High CWE-347 CVEs

27 CVEs, 2 protected by Waratek

Look up CVE IDs Status Exploitation Severity

Reset

Overview 27 matches · 2 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 2 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5

27matches 2protected7.4% 0exploited0.0% 0CISA KEV0.0% 2public PoC7.4% 0EPSS ≥ 0.50.0%

Protected by Waratek 2 7.4% Rule in development 0 0.0% Mitigation candidate 2 7.4% No exploit published 23 85.2%

Critical 0 0.0% High 27 100.0% Medium 0 0.0% Low 0 0.0% None 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0%

blocked by ARMR today 2 7.4% partly blocked 0 0.0% not blocked 25 92.6% not established 0 0.0% unrecorded 0 0.0%

Exploited 0 0.0% Working exploit published 1 3.7% Proof of concept only 1 3.7% Forecast only 0 0.0% No public exploit 25 92.6%

split by StatusSeverityProtectionExploit maturity peak 16 / year

20171 No exploit published1 High1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 20182 Protected by Waratek2 High2 blocked by ARMR today2 No public exploit2 20191 No exploit published1 High1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 20203 No exploit published3 High3 not blocked3 No public exploit3 20210 20222 No exploit published2 High2 not blocked2 No public exploit2 20230 20242 Mitigation candidate1 No exploit published1 High2 not blocked2 Working exploit published1 No public exploit1 20250 202616 Mitigation candidate1 No exploit published15 High16 not blocked16 Proof of concept only1 No public exploit15

2017201820192020202120222023202420252026

27 matches Sign in to download these CVEs as CSV or JSON, or to follow them in a feed.

