KeycloakApplication · Redhat
CVE-2019-14909
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was found in Keycloak 7.x where the user federation LDAP bind type is none (LDAP anonymous bind), any password, invalid or valid will be accepted.
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 confidenceIn Keycloak 7.x, when the user federation LDAP bind type is configured as 'none' (enabling LDAP anonymous bind), the authentication mechanism accepts any password provided - whether valid, invalid, or empty - effectively bypassing password verification entirely.
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
= 7.0.0= 7.0.1CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
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.
-
Verify Keycloak versionCheck the installed Keycloak version by reviewing the server startup logs, the keycloak-server.json configuration file, or the product manifest. Compare against the affected versions 7.0.0 and 7.0.1.Affected if The installed version is 7.0.0 or 7.0.1
-
Identify LDAP user federation providersAccess the Keycloak Admin Console and navigate to User Federation. Review the list of configured LDAP user federation providers. Alternatively, check the keycloak-server.json or standalone.xml configuration files for user-federation entries with 'ldap' as the provider.Affected if At least one LDAP user federation provider is configured
-
Inspect LDAP bind type configurationIn the Keycloak Admin Console under User Federation, select each LDAP provider and review the Bind Type setting in the connection settings. Alternatively, check the corresponding configuration in standalone.xml for the bind-type attribute.Affected if The bind type is set to 'none' for any LDAP user federation provider
-
Confirm password verification bypass conditionReview the overall authentication flow: if LDAP bind type is 'none', the LDAP authentication step will succeed regardless of the password submitted, even for invalid or empty passwords.Affected if LDAP bind type is configured as 'none' and the realm uses this LDAP federation for authentication
A system is affected if running Keycloak 7.0.0 or 7.0.1 with any LDAP user federation provider where the bind type is set to 'none'.
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 dataReconfigure the LDAP user federation bind type to use proper authentication (e.g., 'simple' bind with valid credentials) instead of 'none' to enforce actual password validation against the LDAP directory.
Fix this in Keycloak
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-14909 — 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-2019-14909 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