KeycloakApplication · Redhat
CVE-2019-10201
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIt was found that Keycloak's SAML broker, versions up to 6.0.1, did not verify missing message signatures. If an attacker modifies the SAML Response and removes the <Signature> sections, the message is still accepted, and the message can be modified. An attacker could use this flaw to impersonate other users and gain access to sensitive information.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceKeycloak's SAML broker versions up to 6.0.1 fails to validate that SAML responses contain signatures. An attacker can remove the <Signature> elements from a SAML response and the broker will still process the modified message, allowing impersonation of users and access to sensitive data.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
KeycloakApplication
<= 6.0.1
Single Sign OnApplication
= 7.0= 7.3.3CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the installed Keycloak or RH SSO versionCheck the product version by reviewing the installation directory, release notes, or running 'kc.sh --version' (Keycloak) or checking the RPM package with 'rpm -q jboss-keycloak' or 'rpm -q rh-sso-7'Affected if The installed version is Keycloak <= 6.0.1, or Red Hat Single Sign-On version 7.0 or 7.3.3
-
Determine if the SAML broker identity provider feature is in useReview the Keycloak/RH SSO realm configuration for any SAML identity provider registrations. Check the 'Identity Providers' section in the admin console or examine the 'identity-provider' entries in the realm JSON configuration fileAffected if SAML-based identity providers are configured in the broker
-
Verify if SAML message signature validation is enforcedCheck the identity provider configuration in Keycloak/RH SSO. Look for the 'Validate Signature' option or 'signatureValidationKey' setting in the SAML broker configuration. Inspect the realm configuration XML/JSON for 'trustEmail' or similar signature validation flagsAffected if SAML signature validation is disabled or not explicitly configured for the identity provider, allowing unsigned SAML responses to be accepted
You are affected if your Keycloak version is 6.0.1 or earlier, or your RH SSO version is 7.0 or 7.3.3, AND you have SAML identity providers configured without enforced signature validation.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade Keycloak to version 6.0.1 or later which includes signature verification, or apply the vendor-supplied patch to enforce SAML message signature validation.
Fix this in Keycloak
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-10201 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2019-10201 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data