CVE	Severity	Published▾	Status	Exploitation	Description
CVE-2026-4762	High	2026-11-10	No exploit published	No public exploit	A vulnerability to perform a privilege escalation attack on the server as a non-admin user.
CVE-2026-93998	High	2026-11-05	No exploit published	No public exploit	A flaw was found in the SAML adapter component of Keycloak, which is used to secure applications with SAML-based authentication. The adapter fails to verify that the issuer of a signed SAML assertion matches the expected identity provider configured for the application. If multiple identity providers share the same trusted signing key, an attacker who controls one of those providers can create a validly signed assertion to log into the application as any user, potentially gaining full administrative control.
CVE-2026-46560	High	2026-10-30	No exploit published	No public exploit	Open Access Management (OpenAM) is an access management solution. Prior to 16.1.1, the `RADIUS` authentication module opens an unconnected datagram socket and trusts the first UDP datagram received on the client source port. The receive path does not verify the source IP and port, match the response identifier to the outstanding request, or verify the RFC 2865 `Response Authenticator`; the RFC 2869 `Message-Authenticator` is neither sent nor required. Any non-Reject/non-Challenge packet is treated as success. On a deployment with a `RADIUS` module instance enabled on a login chain, an unauthenticated network attacker can race the real server on-path or spray forged `Access-Accept` packets off-path and obtain a session for any `RADIUS`-mapped username without knowing the shared secret. Unlike CVE-2024-3596, exploitation requires no MD5 chosen-prefix forgery because no response authenticator is checked. The resulting session carries the impersonated principal's privileges. This issue is fixed in version 16.1.1.
CVE-2026-71891	High	2026-10-03	No exploit published	No public exploit	In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, BLS12_381BasicScheme.keyValidate, and so BLSPublicKeyParameters and every BasicScheme, MessageAugmentation and ProofOfPossession verify and aggregateVerify that gate on it, accepted a public key built on a foreign ECCurve that merely shares BLS12-381's field characteristic. The prime-order subgroup check trusts a point's own curve to name its cofactor, since ECPoint.satisfiesOrder returns true outright when the curve's cofactor is one, so a point on a curve with a different equation and a cofactor forged to one passed keyValidate despite not being a G1 point at all. In BC's pairing implementation such a point contributes the identity in the target group, so an aggregate signature verified against a set of public keys including it is accepted even though it contains no signature for that key and message pair, admitting a phantom signer. keyValidate now first confirms that the point's curve carries exactly the canonical G1 field, equation, order and cofactor before any subgroup check. The issue is reachable only where an application constructs an ECPoint on an explicit, non-canonical curve and accepts it as an authority-bearing key; the standard 48-byte compressed-point decoder always supplies the canonical curve and was never affected.
CVE-2026-71887	High	2026-10-03	No exploit published	No public exploit	In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the high-level OpenPGP API accepted a data signature made by a signing subkey whose Subkey Binding signature carried no embedded Primary Key Binding (cross-certification) signature, in the case where that binding omits a Key Flags subpacket. RFC 9580 sec. 5.2.1.8 and sec. 10.1.3 require the embedded Primary Key Binding signature on any subkey that can issue signatures; it is the subkey's own statement that it belongs to the primary key it is bound under. OpenPGPCertificate resolved the subkey's key flags two different ways. isSigningKey() goes through getKeyFlags() and getApplyingSubpacket(), which falls back to the primary key's direct-key or primary User ID self-signature when the binding signature omits the subpacket, so the subkey inherited the primary's SIGN_DATA and counted as signing-capable; verifyEmbeddedPrimaryKeyBinding(), which enforces the requirement, reads the binding signature's own hashed subpackets, found no SIGN_DATA there, and returned early as a non-signing key without ever demanding the back signature. The same subkey was therefore signing-capable - so its signatures were attributed to the certificate and OpenPGPSignature.OpenPGPDocumentSignature.isValid() returned true - while being exempt from cross-certification, where GnuPG refuses the identical certificate and message. An attacker needs only the victim's public signing subkey, which is public material: they bind it to their own primary key with a Subkey Binding signature they are able to make, carrying no Key Flags and no embedded Primary Key Binding signature, which they cannot make without the subkey's private key, and a relying party verifying one of the victim's genuinely signed messages against that certificate is told the signature is valid and given the attacker's certificate as its issuer. Because a certificate's User IDs are self-asserted, a verifier that pins on the subkey's fingerprint or key ID while taking the identity from the enclosing certificate reports a real signature under an attacker-chosen identity. This is misattribution of a genuine signature rather than forgery of a new one: no private key is recovered, and the signature must be one the grafted subkey actually made. The low-level PGPSignature / PGPPublicKeyRing API performs no binding checks by design and is unaffected. Key Flags are a statement about the key the carrying signature refers to (RFC 9580 sec. 5.2.3.29), so a subkey no longer inherits them from the certificate-wide signatures of the primary key: a Subkey Binding signature that omits the subpacket now leaves the subkey with no capabilities rather than the primary's, which makes the flags the cross-certification check consults the same flags every other decision consults. Preferences and the other subpackets a direct-key signature carries are inherited as before, and the primary key itself, whose flags legitimately come from its own direct-key or User ID self-signature, is unaffected.
CVE-2026-85525	High	2026-09-04	No exploit published	No public exploit	Improper OCSP response validation in the Snowflake Python, Go, JDBC, and Node.js drivers allowed a revoked TLS certificate to be accepted as valid, because OCSP responses were not reliably bound to the certificate being validated and definitive verification failures were treated as transient. A man-in-the-middle attacker holding a revoked certificate and its private key for a Snowflake or stage hostname could cause the driver to establish a TLS session to the attacker-controlled endpoint anyway, allowing the attacker to read and modify data transmitted within that connection. Successful exploitation requires that on-path position and the corresponding private key, and impact is limited to data carried within the intercepted connection. The fix is available in Snowflake Connector for Python v4.7.3, Snowflake Go Driver v2.2.0, Snowflake JDBC Driver v4.3.4 (including the snowflake-jdbc-fips and snowflake-jdbc-thin), and Snowflake Node.js Driver v3.3.0. Users must manually upgrade.
CVE-2026-15556	High	2026-08-11	No exploit published	No public exploit	A flaw was found in Picketlink's SP signature validation; a SAML response containing zero assertion elements matching the signature check can allow an attacker to forge a SAML response and auth as any principal with any roles on the protected application.
CVE-2026-59643	High	2026-08-03	No exploit published	No public exploit	In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.85, OpenPGP inline-signature policy failures silently ignored. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpg-fips 2.0.13.
CVE-2026-59639	High	2026-08-03	No exploit published	No public exploit	In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.85, CMS verifySignatures returns true for SignedData with zero signers. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java LTS before 2.73.12, and Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 1.0.12 (1.0.X series), 2.0.12 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.12 (2.1.X series).
CVE-2026-12860	High	2026-08-03	No exploit published	No public exploit	In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.85, RSA PKCS#1 verification skips last two hash bytes in NULL-omitted path. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java LTS before 2.73.12.
CVE-2026-11800	High	2026-06-25	No exploit published	No public exploit	A flaw was found in Keycloak. This JWT algorithm confusion vulnerability in the JWT Authorization Grant flow allows an attacker with valid client credentials to bypass signature verification. By forging an assertion, the attacker can create unauthorized access tokens. This enables the attacker to impersonate any federated user linked to the affected Identity Provider, leading to unauthorized access and potential privilege escalation.
CVE-2026-50010	High	2026-06-12	No exploit published	No public exploit	Netty is a network application framework for development of protocol servers and clients. Prior to versions 4.1.135.Final and 4.2.15.Final, SimpleTrustManagerFactory.engineGetTrustManagers() and related paths wrap any user-supplied plain X509TrustManager in X509TrustManagerWrapper, which extends X509ExtendedTrustManager but implements the 3-arg checkServerTrusted(chain, authType, SSLEngine) by discarding the SSLEngine and calling the 2-arg delegate. Because the object now IS an X509ExtendedTrustManager, neither SunJSSE's internal AbstractTrustManagerWrapper nor Netty's own OpenSslX509TrustManagerWrapper will re-wrap it to add endpoint-identification. Consequently, even though Netty 4.2 sets endpointIdentificationAlgorithm="HTTPS" by default, a client built with `SslContextBuilder.forClient().trustManager(somePlainX509TrustManager)` performs no hostname verification at all. Versions 4.1.135.Final and 4.2.15.Final patch the issue.
CVE-2026-9793	High	2026-05-28	No exploit published	No public exploit	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.
CVE-2026-45575	High	2026-05-26	No exploit published	No public exploit	epa4all-client is the Java Client for epa4all / ePA 3.0 in the Telematik Infrastruktur. Prior to 1.2.2, an attacker who can MITM the TLS connection between the client and the IDP (within the TI network) can substitute a forged discovery document. The forged document redirects uri_puk_idp_enc and uri_puk_idp_sig to attacker-controlled URLs. The client then encrypts the SMC-B-signed challenge response to the attacker's encryption key and POSTs it to the attacker's auth endpoint. This captures the signed authentication material. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.2.2.
CVE-2026-44714	High	2026-05-15	No exploit published	No public exploit	The bitcoinj library is a Java implementation of the Bitcoin protocol. Prior to 0.17.1, ScriptExecution.correctlySpends() contains two fast-path verification bugs for standard P2PKH and native P2WPKH spends in core/src/main/java/org/bitcoinj/script/ScriptExecution.java. In both branches, bitcoinj verifies an attacker-controlled signature/public-key pair but fails to verify that the public key is the one committed to by the output being spent. As a result, any attacker keypair can satisfy bitcoinj's local verification for arbitrary P2PKH and P2WPKH outputs. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.17.1.
CVE-2026-1529	High	2026-02-09	Mitigation candidate	Proof of concept only	A flaw was found in Keycloak. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by modifying the organization ID and target email within a legitimate invitation token's JSON Web Token (JWT) payload. This lack of cryptographic signature verification allows the attacker to successfully self-register into an unauthorized organization, leading to unauthorized access.
CVE-2024-8698	High	2024-09-19	Mitigation candidate	Working exploit published	A flaw exists in the SAML signature validation method within the Keycloak XMLSignatureUtil class. The method incorrectly determines whether a SAML signature is for the full document or only for specific assertions based on the position of the signature in the XML document, rather than the Reference element used to specify the signed element. This flaw allows attackers to create crafted responses that can bypass the validation, potentially leading to privilege escalation or impersonation attacks.
CVE-2024-37532	High	2024-06-20	No exploit published	No public exploit	IBM WebSphere Application Server 8.5 and 9.0 is vulnerable to identity spoofing by an authenticated user due to improper signature validation. IBM X-Force ID: 294721.
CVE-2021-22573	High	2022-05-03	No exploit published	No public exploit	The vulnerability is that IDToken verifier does not verify if token is properly signed. Signature verification makes sure that the token's payload comes from valid provider, not from someone else. An attacker can provide a compromised token with custom payload. The token will pass the validation on the client side. We recommend upgrading to version 1.33.3 or above
CVE-2021-44878	High	2022-01-06	No exploit published	No public exploit	If an OpenID Connect provider supports the "none" algorithm (i.e., tokens with no signature), pac4j v5.3.0 (and prior) does not refuse it without an explicit configuration on its side or for the "idtoken" response type which is not secure and violates the OpenID Core Specification. The "none" algorithm does not require any signature verification when validating the ID tokens, which allows the attacker to bypass the token validation by injecting a malformed ID token using "none" as the value of "alg" key in the header with an empty signature value.
CVE-2020-5407	High	2020-05-13	No exploit published	No public exploit	Spring Security versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.4 and 5.3.x prior to 5.3.2 contain a signature wrapping vulnerability during SAML response validation. When using the spring-security-saml2-service-provider component, a malicious user can carefully modify an otherwise valid SAML response and append an arbitrary assertion that Spring Security will accept as valid.
CVE-2019-17561	High	2020-03-30	No exploit published	No public exploit	The "Apache NetBeans" autoupdate system does not fully validate code signatures. An attacker could modify the downloaded nbm and include additional code. "Apache NetBeans" versions up to and including 11.2 are affected by this vulnerability.
CVE-2020-2146	High	2020-03-09	No exploit published	No public exploit	Jenkins Mac Plugin 1.1.0 and earlier does not validate SSH host keys when connecting agents created by the plugin, enabling man-in-the-middle attacks.
CVE-2019-10201	High	2019-08-14	No exploit published	No public exploit	It was found that Keycloak's SAML broker, versions up to 6.0.1, did not verify missing message signatures. If an attacker modifies the SAML Response and removes the <Signature> sections, the message is still accepted, and the message can be modified. An attacker could use this flaw to impersonate other users and gain access to sensitive information.
CVE-2016-1000342	High	2018-06-04	Protected by Waratek	No public exploit	In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier ECDSA does not fully validate ASN.1 encoding of signature on verification. It is possible to inject extra elements in the sequence making up the signature and still have it validate, which in some cases may allow the introduction of 'invisible' data into a signed structure.
CVE-2016-1000338	High	2018-06-01	Protected by Waratek	No public exploit	In Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the DSA does not fully validate ASN.1 encoding of signature on verification. It is possible to inject extra elements in the sequence making up the signature and still have it validate, which in some cases may allow the introduction of 'invisible' data into a signed structure.
CVE-2017-12974	High	2017-08-20	No exploit published	No public exploit	Nimbus JOSE+JWT before 4.36 proceeds with ECKey construction without ensuring that the public x and y coordinates are on the specified curve, which allows attackers to conduct an Invalid Curve Attack in environments where the JCE provider lacks the applicable curve validation.

