Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.41% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceRed Hat · Red Hat build of Keycloak 26.4
Official source articles: Red Hat RHSA-2026:19596 ↗ · Red Hat RHSA-2026:19597 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.
| Ecosystem and package | Affected range | First fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mavenorg.keycloak:keycloak-services | ECOSYSTEM: introduced 0; fixed 26.6.2 | 26.6.2 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 26 Aug 2026 |
| mavenorg.keycloak:keycloak-services | < 26.6.2 | 26.6.2 | GitHub advisory ↗github reviewed aggregator · 4 Jun 2026 |
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Patch availableA flaw was found in Keycloak. This access control vulnerability in Keycloak's OpenID Connect (OIDC) token introspection endpoint allows a confidential client to bypass audience restrictions. An attacker-controlled client with valid credentials can retrieve sensitive token claims intended for other resource servers, compromising the confidentiality of lightweight access tokens. This issue can be exploited remotely by any confidential client in the realm with valid credentials.
A flaw was found in Keycloak. This access control vulnerability in Keycloak's OpenID Connect (OIDC) token introspection endpoint allows a confidential client to bypass audience restrictions. An attacker-controlled client with valid credentials can retrieve sensitive token claims intended for other resource servers, compromising the confidentiality of lightweight access tokens. This issue can be exploited remotely by any confidential client in the realm with valid credentials.
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
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.
A flaw was found in Keycloak. This access control vulnerability in Keycloak's OpenID Connect (OIDC) token introspection endpoint allows a confidential client to bypass audience restrictions. An attacker-controlled client with valid credentials can retrieve sensitive token claims intended for other resource servers, compromising the confidentiality of lightweight access tokens. This issue can be exploited remotely by any confidential client in the realm with valid credentials.
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
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.
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
CWE-284: Improper Access Control. The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
Published 19 May 2026 · Last source change 20 May 2026, 16:08 UTC · CWE-284 · Improper Access Control
Missing structured fields: affected versions. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.