Export limit exceeded: 420421 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Export limit exceeded: 420421 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (420421 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-97367 | 1 Redhat | 2 Build Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On | 2026-11-06 | 6.4 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Keycloak Account REST API where it incorrectly handles session identification. A malicious client owner can manipulate their own security tokens to point to a different user's active session. This allows the attacker to access and modify the victim's account information, potentially leading to a full account takeover by changing the recovery email and resetting the password. | ||||
| CVE-2026-97311 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 4.3 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Admin REST API of Keycloak, an identity and access management solution. The endpoints used to retrieve groups associated with a specific role do not properly check for individual group visibility permissions. This allows a delegated administrator with basic search privileges to view detailed information about all groups assigned to a role, bypassing intended security restrictions that should limit their view to specific groups. | ||||
| CVE-2026-97177 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.6 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the user update mechanism of the Keycloak Admin REST API. When Fine-Grained Admin Permissions are enabled, the system fails to check for specific password reset authorizations during a general user profile update. This allows a delegated administrator, who should be restricted from resetting passwords, to change a user's credentials and take over their account. | ||||
| CVE-2026-96547 | 1 Redhat | 2 Build Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On | 2026-11-06 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Dynamic Client Registration component of Keycloak, an open-source identity and access management solution. The issue occurs because the system does not properly restrict which claim names can be used when setting up new clients. An attacker with valid registration credentials could create a client that incorrectly maps standard user profile information to sensitive security roles, potentially allowing them to gain unauthorized privileges on external applications that trust Keycloak tokens. | ||||
| CVE-2026-96460 | 1 Redhat | 2 Build Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On | 2026-11-06 | 5.4 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the token exchange mechanism of Keycloak. When using Standard Token Exchange V2, the system issues new tokens with a fresh lifetime based on the requester clients configuration instead of limiting it to the original tokens expiration. This issue allows an authenticated requester to indefinitely extend access for service accounts by repeatedly exchanging tokens, even if the original client has been disabled by an administrator. | ||||
| CVE-2026-96448 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.6 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Fine-Grained Admin Permissions (FGAP v2) feature of Keycloak, an identity and access management solution. The issue occurs when the system checks if a delegated administrator has permission to assign a specific role to a user. Because the check does not look inside composite roles to see what other permissions they contain, an administrator with limited rights can assign a role that secretly includes full administrative control. This allows the attacker to gain complete management access over the entire realm. | ||||
| CVE-2026-96447 | 1 Redhat | 2 Build Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On | 2026-11-06 | 4.2 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the TokenManager component of Keycloak, an open-source identity and access management solution. The issue occurs during the validation of stateless access tokens when the original user ID no longer exists. Keycloak incorrectly falls back to using the username to identify the user without verifying if the identity matches the original token subject. This could allow an attacker with an old token to gain access to a newly created service account if it shares the same client ID as a previously deleted one. | ||||
| CVE-2026-96446 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 4.2 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Pushed Authorization Request PAR implementation of Keycloak. The issue occurs when the silent authentication path prompt=none is used, which allows the authorization process to skip certain steps if a user is already logged in. Due to this bypass, the security rule that ensures a pushed request URI is used only once is not enforced. An attacker could potentially reuse a request URI to obtain multiple authorization codes for a user who is already signed in, violating security standards like FAPI-2. | ||||
| CVE-2026-96445 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.8 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Conditional OTP authenticator of Keycloak, an identity and access management solution. The issue occurs when the system evaluates specific HTTP headers to determine if a one-time password (OTP) should be skipped, but fails to verify if those headers came from a trusted source. This could allow an attacker who already has a user's password to bypass the second-factor authentication by providing a specially crafted header in their request. | ||||
| CVE-2026-95503 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.8 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Kerberos federation provider of Keycloak, an open-source identity and access management solution. When Kerberos password authentication is used without SPNEGO, the system fails to verify the identity of the Key Distribution Center (KDC) by requesting a server ticket. This allows an attacker on the same network to spoof the KDC and bypass the authentication process, potentially gaining unauthorized access to user accounts. | ||||