CVE

Severity

Published▾

Status

Exploitation

Description

CVE-2026-4762

High

2026-11-10

No exploit published

No public exploit

A vulnerability to perform a privilege escalation attack on the server as a non-admin user.

CVE-2026-93998

High

2026-11-05

No exploit published

No public exploit

A flaw was found in the SAML adapter component of Keycloak, which is used to secure applications with SAML-based authentication. The adapter fails to verify that the issuer of a signed SAML assertion matches the expected identity provider configured for the application. If multiple identity providers share the same trusted signing key, an attacker who controls one of those providers can create a validly signed assertion to log into the application as any user, potentially gaining full administrative control.

CVE-2026-46560

High

2026-10-30

No exploit published

No public exploit

Open Access Management (OpenAM) is an access management solution. Prior to 16.1.1, the `RADIUS` authentication module opens an unconnected datagram socket and trusts the first UDP datagram received on the client source port. The receive path does not verify the source IP and port, match the response identifier to the outstanding request, or verify the RFC 2865 `Response Authenticator`; the RFC 2869 `Message-Authenticator` is neither sent nor required. Any non-Reject/non-Challenge packet is treated as success. On a deployment with a `RADIUS` module instance enabled on a login chain, an unauthenticated network attacker can race the real server on-path or spray forged `Access-Accept` packets off-path and obtain a session for any `RADIUS`-mapped username without knowing the shared secret. Unlike CVE-2024-3596, exploitation requires no MD5 chosen-prefix forgery because no response authenticator is checked. The resulting session carries the impersonated principal's privileges. This issue is fixed in version 16.1.1.

