VulnerabilityPublished 21 Jan 2026Updated 2 Apr 2026

CVE-2025-14083: Red Hat build of Keycloak 26.4 · Improper Access Control

Affects Red Hat build of Keycloak 26.4Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.7 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

2.7Low

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 28% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component that could affect component-wide settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 21 Jan 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red HatRed Hat build of Keycloak 26.4	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat build of Keycloak 26.4	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red HatRed Hat build of Keycloak 26.4.11	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately review and tighten access controls on the Keycloak Admin REST API to ensure only fully authorized administrators have access. Employ the principle of least privilege rigorously, limiting high-level privileges to essential personnel only. Monitor administrative API access logs for unusual or unauthorized activity to detect potential exploitation attempts early. Stay informed on Red Hat and Keycloak security advisories for official patches or updates addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly once available. Consider implementing network segmentation to isolate Keycloak administrative interfaces from general user access. Additionally, conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focused on API endpoints to identify and remediate access control weaknesses. Employ multi-factor authentication for administrative accounts to reduce the risk of credential compromise leading to exploitation.

Description

A flaw was found in the Keycloak Admin REST API. This vulnerability allows the exposure of backend schema and rules, potentially leading to targeted attacks or privilege escalation via improper access control.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-14083 is the potential unauthorized disclosure of backend schema and rules within the Keycloak Admin REST API. This exposure can aid attackers in understanding the internal configuration and security policies, enabling more precise and effective privilege escalation or targeted attacks. Although exploitation requires high privileges, if an attacker gains such access, they could leverage this vulnerability to deepen their control or move laterally within the environment. The confidentiality of sensitive configuration data is at risk, but there is no direct impact on data integrity or system availability. For organizations relying on Keycloak for identity management, this could undermine trust in authentication mechanisms and potentially expose sensitive user or system data indirectly. The absence of known exploits and the low CVSS score suggest a limited immediate threat, but the vulnerability could be significant in complex environments with multiple privilege levels and sensitive data.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Apr 2026, 03:20 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats