BlackTreeIndependent security intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-18218High confidence

Keycloak-services: keycloak-services: client not-before revocation ignored when realm not-before is older but nonzero

Red Hat · Red Hat Build of Keycloak

4.2MediumCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Scheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Mitigation available
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

1 current
CVE-2026-18218 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitykeycloak-services: keycloak-services: Client not-before revocation ignored when realm not-before is older but nonzero
3 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • keycloak-services as a component of Red Hat Build of Keycloak
  • rhbk-keycloak-rhel9/rhbk-keycloak-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Build of Keycloak
  • rhbk-openshift-rhel9/rhbk-openshift-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Build of Keycloak
Summary
A flaw was found in the TokenManager component of the Keycloak identity management service. When an administrator attempts to revoke tokens for a specific application (client) using a "not-before" policy, the revocation may be silently ignored if the overall security realm already has an older, non-zero revocation policy in place. This issue can allow previously issued tokens to remain valid for refreshing sessions and accessing user information even after an administrator has attempted to invalidate them. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Remediation
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base, or stability.
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Select the national-authority views to include. The exact source language is shown on each matched advisory. Your choice is remembered on this device and encoded in the shareable URL.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-51478

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

A flaw was found in the TokenManager component of the Keycloak identity management service. When an administrator attempts to revoke tokens for a specific application (client) using a "not-before" policy, the revocation may be silently ignored if the overall security realm already has an older, non-zero revocation policy in place. This issue can allow previously issued tokens to remain valid for refreshing sessions and accessing user information even after an administrator has attempted to invalidate them. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
4.2 · CVSS 3.1
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionScheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Mitigation available
01

What, why and how

A flaw was found in the TokenManager component of the Keycloak identity management service. When an administrator attempts to revoke tokens for a specific application (client) using a "not-before" policy, the revocation may be silently ignored if the overall security realm already has an older, non-zero revocation policy in place. This issue can allow previously issued tokens to remain valid for refreshing sessions and accessing user information even after an administrator has attempted to invalidate them. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

What

A flaw was found in the TokenManager component of the Keycloak identity management service. When an administrator attempts to revoke tokens for a specific application (client) using a "not-before" policy, the revocation may be silently ignored if the overall security realm already has an older, non-zero revocation policy in place. This issue can allow previously issued tokens to remain valid for refreshing sessions and accessing user information even after an administrator has attempted to invalidate them. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Why

The application reaches a protected operation without first confirming that the requester is authorised.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

A flaw was found in the TokenManager component of the Keycloak identity management service. When an administrator attempts to revoke tokens for a specific application (client) using a "not-before" policy, the revocation may be silently ignored if the overall security realm already has an older, non-zero revocation policy in place. This issue can allow previously issued tokens to remain valid for refreshing sessions and accessing user information even after an administrator has attempted to invalidate them. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Why

The application reaches a protected operation without first confirming that the requester is authorised.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Missing Authorization → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
Low: a basic authenticated account is required
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-862 ↗

CWE-862: Missing Authorization. The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CLowConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.ILowIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
Stolen credentials, tokens and legitimate administration functions may provide continued access without deploying a large custom toolset.
NetworkCWE-862
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-51478Official EUVD mapping

A flaw was found in the TokenManager component of the Keycloak identity management service. When an administrator attempts to revoke tokens for a specific application (client) using a "not-before" policy, the revocation may be silently ignored if the overall security realm already has an older, non-zero revocation policy in place. This issue can allow previously issued tokens to remain valid for refreshing sessions and accessing user information even after an administrator has attempted to invalidate them. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Official EUVD record
BSI · German · WID-SEC-W-2026-2614Keycloak: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Keycloak ausnutzen, um seine Privilegien zu erhöhen, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, Daten zu manipulieren und sensible Informationen offenzulegen.

Official advisory
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Mitigation available
Affected
keycloak-services as a component of Red Hat Build of Keycloak; rhbk-keycloak-rhel9/rhbk-keycloak-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Build of Keycloak; rhbk-openshift-rhel9/rhbk-openshift-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Build of Keycloak
Fixed
No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
Action
No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Workaround
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base, or stability.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 31 Jul 2026 · Last source change 31 Aug 2026, 15:23 UTC · CWE-862 · Missing Authorization

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-51478
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates →

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-51478↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Vendor advisory↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-18218 · cve.blacktree.nl