CVE-2026-71891

High

2026-10-03

No exploit published

No public exploit

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, BLS12_381BasicScheme.keyValidate, and so BLSPublicKeyParameters and every BasicScheme, MessageAugmentation and ProofOfPossession verify and aggregateVerify that gate on it, accepted a public key built on a foreign ECCurve that merely shares BLS12-381's field characteristic. The prime-order subgroup check trusts a point's own curve to name its cofactor, since ECPoint.satisfiesOrder returns true outright when the curve's cofactor is one, so a point on a curve with a different equation and a cofactor forged to one passed keyValidate despite not being a G1 point at all. In BC's pairing implementation such a point contributes the identity in the target group, so an aggregate signature verified against a set of public keys including it is accepted even though it contains no signature for that key and message pair, admitting a phantom signer. keyValidate now first confirms that the point's curve carries exactly the canonical G1 field, equation, order and cofactor before any subgroup check. The issue is reachable only where an application constructs an ECPoint on an explicit, non-canonical curve and accepts it as an authority-bearing key; the standard 48-byte compressed-point decoder always supplies the canonical curve and was never affected.

CVE-2026-71887

High

2026-10-03

No exploit published

No public exploit

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the high-level OpenPGP API accepted a data signature made by a signing subkey whose Subkey Binding signature carried no embedded Primary Key Binding (cross-certification) signature, in the case where that binding omits a Key Flags subpacket. RFC 9580 sec. 5.2.1.8 and sec. 10.1.3 require the embedded Primary Key Binding signature on any subkey that can issue signatures; it is the subkey's own statement that it belongs to the primary key it is bound under. OpenPGPCertificate resolved the subkey's key flags two different ways. isSigningKey() goes through getKeyFlags() and getApplyingSubpacket(), which falls back to the primary key's direct-key or primary User ID self-signature when the binding signature omits the subpacket, so the subkey inherited the primary's SIGN_DATA and counted as signing-capable; verifyEmbeddedPrimaryKeyBinding(), which enforces the requirement, reads the binding signature's own hashed subpackets, found no SIGN_DATA there, and returned early as a non-signing key without ever demanding the back signature. The same subkey was therefore signing-capable - so its signatures were attributed to the certificate and OpenPGPSignature.OpenPGPDocumentSignature.isValid() returned true - while being exempt from cross-certification, where GnuPG refuses the identical certificate and message. An attacker needs only the victim's public signing subkey, which is public material: they bind it to their own primary key with a Subkey Binding signature they are able to make, carrying no Key Flags and no embedded Primary Key Binding signature, which they cannot make without the subkey's private key, and a relying party verifying one of the victim's genuinely signed messages against that certificate is told the signature is valid and given the attacker's certificate as its issuer. Because a certificate's User IDs are self-asserted, a verifier that pins on the subkey's fingerprint or key ID while taking the identity from the enclosing certificate reports a real signature under an attacker-chosen identity. This is misattribution of a genuine signature rather than forgery of a new one: no private key is recovered, and the signature must be one the grafted subkey actually made. The low-level PGPSignature / PGPPublicKeyRing API performs no binding checks by design and is unaffected. Key Flags are a statement about the key the carrying signature refers to (RFC 9580 sec. 5.2.3.29), so a subkey no longer inherits them from the certificate-wide signatures of the primary key: a Subkey Binding signature that omits the subpacket now leaves the subkey with no capabilities rather than the primary's, which makes the flags the cross-certification check consults the same flags every other decision consults. Preferences and the other subpackets a direct-key signature carries are inherited as before, and the primary key itself, whose flags legitimately come from its own direct-key or User ID self-signature, is unaffected.

CVE-2026-85525

High

2026-09-04

No exploit published

No public exploit

Improper OCSP response validation in the Snowflake Python, Go, JDBC, and Node.js drivers allowed a revoked TLS certificate to be accepted as valid, because OCSP responses were not reliably bound to the certificate being validated and definitive verification failures were treated as transient. A man-in-the-middle attacker holding a revoked certificate and its private key for a Snowflake or stage hostname could cause the driver to establish a TLS session to the attacker-controlled endpoint anyway, allowing the attacker to read and modify data transmitted within that connection. Successful exploitation requires that on-path position and the corresponding private key, and impact is limited to data carried within the intercepted connection. The fix is available in Snowflake Connector for Python v4.7.3, Snowflake Go Driver v2.2.0, Snowflake JDBC Driver v4.3.4 (including the snowflake-jdbc-fips and snowflake-jdbc-thin), and Snowflake Node.js Driver v3.3.0. Users must manually upgrade.

CVE-2026-15556

High

2026-08-11

No exploit published

No public exploit

A flaw was found in Picketlink's SP signature validation; a SAML response containing zero assertion elements matching the signature check can allow an attacker to forge a SAML response and auth as any principal with any roles on the protected application.

CVE-2026-59643

High

2026-08-03

No exploit published

No public exploit

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.85, OpenPGP inline-signature policy failures silently ignored. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpg-fips 2.0.13.

CVE-2026-59639

High

2026-08-03

No exploit published

No public exploit

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.85, CMS verifySignatures returns true for SignedData with zero signers. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java LTS before 2.73.12, and Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 1.0.12 (1.0.X series), 2.0.12 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.12 (2.1.X series).

CVE-2026-12860

High

2026-08-03

No exploit published

No public exploit

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.85, RSA PKCS#1 verification skips last two hash bytes in NULL-omitted path. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java LTS before 2.73.12.

CVE-2026-11800

High

2026-06-25

No exploit published

No public exploit

A flaw was found in Keycloak. This JWT algorithm confusion vulnerability in the JWT Authorization Grant flow allows an attacker with valid client credentials to bypass signature verification. By forging an assertion, the attacker can create unauthorized access tokens. This enables the attacker to impersonate any federated user linked to the affected Identity Provider, leading to unauthorized access and potential privilege escalation.

CVE-2026-50010

High

2026-06-12

No exploit published

No public exploit

Netty is a network application framework for development of protocol servers and clients. Prior to versions 4.1.135.Final and 4.2.15.Final, SimpleTrustManagerFactory.engineGetTrustManagers() and related paths wrap any user-supplied plain X509TrustManager in X509TrustManagerWrapper, which extends X509ExtendedTrustManager but implements the 3-arg checkServerTrusted(chain, authType, SSLEngine) by discarding the SSLEngine and calling the 2-arg delegate. Because the object now IS an X509ExtendedTrustManager, neither SunJSSE's internal AbstractTrustManagerWrapper nor Netty's own OpenSslX509TrustManagerWrapper will re-wrap it to add endpoint-identification. Consequently, even though Netty 4.2 sets endpointIdentificationAlgorithm="HTTPS" by default, a client built with `SslContextBuilder.forClient().trustManager(somePlainX509TrustManager)` performs no hostname verification at all. Versions 4.1.135.Final and 4.2.15.Final patch the issue.

CVE-2026-9793

High

2026-05-28

No exploit published

No public exploit

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.

CVE-2026-45575

High

2026-05-26

No exploit published

No public exploit

epa4all-client is the Java Client for epa4all / ePA 3.0 in the Telematik Infrastruktur. Prior to 1.2.2, an attacker who can MITM the TLS connection between the client and the IDP (within the TI network) can substitute a forged discovery document. The forged document redirects uri_puk_idp_enc and uri_puk_idp_sig to attacker-controlled URLs. The client then encrypts the SMC-B-signed challenge response to the attacker's encryption key and POSTs it to the attacker's auth endpoint. This captures the signed authentication material. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.2.2.

CVE-2026-44714

High

2026-05-15

No exploit published

No public exploit

The bitcoinj library is a Java implementation of the Bitcoin protocol. Prior to 0.17.1, ScriptExecution.correctlySpends() contains two fast-path verification bugs for standard P2PKH and native P2WPKH spends in core/src/main/java/org/bitcoinj/script/ScriptExecution.java. In both branches, bitcoinj verifies an attacker-controlled signature/public-key pair but fails to verify that the public key is the one committed to by the output being spent. As a result, any attacker keypair can satisfy bitcoinj's local verification for arbitrary P2PKH and P2WPKH outputs. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.17.1.

