Red Hat Keycloak Secure Client URIs Client Policy Executor redirect
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 4.3 | $5k-$25k | 1.34+ |
Summary
A vulnerability has been found in Red Hat Keycloak and classified as problematic. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the component Secure Client URIs Client Policy Executor. This manipulation causes redirect. This vulnerability is registered as CVE-2026-18211. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. No exploit is available.
Details
A vulnerability was found in Red Hat Keycloak (the affected version unknown). It has been declared as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown part of the component Secure Client URIs Client Policy Executor. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a redirect vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-601. A web application accepts a user-controlled input that specifies a link to an external site, and uses that link in a Redirect. This simplifies phishing attacks. As an impact it is known to affect integrity. The summary by CVE is:
A flaw was found in the secure-client-uris client policy executor within Keycloak core services. This component is responsible for enforcing security requirements on client configurations, such as requiring encrypted connections for redirect URIs. Due to an improper check that only looks at the start of a web address rather than properly verifying the host, an attacker can bypass these security restrictions by using a specially crafted domain name. This could allow an attacker to intercept sensitive authentication codes over unencrypted connections.
The advisory is shared at access.redhat.com. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2026-18211 since 07/29/2026. The exploitation appears to be easy. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploitation doesn't need any form of authentication. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $5k-$25k at the moment (estimation calculated on 07/31/2026). MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1204.001 for this issue.
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Vendor
Name
License
Website
- Vendor: https://www.redhat.com/
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔒VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 4.3VulDB Meta Temp Score: 4.3
VulDB Base Score: 4.3
VulDB Temp Score: 4.3
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔒
VulDB Temp Score: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: RedirectCWE: CWE-601
CAPEC: 🔒
ATT&CK: 🔒
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔒
Status: Not defined
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔒
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔒
Timeline
07/29/2026 CVE reserved07/31/2026 Advisory disclosed
07/31/2026 VulDB entry created
07/31/2026 VulDB entry last update
Sources
Vendor: redhat.comAdvisory: access.redhat.com
Status: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2026-18211 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2026-18211
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-385045
Entry
Created: 07/31/2026 09:37Changes: 07/31/2026 09:37 (51)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.