Initial commit MS receiver UP migration

[oslynn]

This PR is MS receiver UP migration pre-work,

Test Steps:

1. Include steps to test these changes

Changes

• Include a comprehensive list of changes in this PR
• (For web UI changes) Include screenshots/video of changes

Checklist

Testing

• [ ] Tested locally?
• [ ] Ran ./prime test or ./gradlew testSmoke against local Docker ReportStream container?
• [ ] (For Changes to /frontend-react/...) Ran npm run lint:write?
• [ ] Added tests?

Process

• [ ] Are there licensing issues with any new dependencies introduced?
• [ ] Includes a summary of what a code reviewer should test/verify?
• [ ] Updated the release notes?
• [ ] Database changes are submitted as a separate PR?
• [ ] DevOps team has been notified if PR requires ops support?

Linked Issues

• Fixes #issue

To Be Done

Create GitHub issues to track the work remaining, if any

• #issue

Specific Security-related subjects a reviewer should pay specific attention to

• Does this PR introduce new endpoints?
  • new endpoint A
  • new endpoint B
• Does this PR include changes in authentication and/or authorization of existing endpoints?
• Does this change introduce new dependencies that need vetting?
• Does this change require changes to our infrastructure?
• Does logging contain sensitive data?
• Does this PR include or remove any sensitive information itself?

If you answered 'yes' to any of the questions above, conduct a detailed Review that addresses at least:

• What are the potential security threats and mitigations? Please list the STRIDE threats and how they are mitigated
  • Spoofing (faking authenticity)
    • Threat T, which could be achieved by A, is mitigated by M
  • Tampering (influence or sabotage the integrity of information, data, or system)
  • Repudiation (the ability to dispute the origin or originator of an action)
  • Information disclosure (data made available to entities who should not have it)
  • Denial of service (make a resource unavailable)
  • Elevation of Privilege (reduce restrictions that apply or gain privileges one should not have)
• Have you ensured logging does not contain sensitive data?
• Have you received any additional approvals needed for this change?

[github-actions[bot]]

Dependency Review

✅ No vulnerabilities or license issues or OpenSSF Scorecard issues found.

OpenSSF Scorecard

Package	Version	Score	Details

Scanned Manifest Files

[github-actions[bot]]

Test Results

1 279 tests  ±0   1 275 :white_check_mark: ±0   7m 31s :stopwatch: -38s   160 suites ±0       4 :zzz: ±0    160 files   ±0       0 :x: ±0 

Results for commit a9931390. ± Comparison against base commit 99e0eaa8.

:recycle: This comment has been updated with latest results.

[github-actions[bot]]

Integration Test Results

 63 files  ±0   63 suites  ±0   29m 42s :stopwatch: -53s 416 tests ±0  407 :white_check_mark: ±0  9 :zzz: ±0  0 :x: ±0  419 runs  ±0  410 :white_check_mark: ±0  9 :zzz: ±0  0 :x: ±0 

Results for commit a9931390. ± Comparison against base commit 99e0eaa8.

:recycle: This comment has been updated with latest results.

[sonarqubecloud[bot]]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud