VulnerabilityPublished 20 Jun 2025Updated 21 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-5416: Red Hat Build of Keycloak · Exposure of Sensitive System Information to an Unauthorized Control Sphere

Affects Red Hat Build of KeycloakSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.7 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 13:47 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

2.7Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 19% 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 20 Jun 2025
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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-5416, organizations should implement strict access controls on the /admin/serverinfo endpoint, ensuring that only highly trusted administrators with a genuine need can access this information. Employ role-based access control (RBAC) policies to minimize the number of users with permissions to access administrative endpoints. Monitor and audit access logs for unusual or unauthorized access attempts to the /admin/serverinfo endpoint. Consider network segmentation or firewall rules to restrict access to Keycloak administrative interfaces to trusted networks or VPNs. Stay alert for official patches or updates from Red Hat and apply them promptly once available. Additionally, review Keycloak configuration to disable or limit exposure of sensitive environment information where possible. Employ multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of compromised credentials being used to exploit this vulnerability. Finally, conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focused on identity management systems to detect and remediate similar issues proactively.

Description

A vulnerability has been identified in Keycloak that could lead to unauthorized information disclosure. While it requires an already authenticated user, the /admin/serverinfo endpoint can inadvertently provide sensitive environment information.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-5416 is unauthorized disclosure of sensitive system information to authenticated users who should not have access to such details. While the vulnerability does not allow direct compromise of system integrity or availability, the leaked information could facilitate more targeted and effective attacks by revealing system configurations, environment variables, or other metadata. For organizations, this could mean an increased risk of privilege escalation, lateral movement, or exploitation of other vulnerabilities once attackers gain initial access. Since Keycloak is often deployed in critical identity and access management roles, any information leakage could indirectly affect the security posture of connected applications and services. However, the requirement for authenticated access limits the scope of potential attackers to insiders or compromised accounts. The absence of known exploits and the low CVSS score suggest a limited immediate threat, but the exposure of environment information is a recognized risk factor in multi-stage attacks.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 Feb 2026, 15:18 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats