Overview 3 matches · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
3matches
0protected0.0%
0exploited0.0%
0CISA KEV0.0%
0public PoC0.0%
0EPSS ≥ 0.50.0%
Protected by Waratek
0
0.0%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
0
0.0%
No exploit published
3
100.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
3
100.0%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
0
0.0%
Working exploit published
0
0.0%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
3
100.0%
split by
peak 1 / month
Feb 23Mar 23Apr 23May 23Jun 23Jul 23Aug 23Sep 23Oct 23Nov 23Dec 23Jan 24
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-6291 | High | 2024-01-26 | No exploit published | No public exploit | A flaw was found in the redirect_uri validation logic in Keycloak. This issue may allow a bypass of otherwise explicitly allowed hosts. A successful attack may lead to an access token being stolen, making it possible for the attacker to impersonate other users. |
| CVE-2023-1664 | Medium | 2023-05-26 | No exploit published | No public exploit | A flaw was found in Keycloak. This flaw depends on a non-default configuration "Revalidate Client Certificate" to be enabled and the reverse proxy is not validating the certificate before Keycloak. Using this method an attacker may choose the certificate which will be validated by the server. If this happens and the KC_SPI_TRUSTSTORE_FILE_FILE variable is missing/misconfigured, any trustfile may be accepted with the logging information of "Cannot validate client certificate trust: Truststore not available". This may not impact availability as the attacker would have no access to the server, but consumer applications Integrity or Confidentiality may be impacted considering a possible access to them. Considering the environment is correctly set to use "Revalidate Client Certificate" this flaw is avoidable. |
| CVE-2022-4492 | High | 2023-02-23 | No exploit published | No public exploit | The undertow client is not checking the server identity presented by the server certificate in https connections. This is a compulsory step (at least it should be performed by default) in https and in http/2. I would add it to any TLS client protocol. |