ctipilot.ch

Keycloak / Red Hat Build of Keycloak — SAML broker metadata import without key-usage attributes disables response signature validation, letting an unauthenticated attacker forge a SAML response and log in as any user whose external identifier is known; CVSS 7.4, fixed in 26.4.14 / 26.6.5 / 26.7.1

cve · CVE-2026-16443

Coverage timeline
1
first 2026-08-07 → last 2026-08-07
Peak priority
high
1 high
Sources cited
5
2 hosts
Sections touched
1
trending-vulnerabilities
Co-occurring entities
6
see Related entities below
ATT&CK techniques
6
pinned v19.1 · see below

Hunting pivots

Affected products
KeycloakRed Hat Build of Keycloak

ATT&CK techniques

6 techniques observed across 1 entry — derived from entry metadata and body evidence, never asserted without a published entry behind it · pinned to MITRE ATT&CK v19.1 · compare on the matrix · Navigator layer (JSON)

Initial Access TA0001

T1078.004Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts×1

Valid accounts in cloud environments may allow adversaries to perform actions to achieve Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion. Cloud accounts are those created and configured by an organization for use by users, remote support, services, or for administration of resources within a cloud service provider or SaaS application. Cloud Accounts can exist solely in the cloud; alternatively, they may be hybrid-joined between on-premises systems and the cloud through syncing or federation with other identity sources such as Windows Active Directory.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

T1190Exploit Public-Facing Application×1

Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network. The weakness in the system can be a software bug, a temporary glitch, or a misconfiguration.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

Persistence TA0003

T1078.004Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts×1

Valid accounts in cloud environments may allow adversaries to perform actions to achieve Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion. Cloud accounts are those created and configured by an organization for use by users, remote support, services, or for administration of resources within a cloud service provider or SaaS application. Cloud Accounts can exist solely in the cloud; alternatively, they may be hybrid-joined between on-premises systems and the cloud through syncing or federation with other identity sources such as Windows Active Directory.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

T1556Modify Authentication Process×1

Adversaries may modify authentication mechanisms and processes to access user credentials or enable otherwise unwarranted access to accounts. The authentication process is handled by mechanisms, such as the Local Security Authentication Server (LSASS) process and the Security Accounts Manager (SAM) on Windows, pluggable authentication modules (PAM) on Unix-based systems, and authorization plugins on MacOS systems, responsible for gathering, storing, and validating credentials. By modifying an authentication process, an adversary may be able to authenticate to a service or system without using Valid Accounts.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

Privilege Escalation TA0004

T1068Exploitation for Privilege Escalation×1

Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges. Exploitation of a software vulnerability occurs when an adversary takes advantage of a programming error in a program, service, or within the operating system software or kernel itself to execute adversary-controlled code. Security constructs such as permission levels will often hinder access to information and use of certain techniques, so adversaries will likely need to perform privilege escalation to include use of software exploitation to circumvent those restrictions.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

T1078.004Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts×1

Valid accounts in cloud environments may allow adversaries to perform actions to achieve Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion. Cloud accounts are those created and configured by an organization for use by users, remote support, services, or for administration of resources within a cloud service provider or SaaS application. Cloud Accounts can exist solely in the cloud; alternatively, they may be hybrid-joined between on-premises systems and the cloud through syncing or federation with other identity sources such as Windows Active Directory.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

Stealth TA0005

T1078.004Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts×1

Valid accounts in cloud environments may allow adversaries to perform actions to achieve Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion. Cloud accounts are those created and configured by an organization for use by users, remote support, services, or for administration of resources within a cloud service provider or SaaS application. Cloud Accounts can exist solely in the cloud; alternatively, they may be hybrid-joined between on-premises systems and the cloud through syncing or federation with other identity sources such as Windows Active Directory.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

Defense Impairment TA0112

T1556Modify Authentication Process×1

Adversaries may modify authentication mechanisms and processes to access user credentials or enable otherwise unwarranted access to accounts. The authentication process is handled by mechanisms, such as the Local Security Authentication Server (LSASS) process and the Security Accounts Manager (SAM) on Windows, pluggable authentication modules (PAM) on Unix-based systems, and authorization plugins on MacOS systems, responsible for gathering, storing, and validating credentials. By modifying an authentication process, an adversary may be able to authenticate to a service or system without using Valid Accounts.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

Credential Access TA0006

T1556Modify Authentication Process×1

Adversaries may modify authentication mechanisms and processes to access user credentials or enable otherwise unwarranted access to accounts. The authentication process is handled by mechanisms, such as the Local Security Authentication Server (LSASS) process and the Security Accounts Manager (SAM) on Windows, pluggable authentication modules (PAM) on Unix-based systems, and authorization plugins on MacOS systems, responsible for gathering, storing, and validating credentials. By modifying an authentication process, an adversary may be able to authenticate to a service or system without using Valid Accounts.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

T1606.002Forge Web Credentials: SAML Tokens×1

An adversary may forge SAML tokens with any permissions claims and lifetimes if they possess a valid SAML token-signing certificate. The default lifetime of a SAML token is one hour, but the validity period can be specified in the <code>NotOnOrAfter</code> value of the <code>conditions ...</code> element in a token. This value can be changed using the <code>AccessTokenLifetime</code> in a <code>LifetimeTokenPolicy</code>. Forged SAML tokens enable adversaries to authenticate across services that use SAML 2.0 as an SSO (single sign-on) mechanism.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

Impact TA0040

T1499.004Endpoint Denial of Service: Application or System Exploitation×1

Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities that can cause an application or system to crash and deny availability to users. Some systems may automatically restart critical applications and services when crashes occur, but they can likely be re-exploited to cause a persistent denial of service (DoS) condition.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/keycloak-saml-broker-signature-bypass-cve-2026-16443 · ATT&CK page ↗

Story timeline

  1. 2026-08-07CVE-2026-16443 — Keycloak: importing SAML metadata without key-usage attributes silently disables response signature validation, so an unauthenticated attacker forges a login as any known user
    trending-vulnerabilitiesKeycloak's identity broker stopped checking SAML signatures on a metadata-import edge case — one of seven CVEs fixed in 26.4.14 / 26.6.5 / 26.7.1

Where this entity is cited

  • trending-vulnerabilities1

Source distribution

  • access.redhat.com4 (80%)
  • cert.ssi.gouv.fr1 (20%)

Co-occurring entities

Derived — referenced by the same focused operational entries (weekly summaries and report roundups don't count); ×N counts the shared entries.

Entries about Keycloak / Red Hat Build of Keycloak — SAML broker metadata import without key-usage attributes disables response signature validation, letting an unauthenticated attacker forge a SAML response and log in as any user whose external identifier is known; CVSS 7.4, fixed in 26.4.14 / 26.6.5 / 26.7.1 (1)

2026-08-07 · view entry permalink →

CVE-2026-16443 — Keycloak: importing SAML metadata without key-usage attributes silently disables response signature validation, so an unauthenticated attacker forges a login as any known user

Keycloak's SAML identity-brokering path stopped enforcing the one guarantee that makes federated login trustworthy. In CVE-2026-16443, when Keycloak imports an upstream identity provider's SAML metadata that lacks specific usage attributes for its keys, it disables signature validation for SAML responses even though a signing certificate was supplied — and Red Hat's own record states the consequence plainly: "This issue allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge a SAML response and gain unauthorized access to a user account by knowing their external identifier" (Red Hat Product Security, 2026-08-05). The external identifier is not a secret — it is typically a username or email address as the upstream IdP renders it — so the practical precondition is knowing who you want to be. Red Hat rates the flaw Important at CVSS 7.4, with the score held down by attack complexity rather than by any authentication requirement (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N).

A sibling flaw in the same broker, CVE-2026-16442 (also CVSS 7.4), lets the IdP-initiated single-sign-on endpoint skip the check for whether a provider is restricted to account linking only, so an attacker controlling a linked upstream identity bypasses that restriction and reaches full access to the local account (Red Hat Product Security, 2026-08-05). The two Dynamic Client Registration flaws are the privilege-escalation half of the batch: CVE-2026-15572 (CVSS 8.8) exploits the "Allowed Protocol Mapper Types" policy failing to re-validate a mapper's type on client update when its configuration is unchanged, so an attacker registers a permitted mapper and then swaps it for a restricted one that hardcodes administrative roles (Red Hat Product Security, 2026-08-05); CVE-2026-16102 (CVSS 8.1) abuses the default DCR policy's mis-validated claim path for User Property mappers to write into sensitive internal claim locations and forge administrative roles into the attacker's own access token, which Red Hat says "allows the attacker to take over other clients, steal confidential secrets, and potentially gain full administrative control over the realm" (Red Hat Product Security, 2026-08-05). The remaining three are CVE-2026-15573 (CVSS 8.1), where PathMatcher compares request paths to authorization policies without normalising the URI, so a trailing slash or a matrix parameter selects a weaker policy; CVE-2026-16071 (CVSS 5.4), where a delegated administrator's LDAP entry-DN search escapes the configured users-DN boundary and imports directory entries from outside it; and CVE-2026-16100 (CVSS 6.5), where raw error text from failed account operations becomes an unbounded Prometheus metric label and exhausts memory.

CERT-FR carried the batch to European constituents on 2026-08-06, a day after disclosure, and records the affected range as Keycloak before 26.4.14, 26.6.x before 26.6.5, and 26.7.x before 26.7.1 (CERT-FR, 2026-08-06). No party reports exploitation or public exploit code. The reason this batch matters more than its scores suggest is placement: Keycloak is the identity broker in front of a large share of European public-sector federated-login and e-government portal estates, so a forged assertion is not one application's problem but every application behind that realm. Detection concepts, telemetry class first: in identity-provider audit records, a forged SAML response has no counterpart in the upstream IdP's own authentication log, so correlating broker-login successes against the upstream provider's sign-in events for the same principal and interval surfaces assertions nobody upstream issued; and because Dynamic Client Registration happens over the registration API rather than the admin console, mapper or claim-path changes on DCR-managed clients that carry no matching administrative session are the signal for the privilege-escalation pair. Triage: routine Keycloak upgrades and scheduled IdP metadata refreshes both touch these same code paths, so the discriminator is not the configuration change itself but its provenance — a broker-login success with no upstream authentication behind it, or a protocol-mapper type that changed on a client no administrator touched.

This issue allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge a SAML response and gain unauthorized access to a user account by knowing their external identifier.

Red Hat Product Security 2026-08-05

Keycloak versions 26.6.x antérieures à 26.6.5

CERT-FR (ANSSI) 2026-08-06
vulnerability07 Aug 04:41Zmulti-sourceOpen finding ↗