VulnerabilityPublished 6 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-96460: Red Hat Build of Keycloak · Incorrect Implementation of Authentication Algorithm

Affects Red Hat Build of KeycloakSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium.

Data as of 6 Nov 2026, 06:20 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (redhat)	CVSS 3.1	5.4

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 6 Nov 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 5 Nov 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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 Hat Build of Keycloakkeycloak-services	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Build of Keycloakrhbk/keycloak-rhel9	Affected–	Fixed in–
Red Hat Single Sign-On 7keycloak-services	Affected–	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Currently, no mitigation or fix is available that meets Red Hat's criteria for ease of use, deployment, applicability, or stability. Users should monitor Red Hat's advisory for updates. Since exploitation requires valid tokens and credentials, restricting access to these credentials and monitoring for unusual token exchange activity may help reduce risk until a fix is released.

Description

CVE-2026-96460 is a vulnerability in the token exchange mechanism of Red Hat Build of Keycloak. The flaw allows an authenticated requester to repeatedly exchange tokens and obtain new tokens with fresh lifetimes based on the requester client's configuration, rather than limiting the new token's lifetime to the original token's expiration. This enables indefinite extension of access for service accounts, even if the original client has been disabled by an administrator.

Impact

An attacker who already possesses a valid exchanged service-account token and authorized client credentials can maintain persistent access indefinitely by repeatedly exchanging tokens. This bypasses administrative actions such as disabling the original client, potentially allowing unauthorized prolonged access to protected resources. The confidentiality and integrity impacts are low, with no availability impact reported.

Summary

This vulnerability arises from an incorrect implementation of the Standard Token Exchange V2 in Red Hat Build of Keycloak. The system issues new tokens with lifetimes based on the requester client's configuration instead of bounding them by the original token's expiration. Consequently, an authenticated requester with valid exchanged service-account tokens and authorized client credentials can indefinitely renew access tokens, bypassing administrative revocation. The Red Hat Product Security team assessed the severity as moderate, noting that exploitation requires existing valid tokens and credentials. No mitigation or fix currently meets Red Hat's criteria for ease of use, deployment, or stability. The vulnerability is tracked under CWE-303 (Incorrect Implementation of Authentication Algorithm).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 6 Nov 2026, 06:20 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats