dbcve.org
Build Of KeycloakApplication · Redhat

CVE-2026-9793

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-28
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
A flaw was found in Keycloak. When a JSON Web Encryption (JWE) encrypted request object is submitted, Keycloak may incorrectly process unsigned claims if the decrypted content is raw JSON, bypassing the configured signature policy. This allows a remote attacker to submit unauthorized claims, leading to a compromise of data integrity within the OpenID Connect (OIDC) authorization flow. While a redirect URI allowlist acts as a compensating control, this vulnerability violates OIDC Core and Financial-grade API (FAPI) signing requirements.

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 confidence

Keycloak incorrectly processes unsigned claims when decrypting JWE-encrypted request objects if the decrypted content is raw JSON, bypassing the configured signature verification policy. This allows a remote attacker to inject unauthorized claims into the OIDC authorization flow, compromising data integrity despite the presence of a redirect URI allowlist as a compensating control.

MitigationEnsure Keycloak is updated to a version that properly validates signatures on all decrypted JWE content, and verify that redirect URI allowlists are strictly configured as an additional defense layer.

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
Build Of KeycloakApplication
Affected:all versions

CVSS 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
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify Keycloak version
    Check the running Keycloak version via the admin console or by querying the /health/ready endpoint, or check the container/部署 metadata
    Affected if The version is any version of Red Hat Build of Keycloak (all versions are affected)
  2. Verify OIDC request object usage
    Review the OIDC client configuration to determine if request objects (request_uri or request parameter) are enabled in the authentication flow
    Affected if Request objects are enabled and used in the OIDC authorization flow
  3. Check JWE encryption configuration for request objects
    Inspect the Keycloak realm or client settings for any configured JWE (JSON Web Encryption) for request objects, typically found under the OpenID Connect authentication flow settings
    Affected if JWE encryption is configured for decrypting incoming request objects
  4. Confirm signature validation enforcement
    Examine the client or realm settings for 'request_object_signature_algorithm' or similar signature verification configuration for request objects
    Affected if The configuration allows unsigned or unverified claims from decrypted JWE content, or if signature verification can be bypassed when content is raw JSON

A user is affected if they run any version of Red Hat Build of Keycloak with OIDC request objects enabled and JWE encryption configured, where signature verification can be bypassed for raw JSON content in decrypted request objects.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Ensure Keycloak is updated to a version that properly validates signatures on all decrypted JWE content, and verify that redirect URI allowlists are strictly configured as an additional defense layer.

Fix this in Build Of Keycloak Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-9793 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-9793 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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