CVE-2026-4366
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 identified in Keycloak, an identity and access management solution, where it improperly follows HTTP redirects when processing certain client configuration requests. This behavior allows an attacker to trick the server into making unintended requests to internal or restricted resources. As a result, sensitive internal services such as cloud metadata endpoints could be accessed. This issue may lead to information disclosure and enable attackers to map internal network infrastructure.
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 · moderate confidenceKeycloak improperly follows HTTP redirects when processing client configuration requests, allowing attackers to trick the server into making requests to internal/restricted resources such as cloud metadata endpoints. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that enables information disclosure and internal network mapping.
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= 8.0.0all versions= 7.0CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/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 Keycloak or JBoss EAP installation and versionCheck for Keycloak installation directories (typically /opt/keycloak or /opt/jboss/keycloak) and locate the version file (VERSION or keycloak_VERSION). For JBoss EAP, check /opt/jbossas/standalone/configuration or use 'rpm -qa | grep keycloak' or 'rpm -qa | grep jboss' commands.Affected if The installed version matches any of the affected products: Redhat Build Of Keycloak (all versions), JBoss EAP 8.0.0, JBoss EAP Expansion Pack (all versions), or RH SSO 7.0.
-
Verify client registration service is enabledInspect the Keycloak/JBoss configuration file (standalone.xml or keycloak.conf) and search for 'clientRegistration' or 'client-registration' settings. Also check if the Client Registration Service endpoint at /auth/realms/{realm}/client-registration/ is accessible.Affected if Client registration service is enabled and publicly accessible without additional restrictions.
-
Check for redirect-following behavior in logsReview Keycloak server logs (typically in /opt/keycloak/standalone/log/ as server.log or boot.log) for patterns like 'Following redirect' or HTTP 3xx responses during client registration operations. Search for client-registration API calls.Affected if Logs show HTTP redirects being followed to non-standard or internal URLs during client configuration requests.
-
Inspect network accessibility to metadata endpointsFrom the Keycloak/JBoss server, verify if internal cloud metadata endpoints are reachable by testing connectivity to common metadata IPs such as 169.254.169.254 (AWS/Azure/GCP) or internal network ranges. Use curl or nmap from the server to probe these endpoints.Affected if The Keycloak server can successfully reach cloud metadata endpoints or internal network resources that should be restricted.
-
Audit client registration configurationsReview registered clients in the Keycloak admin console or database for any clients with redirect URIs pointing to internal endpoints. Check client templates or client scopes for custom redirect configurations.Affected if Client configurations contain redirect URIs pointing to internal IP ranges (127.0.0.1, 169.254.x.x, 10.x.x.x, 192.168.x.x) or cloud metadata services.
You are affected if you run any version of Redhat Build of Keycloak, JBoss EAP 8.0.0, JBoss EAP Expansion Pack, or RH SSO 7.0 with client registration service enabled and the server can reach internal network resources.
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 dataApply the vendor patch for Keycloak when available, and implement network segmentation to restrict server access to metadata endpoints and internal services.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-4366 — 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-2026-4366 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