| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. An unauthenticated attacker can exploit this vulnerability by sending a specially crafted POST request with an excessively long scope parameter to the OpenID Connect (OIDC) token endpoint. This leads to high resource consumption and prolonged processing times, ultimately resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS) for the Keycloak server. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. An authenticated user with the uma_protection role can bypass User-Managed Access (UMA) policy validation. This allows the attacker to include resource identifiers owned by other users in a policy creation request, even if the URL path specifies an attacker-owned resource. Consequently, the attacker gains unauthorized permissions to victim-owned resources, enabling them to obtain a Requesting Party Token (RPT) and access sensitive information or perform unauthorized actions. |
| A flaw was identified in the Docker v2 authentication endpoint of Keycloak, where tokens continue to be issued even after a Docker registry client has been administratively disabled. This means that turning the client “Enabled” setting to OFF does not fully prevent access. As a result, previously valid credentials can still be used to obtain authentication tokens. This weakens administrative controls and could allow unintended access to container registry resources. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. An administrator with `manage-users` permission can bypass the "Only administrators can view" setting for unmanaged attributes, allowing them to modify these attributes. This improper access control can lead to unauthorized changes to user profiles, even when the system is configured to restrict such modifications. |
| A security flaw in the IdentityBrokerService.performLogin endpoint of Keycloak allows authentication to proceed using an Identity Provider (IdP) even after it has been disabled by an administrator. An attacker who knows the IdP alias can reuse a previously generated login request to bypass the administrative restriction. This undermines access control enforcement and may allow unauthorized authentication through a disabled external provider. |
| A flaw was found in the Keycloak server during refresh token processing, specifically in the TokenManager class responsible for enforcing refresh token reuse policies. When strict refresh token rotation is enabled, the validation and update of refresh token usage are not performed atomically. This allows concurrent refresh requests to bypass single-use enforcement and issue multiple access tokens from the same refresh token. As a result, Keycloak’s refresh token rotation hardening can be undermined. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. Keycloak's Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) broker endpoint does not properly validate encrypted assertions when the overall SAML response is not signed. An attacker with a valid signed SAML assertion can exploit this by crafting a malicious SAML response. This allows the attacker to inject an encrypted assertion for an arbitrary principal, leading to unauthorized access and potential information disclosure. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. A remote attacker could bypass security controls by sending a valid SAML response from an external Identity Provider (IdP) to the Keycloak SAML endpoint for IdP-initiated broker logins. This allows the attacker to complete broker logins even when the SAML Identity Provider is disabled, leading to unauthorized authentication. |
| A flaw was identified in the Account REST API of Keycloak that allows a user authenticated at a lower security level to perform sensitive actions intended only for higher-assurance sessions. Specifically, an attacker who has already obtained a victim’s password can delete the victim’s registered MFA/OTP credential without first proving possession of that factor. The attacker can then register their own MFA device, effectively taking full control of the account. This weakness undermines the intended protection provided by multi-factor authentication. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. An authorization bypass vulnerability in the Keycloak Admin API allows any authenticated user, even those without administrative privileges, to enumerate the organization memberships of other users. This information disclosure occurs if the attacker knows the victim's unique identifier (UUID) and the Organizations feature is enabled. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. An administrator with `manage-clients` permission can exploit a misconfiguration where this permission is equivalent to `manage-permissions`. This allows the administrator to escalate privileges and gain control over roles, users, or other administrative functions within the realm. This privilege escalation can occur when admin permissions are enabled at the realm level. |
| A flaw was identified in Keycloak’s OpenID Connect Dynamic Client Registration feature when clients authenticate using private_key_jwt. The issue allows a client to specify an arbitrary jwks_uri, which Keycloak then retrieves without validating the destination. This enables attackers to coerce the Keycloak server into making HTTP requests to internal or restricted network resources. As a result, attackers can probe internal services and cloud metadata endpoints, creating an information disclosure and reconnaissance risk. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. The User-Managed Access (UMA) 2.0 Protection API endpoint for permission tickets fails to enforce the `uma_protection` role check. This allows any authenticated user with a token issued for a resource server client, even without the `uma_protection` role, to enumerate all permission tickets in the system. This vulnerability partial leads to information disclosure. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak, where it does not correctly validate its client step-up authentication in org.keycloak.authentication. This flaw allows a remote user authenticated with a password to register a false second authentication factor along with an existing one and bypass authentication. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. By setting a verification policy to 'ALL', the trust store certificate verification is skipped, which is unintended. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. A significant Broken Access Control vulnerability exists in the UserManagedPermissionService (UMA Protection API). When updating or deleting a UMA policy associated with multiple resources, the authorization check only verifies the caller's ownership against the first resource in the policy's list. This allows a user (Owner A) who owns one resource (RA) to update a shared policy and modify authorization rules for other resources (e.g., RB) in that same policy, even if those other resources are owned by a different user (Owner B). This constitutes a horizontal privilege escalation. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. An IDOR (Broken Access Control) vulnerability exists in the admin API endpoints for authorization resource management, specifically in ResourceSetService and PermissionTicketService. The system checks authorization against the resourceServer (client) ID provided in the API request, but the backend database lookup and modification operations (findById, delete) only use the resourceId. This mismatch allows an authenticated attacker with fine-grained admin permissions for one client (e.g., Client A) to delete or update resources belonging to another client (Client B) within the same realm by supplying a valid resource ID. |
| A flaw was found in the keycloak-services component of Keycloak. This vulnerability allows the issuance of access and refresh tokens for disabled users, leading to unauthorized use of previously revoked privileges, via a business logic vulnerability in the Token Exchange implementation when a privileged client invokes the token exchange flow. |
| A flaw was found in the Keycloak Admin REST API. This vulnerability allows the exposure of backend schema and rules, potentially leading to targeted attacks or privilege escalation via improper access control. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. This issue occurs due to improperly enforcing token types when validating signatures locally. This could allow an authenticated attacker to exchange a logout token for an access token and possibly gain access to data outside of enforced permissions. |
