CVE-2019-14910
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, when keycloak is configured with LDAP user federation and StartTLS is used instead of SSL/TLS from the LDAP server (ldaps), in this case user authentication succeeds even if invalid password has entered.
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 7.x contains an authentication bypass vulnerability in its LDAP user federation component. When StartTLS is used to upgrade an LDAP connection to TLS (instead of using LDAPS with SSL/TLS), the password validation is improperly handled, allowing authentication to succeed with any password, including invalid ones.
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= 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 Keycloak versionCheck the installed Keycloak version in the server metadata or management consoleAffected if Version is exactly 7.0.0 or 7.0.1
-
Locate LDAP user federation configurationFind the LDAP user federation provider configuration in the Keycloak realm settings or configuration filesAffected if An LDAP user federation provider is configured and active
-
Verify LDAP connection security mechanismInspect the LDAP connection settings to determine if StartTLS is enabled (rather than LDAPS on port 636)Affected if StartTLS is used for LDAP connection encryption
-
Confirm LDAP server port in useCheck the configured LDAP server port in the federation provider settingsAffected if Port 389 (standard LDAP with StartTLS) is configured instead of port 636 (LDAPS)
A user is affected if they run Keycloak version 7.0.0 or 7.0.1 with an LDAP user federation provider configured to use StartTLS on port 389.
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 to a patched Keycloak version, or ensure LDAPS (SSL/TLS on port 636) is used instead of StartTLS on port 389.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-14910 — 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-2019-14910 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