| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A vulnerability was discovered in Keycloak's administrative interface that allows certain administrators to see information about groups they shouldn't have access to. When the new Fine-Grained Admin Permissions (FGAP v2) are turned on, an administrator who is allowed to see a specific "role" can also see a list of all groups assigned to that role. The system fails to check if the administrator has permission to see those specific groups. This could allow a restricted administrator to discover "hidden" groups and see their details, such as internal names and custom settings, which might contain sensitive deployment information. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| 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 the Undertow HTTP server core, which is used in WildFly, JBoss EAP, and other Java applications. The Undertow library fails to properly validate the Host header in incoming HTTP requests.As a result, requests containing malformed or malicious Host headers are processed without rejection, enabling attackers to poison caches, perform internal network scans, or hijack user sessions. |
| A flaw was found in Undertow where malformed client requests can trigger server-side stream resets without triggering abuse counters. This issue, referred to as the "MadeYouReset" attack, allows malicious clients to induce excessive server workload by repeatedly causing server-side stream aborts. While not a protocol bug, this highlights a common implementation weakness that can be exploited to cause a denial of service (DoS). |
| A flaw was found in npm-serialize-javascript. The vulnerability occurs because the serialize-javascript module does not properly sanitize certain inputs, such as regex or other JavaScript object types, allowing an attacker to inject malicious code. This code could be executed when deserialized by a web browser, causing Cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks. This issue is critical in environments where serialized data is sent to web clients, potentially compromising the security of the website or web application using this package. |
| 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. |
| A flaw was found in the HAL Console in the Wildfly component, which does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output used as a web page that is served to other users. The attacker must be authenticated as a user that belongs to management groups “SuperUser”, “Admin”, or “Maintainer”. |
| 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 |
| Apache Log4j2 versions 2.0-alpha1 through 2.16.0 (excluding 2.12.3 and 2.3.1) did not protect from uncontrolled recursion from self-referential lookups. This allows an attacker with control over Thread Context Map data to cause a denial of service when a crafted string is interpreted. This issue was fixed in Log4j 2.17.0, 2.12.3, and 2.3.1. |
| 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. |
