice_LeavesThePassphraseWrapAlone pins.

--- Two things found on the way ---

Registering twice from one machine left two devices on the account. The server
is idempotent on the public key, but the client generates a fresh key pair every
call and the keystore holds one — so the second registration orphaned a wrap
whose private half had just been overwritten, which is precisely the leftover
this change exists to remove. Registering now withdraws the previous device.
Found by a test that asserted the property and failed.

And the fakes were lying about it. FakeAccountServer's comment claimed the real
service's idempotence while handing back a fresh Guid on every call, which is
invisible until something revokes by id — at which point a test would be
revoking an id the server never issued, and passing. Both fakes now issue one id
per public key and drop the wrap with the device, as the cascade does.

--- Reachable at all ---

ForgetDeviceAsync had exactly one caller and it was a test, so "Stop unlocking
here" now sits in the account bar where "Use Windows Hello here" was. Its own
flag rather than the negation of that one: a machine with no TPM and a machine
that is already registered are both "cannot register", and only the second has
anything to take back.

No confirmation prompt, deliberately. The cost of pressing it by accident is one
passphrase and one re-registration; the cost of a dialog is a moment's
hesitation at the point somebody has realised a machine is in the wrong hands.

Offline it does the local half and says so rather than refusing. Whether this
machine may unlock itself is decided entirely by the local cache and the local
keystore — the unlock path never asks the server — so forgetting here is what
actually revokes, and "you are offline, so this machine will go on unlocking
itself" would be the worst available answer. DeviceRevocation.LocalOnly is what
the interface reports and the status line explains what is left to do.

The local half runs first for the same reason, and the keystore call is the
first thing in the method that can yield: on Windows it raises a consent dialog,
and a dialog wants the thread it was called from. That ordering is currently
load-bearing and shakier than it looks — see the open device-unlock hang.

Four mutations, all caught: dropping the user scope from the server query
(1 test), skipping the stale-device revoke on re-registration (2), skipping the
server call in ForgetDeviceAsync (2), and the earlier version of the client that
never called it at all.

930 tests green across 16 projects, 13 of them new. Zero warnings, format clean.

src/DodoSSH.Api/Features/Identity/DeviceService.cs

@@ -81,6 +81,46 @@ internal sealed class DeviceService(DodoDbContext database, TimeProvider clock)
         return new RegisterDeviceResponse(registered.Id, now);
     }
 
+    /// <summary>
+    /// Removes a device and the wrap that let it unlock.
+    /// </summary>
+    /// <returns>Whether there was one to remove.</returns>
+    /// <remarks>
+    /// <para>
+    /// Scoped to the caller's own account, which is the whole authorisation check: the id is a v7 GUID and
+    /// unguessable, but "unguessable" is not a permission, and a user must not be able to revoke somebody
+    /// else's laptop by pasting an id they saw once.
+    /// </para>
+    /// <para>
+    /// The wrap goes with it through the foreign key's cascade rather than a second statement, and that is
+    /// worth naming because the device row is not the dangerous half. A device nobody can use is untidy; a
+    /// <see cref="UserKeyWrapKind.Device"/> wrap left behind is the user's identity bundle still sealed to a
+    /// key somebody may hold. <c>RevokingADevice_TakesItsWrapWithIt</c> asserts the cascade rather than
+    /// trusting the configuration to keep saying so.
+    /// </para>
+    /// <para>
+    /// Never refused for being the last device. ADR 0001 makes an enrolled device a recovery
+    /// path, so removing the last one does cost the user something — but the machine somebody is revoking is
+    /// most likely the one they have just lost, and a server that argued about it would be refusing the one
+    /// request that has to work immediately. The passphrase wrap is untouched either way, so this can never
+    /// lock anyone out of their own vault.
+    /// </para>
+    /// </remarks>
+    internal async Task<bool> RevokeAsync(
+        UserAccount user,
+        Guid deviceId,
+        CancellationToken cancellationToken)
+    {
+        ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(user);
+
+        var removed = await database.Devices
+            .Where(device => device.Id == deviceId && device.UserId == user.Id)
+            .ExecuteDeleteAsync(cancellationToken)
+            .ConfigureAwait(false);
+
+        return removed > 0;
+    }
+
     /// <summary>Rounds a timestamp down to what the database can actually hold.</summary>
     /// <remarks>
     /// <see cref="TimeProvider"/> reports 100-nanosecond ticks and PostgreSQL's <c>timestamp with time

src/DodoSSH.Api/Features/Identity/IdentityEndpoints.cs

@@ -39,6 +39,14 @@ internal static class IdentityEndpoints
             .WithName("RegisterDevice")
             .WithSummary("Registers a device key so this machine can unlock without the passphrase.");
 
+        // On the group's ordinary policy, unlike registering. Registering needs a bundle to seal, so
+        // demanding enrollment says something true; revoking needs nothing but the account, and a user whose
+        // enrollment state is somehow in doubt is exactly who should still be able to withdraw a laptop they
+        // have lost. Not enrolled means no devices, which this answers as 404 and no harm done.
+        group.MapDelete("/devices/{deviceId:guid}", RevokeDeviceAsync)
+            .WithName("RevokeDevice")
+            .WithSummary("Withdraws a device key, so that machine can no longer unlock without the passphrase.");
+
         return app;
     }
 
@@ -125,6 +133,25 @@ internal static class IdentityEndpoints
         }
     }
 
+    /// <remarks>
+    /// 404 for a device that is not there, rather than a bland 204. A revocation is one of the few calls
+    /// where succeeding on a typo would be a real disservice — "revoked" is what the user reads, and reading
+    /// it about the wrong id is worse than being told to look again. Clients that are only driving towards
+    /// "this machine cannot unlock" can treat 404 as having arrived, which is what the desktop client does.
+    /// </remarks>
+    private static async Task<Results<NoContent, NotFound>> RevokeDeviceAsync(
+        Guid deviceId,
+        ICurrentUserContext currentUser,
+        DeviceService devices,
+        CancellationToken cancellationToken)
+    {
+        var user = await currentUser.GetOrProvisionAsync(cancellationToken).ConfigureAwait(false);
+
+        var revoked = await devices.RevokeAsync(user, deviceId, cancellationToken).ConfigureAwait(false);
+
+        return revoked ? TypedResults.NoContent() : TypedResults.NotFound();
+    }
+
     private static ProblemHttpResult Problem(int statusCode, string code, string detail) =>
         TypedResults.Problem(
             detail: detail,