CVE-2023-6787
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 flaw was found in Keycloak that occurs from an error in the re-authentication mechanism within org.keycloak.authentication. This flaw allows hijacking an active Keycloak session by triggering a new authentication process with the query parameter "prompt=login," prompting the user to re-enter their credentials. If the user cancels this re-authentication by selecting "Restart login," an account takeover may occur, as the new session, with a different SUB, will possess the same SID as the previous session.
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 has a session fixation vulnerability in its re-authentication mechanism. When 'prompt=login' triggers a new authentication flow and the user selects 'Restart login' to cancel, a new session is created with a different SUB (subject identifier) but retains the same SID (session ID) from the original session, allowing session hijacking.
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 dataall versions< 22.0.10>= 23.0.0, < 24.0.3CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 installed Keycloak versionQuery the Keycloak server info endpoint at /realms/{realm}/serverinfo or check the startup logs for the version numberAffected if The installed version is any version of Redhat Build Of Keycloak, or is less than 22.0.10, or is between 23.0.0 and 24.0.3 for Redhat Keycloak
-
Verify authentication flow configurationNavigate to the Keycloak Admin Console, go to Authentication > Flows, and review any custom flows that use the 'prompt=login' optionAffected if The 'prompt=login' parameter is configured in any authentication flow, which triggers the vulnerable re-authentication mechanism
-
Check for 'Restart login' option in flowsIn Authentication > Flows, examine forms and scripts for 'Restart login' or similar cancellation options that interact with prompt=loginAffected if Authentication flows contain a 'Restart login' button or equivalent that cancels authentication while prompt=login is active, creating the session mismatch condition
-
Inspect active session behaviorUse the Admin Console Users section or user session endpoints to compare SUB (subject identifier) against SID (session ID) for sessions created after authentication restartAffected if A session shows a new SUB with the same SID as a previous session, indicating the session fixation vulnerability is present
The environment is affected if Keycloak version is in the vulnerable range AND prompt=login authentication flows with restart capability are in use, as this allows the same SID to persist across different SUB values enabling session hijacking.
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.
dbcve · scoped22.0.1024.0.3
Ensure that re-authentication flows properly invalidate the existing session and generate a new SID when the authentication is restarted or canceled, rather than preserving the old SID with a new SUB.
Keycloak 22.0.10 or 24.0.3 (depending on your current version)
- 1. Identify your current Keycloak version by checking the server logs or the About section in the admin console
- 2. If running Keycloak < 22.0.10, upgrade to version 22.0.10 or later
- 3. If running Keycloak >= 23.0.0 and < 24.0.3, upgrade to version 24.0.3 or later
- 4. If running a build of Keycloak (all versions), upgrade to one of the fixed releases (22.0.10 or 24.0.3) based on your compatibility needs
- 5. After upgrading, verify the re-authentication behavior with prompt=login works correctly
- 6. Review session management in the admin console to ensure no orphaned sessions exist
- 7. Test the 'Restart login' flow to confirm the session fix is properly applied
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 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 $4,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-6787 — 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-2023-6787 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