| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A flaw was found in the secure-client-uris client policy executor within Keycloak core services. This component is responsible for enforcing security requirements on client configurations, such as requiring encrypted connections for redirect URIs. Due to an improper check that only looks at the start of a web address rather than properly verifying the host, an attacker can bypass these security restrictions by using a specially crafted domain name. This could allow an attacker to intercept sensitive authentication codes over unencrypted connections. |
| Keycloak allows users to log in using Google accounts and can be configured to only allow users from specific Google Workspace domains. A flaw was found where the token exchange feature, which allows swapping a Google token for a Keycloak token, does not check these domain restrictions. This means an attacker with a valid Google account from a different domain could bypass the security check and gain access to the Keycloak realm. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| A flaw was found in Wildfly Elytron integration. The component does not implement sufficient measures to prevent multiple failed authentication attempts within a short time frame, making it more susceptible to brute force attacks via CLI. |
| A flaw was found in Keycloak. This JWT algorithm confusion vulnerability in the JWT Authorization Grant flow allows an attacker with valid client credentials to bypass signature verification. By forging an assertion, the attacker can create unauthorized access tokens. This enables the attacker to impersonate any federated user linked to the affected Identity Provider, leading to unauthorized access and potential privilege escalation. |
| A vulnerability was found in Wildfly’s management interface. Due to the lack of limitation of sockets for the management interface, it may be possible to cause a denial of service hitting the nofile limit as there is no possibility to configure or set a maximum number of connections. |
| A vulnerability was found in the Infinispan component in Red Hat Data Grid. The REST compare API may have a buffer leak and an out of memory error can occur when sending continual requests with large POST data to the REST API. |
| A flaw was found in Undertow. When Undertow receives an HTTP request where the first header line starts with one or more spaces, it incorrectly processes the request by stripping these leading spaces. This behavior, which violates HTTP standards, can be exploited by a remote attacker to perform request smuggling. Request smuggling allows an attacker to bypass security mechanisms, access restricted information, or manipulate web caches, potentially leading to unauthorized actions or data exposure. |
| A flaw was found in Undertow. This vulnerability allows a remote attacker to construct specially crafted requests where header names are parsed differently by Undertow compared to upstream proxies. This discrepancy in header interpretation can be exploited to launch request smuggling attacks, potentially bypassing security controls and accessing unauthorized resources. |
| A flaw was found in Undertow. A remote attacker can exploit this vulnerability by sending `\r\r\r` as a header block terminator. This can be used for request smuggling with certain proxy servers, such as older versions of Apache Traffic Server and Google Cloud Classic Application Load Balancer, potentially leading to unauthorized access or manipulation of web requests. |
| Apache Log4j2 versions 2.0-beta7 through 2.17.0 (excluding security fix releases 2.3.2 and 2.12.4) are vulnerable to a remote code execution (RCE) attack when a configuration uses a JDBC Appender with a JNDI LDAP data source URI when an attacker has control of the target LDAP server. This issue is fixed by limiting JNDI data source names to the java protocol in Log4j2 versions 2.17.1, 2.12.4, and 2.3.2. |
| Improper validation of certificate with host mismatch in Apache Log4j SMTP appender. This could allow an SMTPS connection to be intercepted by a man-in-the-middle attack which could leak any log messages sent through that appender. Fixed in Apache Log4j 2.12.3 and 2.13.1 |
| JMSAppender in Log4j 1.2 is vulnerable to deserialization of untrusted data when the attacker has write access to the Log4j configuration. The attacker can provide TopicBindingName and TopicConnectionFactoryBindingName configurations causing JMSAppender to perform JNDI requests that result in remote code execution in a similar fashion to CVE-2021-44228. Note this issue only affects Log4j 1.2 when specifically configured to use JMSAppender, which is not the default. Apache Log4j 1.2 reached end of life in August 2015. Users should upgrade to Log4j 2 as it addresses numerous other issues from the previous versions. |
| Included in Log4j 1.2 is a SocketServer class that is vulnerable to deserialization of untrusted data which can be exploited to remotely execute arbitrary code when combined with a deserialization gadget when listening to untrusted network traffic for log data. This affects Log4j versions up to 1.2 up to 1.2.17. |
| JMSSink in all versions of Log4j 1.x is vulnerable to deserialization of untrusted data when the attacker has write access to the Log4j configuration or if the configuration references an LDAP service the attacker has access to. The attacker can provide a TopicConnectionFactoryBindingName configuration causing JMSSink to perform JNDI requests that result in remote code execution in a similar fashion to CVE-2021-4104. Note this issue only affects Log4j 1.x when specifically configured to use JMSSink, which is not the default. Apache Log4j 1.2 reached end of life in August 2015. Users should upgrade to Log4j 2 as it addresses numerous other issues from the previous versions. |
| By design, the JDBCAppender in Log4j 1.2.x accepts an SQL statement as a configuration parameter where the values to be inserted are converters from PatternLayout. The message converter, %m, is likely to always be included. This allows attackers to manipulate the SQL by entering crafted strings into input fields or headers of an application that are logged allowing unintended SQL queries to be executed. Note this issue only affects Log4j 1.x when specifically configured to use the JDBCAppender, which is not the default. Beginning in version 2.0-beta8, the JDBCAppender was re-introduced with proper support for parameterized SQL queries and further customization over the columns written to in logs. Apache Log4j 1.2 reached end of life in August 2015. Users should upgrade to Log4j 2 as it addresses numerous other issues from the previous versions. |
