Build Of Keycloak

A flaw was found in the keycloak-services component of Keycloak, which provides identity and access management services. The issue occurs when a realm administrator uses a wildcard domain (like *.example.com) to restrict which hosts can register or update clients. Due to improper validation, the system accepts any hostname that ends with the specified domain suffix, even if it is not a legitimate subdomain. An attacker who can control the reverse DNS of their connection can bypass these host-based restrictions, potentially allowing unauthorized client modifications.Show less

A flaw was found in the group policy evaluation logic of Keycloak, an identity and access management solution. When a group policy is set to extend permissions to child groups, the system incorrectly uses a simple text-based prefix check to verify group membership. This allows a user who belongs to a different group with a similar starting name to bypass security checks and gain unauthorized access to administrative functions or protected resources.Show less

A flaw was found in the RoleContainerResource component of Keycloak. The issue occurs because certain name-based endpoints in the admin REST API do not properly enforce authorization checks when managing composite roles. This allows a delegated administrator with manage-realm permissions to remove essential child roles from built-in admin roles, potentially disrupting administrative functions within a realm.Show less

A flaw was found in the client policy enforcement mechanism of Keycloak. The issue occurs when the system checks group membership by name instead of a unique identifier. An attacker with client management privileges could bypass security policies by joining a group with a matching name in a different part of the group hierarchy, potentially allowing them to register or update clients without following required security hardening profiles.Show less

Keycloak provides a way to manage identity providers and organizations through its administrative API. A flaw was discovered where an administrator with permission to manage identity providers could link a new provider to an organization without having the required permissions to manage that organization. This could allow an unauthorized administrator to influence how users log into specific organizations.Show less

A flaw was found in the role-users endpoint of the keycloak-services library, which is the core component of the Keycloak identity and access management solution. The issue occurs because the system fails to check if an administrator has permission to view individual users when listing members of a role. This allows a restricted administrator to see private information, such as names and email addresses, for users they should not be able to access.Show less

A flaw was found in the Keycloak Admin REST API, which is used to manage security realms and clients. The issue occurs when the system processes requests for rotated client secrets that are stored in a secure vault. Due to improper boundary enforcement, a delegated administrator with view-only permissions can retrieve the actual resolved secret instead of the vault placeholder, leading to the exposure of sensitive credentials.Show less

A flaw was found in the default-groups REST endpoint and realm representation of Keycloak. This component is responsible for managing groups that are automatically assigned to new users within a realm. The issue allows a delegated administrator with realm-viewing permissions to see the names and identifiers of hidden default groups, even if they lack the specific permissions to view those groups. This can lead to the exposure of sensitive organizational structures or internal group names.Show less

A flaw was found in the admin REST API of Keycloak, a solution for identity and access management. The issue occurs when a delegated administrator attempts to remove a child role from a composite role. Due to missing authorization checks, an attacker with limited administrative permissions can remove privileged roles they are not authorized to manage, leading to a loss of access for other users and administrators.Show less

A flaw was found in the authentication configuration endpoint of the keycloak-services component, which is the core engine for Red Hat Build of Keycloak identity and access management. The issue occurs because the system fails to mask sensitive configuration values, such as reCAPTCHA secret keys, when they are requested by administrators with view-only permissions. This can lead to the exposure of third-party service credentials to unauthorized personnel or through administrative logs.Show less

A flaw was found in the keycloak-services component of Keycloak. This issue is an incomplete fix for CVE-2026-9798, where brute-force protection checks were added to the Client-Initiated Backchannel Authentication (CIBA) initiation handler but were omitted from the token redemption handler. This allows an attacker with valid client credentials to obtain access and refresh tokens for a user account that has been locked due to brute-force protection, provided the authentication request was started before the lockout occurred and was approved by the user.Show less

Keycloak provides a mechanism called Client Policies to enforce security requirements on clients, such as requiring them to use signed JWTs for authentication. A flaw was discovered where this enforcement can be bypassed. An attacker with valid client credentials can provide a fake, unsigned assertion header that tricks the system into thinking the policy requirements have been met. This allows the attacker to authenticate using simpler methods like a client secret even when the administrator has mandated more secure, signed assertions.Show less

A flaw was found in the keycloak-services component of Red Hat Build of Keycloak. The issue occurs because OAuth 2.0 authorization codes are not properly bound to the client that originally requested them. An attacker who can intercept an authorization code can modify it to be redeemed by their own client, potentially allowing them to obtain access tokens for a victim's identity.Show less

A flaw was found in the organization management component of Keycloak. A delegated administrator with permission to manage organizations can create an invitation for a non-existent email address and then retrieve the secret registration link directly through the application programming interface. By using this link, the administrator can create new user accounts and add them to the organization without having the required user management permissions or access to the invited email account. This allows an administrator to bypass security boundaries and add unauthorized members to an organization.Show less

A flaw was found in the Keycloak keycloak-services component, which handles the management of identity providers. The issue occurs when a delegated administrator updates an OIDC identity provider using a masked client secret sentinel value. Due to improper validation, Keycloak reuses the existing real secret even if security-sensitive fields like the token URL have been changed, allowing an attacker to redirect and capture the secret.Show less

A flaw was found in the group search functionality of the Keycloak server's administrative API. When Fine-Grained Admin Permissions (FGAP) v2 is enabled, a delegated administrator can bypass access restrictions to view parent groups they are not authorized to see. By searching for a child group they have permission to view, the system incorrectly returns the full details of the parent group in the response, leading to the disclosure of sensitive group attributes and configuration.Show less

A flaw was found in Keycloak. When the JSON Web Token (JWT) authorization grant preview feature is enabled and a user account is disabled, Keycloak fails to validate the user’s disabled status during JWT authorization grant processing. A remote attacker with low privileges can exploit this improper access control vulnerability by presenting a valid assertion token from an external identity provider to obtain a JWT for a disabled user. This allows unauthorized access to sensitive resources.Show less

A flaw exists in the org.keycloak.broker.oidc package where the OIDC broker incorrectly synchronizes the email_verified claim. When an OIDC identity provider is configured with trustEmail=true and the userinfo endpoint is enabled, Keycloak retrieves the email address from the userinfo response but retrieves the email_verified status exclusively from the id_token. The root cause is a lack of validation ensuring that the email_verified claim in the id_token actually refers to the email address returned by the userinfo endpoint. If these two sources return different email addresses, the id_token's email_verified=true claim is blindly applied to the userinfo email. Exploitation Conditions: The OIDC identity provider must have trustEmail set to true (non-default). The userinfo endpoint must be enabled (default). The attacker must control or have compromised the upstream OIDC provider. Concrete Impact: Mark arbitrary email addresses as verified in the Keycloak database. Bypass email-based security controls or verification workflows. Potential account takeover if the application relies solely on the email_verified flag from the IdP to link accounts.Show less

A flaw was found in the Fine-Grained Admin Permissions (FGAP) v2 implementation within Keycloak's administrative services. When FGAP v2 is enabled, the system fails to properly filter child groups based on the caller's specific permissions when requested through a parent group. This allows a delegated administrator to view details of child groups they are not authorized to access directly, including group names, paths, and custom attributes.Show less

A flaw was found in the ClientResource component of Keycloak's admin services when Fine-Grained Admin Permissions (FGAP) v2 is enabled. This issue allows a delegated administrator, who should only have limited control over specific clients, to attach or remove hidden client scopes that they are not authorized to see or manage. As a result, an attacker could inject unauthorized data or permissions into the security tokens issued to end-users, potentially tricking other applications into granting higher levels of access than intended.Show less