Search
Search Results (7 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-16102 | 1 Redhat | 8 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Data Grid 8 and 5 more | 2026-08-07 | 8.1 High |
| A flaw was found in the Dynamic Client Registration (DCR) component of Keycloak, an identity and access management solution. The default DCR policy fails to properly validate the claim path for User Property mappers, allowing them to write values to sensitive internal claim locations. An attacker with a standard user account and a limited Initial Access Token can exploit this to forge administrative roles in their access token. This allows the attacker to take over other clients, steal confidential secrets, and potentially gain full administrative control over the realm. | ||||
| CVE-2026-16071 | 1 Redhat | 8 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Data Grid 8 and 5 more | 2026-08-07 | 5.4 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the LDAP storage provider of Keycloak, which is used to federate user identities from external directories. The issue occurs when a delegated administrator performs a search using a specific LDAP entry Distinguished Name (DN). Due to missing validation, the system allows lookups for users located outside the configured search boundary, leading to the disclosure of account information from unauthorized parts of the directory and unintended importing of those users into local storage. | ||||
| CVE-2026-16100 | 1 Redhat | 8 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Data Grid 8 and 5 more | 2026-08-07 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the user-event metrics recording of Keycloak. When metrics are enabled, the system records raw error messages from failed account operations as Prometheus metric labels. Because these error messages can include user-supplied input like nonexistent client IDs, an authenticated user can create a massive number of unique metric entries, eventually exhausting system memory and causing the service to crash or become unavailable. | ||||
| CVE-2026-16442 | 1 Redhat | 8 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Data Grid 8 and 5 more | 2026-08-07 | 7.4 High |
| A flaw was found in the SAML broker component of Keycloak, which is used to manage identity federation and user authentication. The issue occurs because the IdP-initiated Single Sign-On endpoint fails to check if a provider is restricted to account linking only. This allows an attacker with control over a linked upstream identity to bypass login restrictions and gain full access to a local user account. | ||||
| CVE-2026-16443 | 1 Redhat | 8 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Data Grid 8 and 5 more | 2026-08-07 | 7.4 High |
| A flaw was found in the SAML metadata import functionality of the keycloak-services component, which is the core engine for identity brokering in Red Hat Build of Keycloak. When importing identity provider metadata that lacks specific usage attributes for keys, the system incorrectly disables signature validation for SAML responses even if a signing certificate is provided. This issue allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge a SAML response and gain unauthorized access to a user account by knowing their external identifier. | ||||
| CVE-2026-15573 | 1 Redhat | 8 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Data Grid 8 and 5 more | 2026-08-07 | 8.1 High |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak's Authorization Services. The component responsible for matching request paths to security policies (PathMatcher) does not properly normalize URIs before comparison. By adding extra characters like a trailing slash or matrix parameters to a URL, an attacker can trick the system into applying a less restrictive security policy than intended. This allows an authenticated user to access administrative or restricted areas they should not have permission to see. | ||||
| CVE-2026-18573 | 1 Redhat | 8 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Data Grid 8 and 5 more | 2026-08-03 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the keycloak-services component of Keycloak, which is used for managing authentication and authorization flows. The issue occurs when a realm administrator configures client policies to enforce specific authentication requirements on confidential clients. Due to improper evaluation of the client state during an update operation, an attacker with client management permissions can bypass these security policies by first creating a public client and then updating it to a confidential client with weaker authentication. This can result in the persistence of clients that do not comply with the intended security hardening of the realm. | ||||
Page 1 of 1.