CVE-2025-14778
mediumpriority · track · 0EPSS 0.003 · 24 %ileDEEUUSEPSS · scored 2026-10-22
A flaw was found in Keycloak. A significant Broken Access Control vulnerability exists in the UserManagedPermissionService (UMA Protection API). When updating or deleting a UMA policy associated with multiple resources, the authorization check only verifies the caller's ownership against the first resource in the policy's list. This allows a user (Owner A) who owns one resource (RA) to update a shared policy and modify authorization rules for other resources (e.g., RB) in that same policy, even if those other resources are owned by a different user (Owner B). This constitutes a horizontal privilege escalation.
cvss
Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.
base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode
ssvc
A stakeholder decision — act, attend, or track — from exploitation and impact.
weaknesses
The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.
affected products (14)
Products and version ranges known to be affected.
advisories (3)
Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.
- WID-SEC-W-2026-0347Red Hat Build of Keycloak: Mehrere SchwachstellenDeutsch2026-02-09csaf · cert_bundDE
Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Red Hat Build of Keycloak ausnutzen, um die Authentifizierung zu umgehen, erweiterte Berechtigungen zu erlangen, vertrauliche Informationen offenzulegen, einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand zu verursachen, beliebigen Code auszuführen oder Daten zu manipulieren.
- WID-SEC-W-2026-0356Keycloak: Mehrere SchwachstellenDeutsch2026-02-09csaf · cert_bundDE
Ein entfernter, authentisierter Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Keycloak ausnutzen, um seine Privilegien zu erhöhen und Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen.
- GHSA-fm6w-rrp3-2x4wKeycloak Affected by Broken Access Control Vulnerability in the UserManagedPermissionService2026-02-09ghsa · osvUS
A flaw was found in Keycloak. A significant Broken Access Control vulnerability exists in the UserManagedPermissionService (UMA Protection API). When updating or deleting a UMA policy associated with multiple resources, the authorization check only verifies the caller's ownership against the first resource in the policy's list. This allows a user (Owner A) who owns one resource (RA) to update a shared policy and modify authorization rules for other resources (e.g., RB) in that same policy, even if those other resources are owned by a different user (Owner B). This constitutes a horizontal privilege escalation.
also known as (3)
Other names and identifiers for this entity.
sources
Which sources assert this record, and when.
references (17)
External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:2364cnnvd
- https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14778cnnvd
- https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2025-14778cnnvd
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2422600cnnvd
- https://vigilance.fr/vulnerability/Keycloak-four-vulnerabilities-dated-12-02-2026-49655cnnvd
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:2363enisa_euvd
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:2364enisa_euvd
- https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:2365enisa_euvd
Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.
Free scan