| CVE-2026-94217 | 1 Redhat | 2 Build Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On | 2026-11-06 | 3.5 Low |
| A flaw was found in the User-Managed Access (UMA) implementation of Keycloak. The issue occurs in the authorization token endpoint when processing permission tickets. If two different users own resources with the same name, the system incorrectly merges the permissions from both resources when one user requests an authorization token. This allows an attacker to gain access scopes on a victim's resource that were never intended to be shared. | ||||
| CVE-2026-94215 | 1 Redhat | 2 Build Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On | 2026-11-06 | 5.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Admin REST API of Keycloak, an open-source identity and access management solution. The issue occurs because the API uses a per-request in-memory cache to resolve clients by their unique identifier without verifying if the client belongs to the realm specified in the request path. This allows an administrator with limited privileges to read or modify sensitive client configurations in the master realm by accessing them through a realm they control. Successful exploitation could lead to the exposure of client credentials or the redirection of administrative login attempts to malicious sites. | ||||
| CVE-2026-94213 | 1 Redhat | 2 Build Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On | 2026-11-06 | 4.9 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Authorization Services component of Keycloak, an open-source identity and access management solution. The issue occurs in the policy evaluation endpoint, which is used by administrators to test how access policies apply to specific users. Due to missing authorization checks, a delegated administrator with limited viewing privileges can access the full profile and role information of any user in the realm, even if they are not permitted to view user details. This could lead to the exposure of sensitive information such as email addresses and assigned security roles. | ||||
| CVE-2026-94001 | 1 Redhat | 2 Build Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On | 2026-11-06 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Admin REST API of Keycloak, an open-source identity and access management solution. The endpoint used for deleting user credentials does not correctly check for fine-grained reset-password permissions. This allows a delegated administrator, who should be restricted from resetting passwords, to delete a user's password credentials, resulting in the user being unable to log in. | ||||
| CVE-2026-94000 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.6 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the Admin REST API of Keycloak, an open-source identity and access management solution. The issue occurs in the group-membership endpoints where the system fails to check if a group grants administrative privileges before allowing a user to be added. This allows a delegated administrator with limited permissions to add themselves to a high-privilege group, potentially gaining full control over the entire realm. | ||||
| CVE-2026-93999 | 1 Redhat | 4 Build Keycloak, Build Of Keycloak, Red Hat Single Sign On and 1 more | 2026-11-06 | 4.2 Medium |
| A flaw was found in the OIDC protocol implementation of Keycloak, an open-source identity and access management solution. The issue occurs during the token refresh process when the server restores requested audiences from stored client IDs. Keycloak fails to verify if the target audience client is still enabled before issuing a new access token. This allows an application with an existing refresh token to continue obtaining valid access tokens for a disabled client, potentially bypassing administrative access controls for resource servers that rely on offline JWT validation. | ||||
| CVE-2026-93579 | 2 Io.netty, Redhat | 23 Netty-codec-http2, Amq Broker, Apicurio Registry and 20 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in Netty's HTTP/2 stack. This vulnerability allows a remote attacker to inject prohibited characters, such as NUL, Line Feed, and Carriage Return, into HTTP/2 header field values due to insufficient validation. When these values cross an HTTP/2 to HTTP/1.1 translation boundary, they can be exploited for request smuggling, header injection, or response splitting. This could lead to unauthorized access, data manipulation, or other security bypasses. | ||||
| CVE-2026-93574 | 2 Io.netty, Redhat | 22 Netty-codec-http, Amq Broker, Amq Clients and 19 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in Netty's `netty-codec-http` component. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a specially crafted HTTP/1.1 chunk-size token that includes post-digit whitespace. This incorrect parsing of the chunk size can lead to HTTP request smuggling. This allows an attacker to bypass security controls or access unauthorized resources in proxy/backend deployments. | ||||
| CVE-2026-93573 | 2 Io.netty, Redhat | 22 Netty-codec-http, Amq Broker, Amq Clients and 19 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in Netty's HTTP/1.1 decoder. This vulnerability allows a remote attacker to bypass `Transfer-Encoding` header validation by splitting the `Transfer-Encoding` field across multiple headers, with the last field containing a non-final transfer coding like `gzip` or `deflate`. This bypass can lead to HTTP request smuggling, enabling attackers to bypass security controls, desynchronize request processing, or cause requests to be processed in an unintended context. | ||||
| CVE-2026-93566 | 2 Red Hat, Redhat | 22 Red Hat Amq Broker 7, Amq Broker, Amq Clients and 19 more | 2026-11-06 | 6.5 Medium |
| A flaw was found in Netty. A remote attacker could exploit this by sending a specially crafted HTTP request that includes control characters within the chunk-size line. This bypasses the intended strict validation, allowing the attacker to inject arbitrary HTTP requests. This vulnerability can lead to HTTP request smuggling, potentially resulting in information disclosure or other unauthorized actions. | ||||