CVE-2026-1529

High

2026-02-09

Mitigation candidate

Proof of concept only

A flaw was found in Keycloak. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by modifying the organization ID and target email within a legitimate invitation token's JSON Web Token (JWT) payload. This lack of cryptographic signature verification allows the attacker to successfully self-register into an unauthorized organization, leading to unauthorized access.

CVE-2024-8698

High

2024-09-19

Mitigation candidate

Working exploit published

A flaw exists in the SAML signature validation method within the Keycloak XMLSignatureUtil class. The method incorrectly determines whether a SAML signature is for the full document or only for specific assertions based on the position of the signature in the XML document, rather than the Reference element used to specify the signed element. This flaw allows attackers to create crafted responses that can bypass the validation, potentially leading to privilege escalation or impersonation attacks.

CVE-2024-37532

High

2024-06-20

No exploit published

No public exploit

IBM WebSphere Application Server 8.5 and 9.0 is vulnerable to identity spoofing by an authenticated user due to improper signature validation. IBM X-Force ID: 294721.

CVE-2021-22573

High

2022-05-03

No exploit published

No public exploit

The vulnerability is that IDToken verifier does not verify if token is properly signed. Signature verification makes sure that the token's payload comes from valid provider, not from someone else. An attacker can provide a compromised token with custom payload. The token will pass the validation on the client side. We recommend upgrading to version 1.33.3 or above

CVE-2021-44878

High

2022-01-06

No exploit published

No public exploit

If an OpenID Connect provider supports the "none" algorithm (i.e., tokens with no signature), pac4j v5.3.0 (and prior) does not refuse it without an explicit configuration on its side or for the "idtoken" response type which is not secure and violates the OpenID Core Specification. The "none" algorithm does not require any signature verification when validating the ID tokens, which allows the attacker to bypass the token validation by injecting a malformed ID token using "none" as the value of "alg" key in the header with an empty signature value.

CVE-2020-5407

High

2020-05-13

No exploit published

No public exploit

Spring Security versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.4 and 5.3.x prior to 5.3.2 contain a signature wrapping vulnerability during SAML response validation. When using the spring-security-saml2-service-provider component, a malicious user can carefully modify an otherwise valid SAML response and append an arbitrary assertion that Spring Security will accept as valid.

CVE-2019-17561

High

2020-03-30

No exploit published

No public exploit

The "Apache NetBeans" autoupdate system does not fully validate code signatures. An attacker could modify the downloaded nbm and include additional code. "Apache NetBeans" versions up to and including 11.2 are affected by this vulnerability.

CVE-2020-2146

High

2020-03-09

No exploit published

No public exploit

Jenkins Mac Plugin 1.1.0 and earlier does not validate SSH host keys when connecting agents created by the plugin, enabling man-in-the-middle attacks.

CVE-2019-10201

High

2019-08-14

No exploit published

No public exploit

It was found that Keycloak's SAML broker, versions up to 6.0.1, did not verify missing message signatures. If an attacker modifies the SAML Response and removes the <Signature> sections, the message is still accepted, and the message can be modified. An attacker could use this flaw to impersonate other users and gain access to sensitive information.

CVE-2016-1000342

High

2018-06-04

Protected by Waratek

No public exploit

In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier ECDSA does not fully validate ASN.1 encoding of signature on verification. It is possible to inject extra elements in the sequence making up the signature and still have it validate, which in some cases may allow the introduction of 'invisible' data into a signed structure.

CVE-2016-1000338

High

2018-06-01

Protected by Waratek

No public exploit

In Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the DSA does not fully validate ASN.1 encoding of signature on verification. It is possible to inject extra elements in the sequence making up the signature and still have it validate, which in some cases may allow the introduction of 'invisible' data into a signed structure.

CVE-2017-12974

High

2017-08-20

No exploit published

No public exploit

Nimbus JOSE+JWT before 4.36 proceeds with ECKey construction without ensuring that the public x and y coordinates are on the specified curve, which allows attackers to conduct an Invalid Curve Attack in environments where the JCE provider lacks the applicable curve validation.