Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-2575

Redhat Build Of Keycloak 26.4 – 26.4.10

Published
18 March 2026
Modified
03 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 5.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
EPSS Score 0.0050 41th percentile
Risk Priority 45 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2026-2575 is a medium-severity Data Amplification (CWE-409) vulnerability in Redhat Build Of Keycloak. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 41th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SC-5 (Denial-of-service Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A flaw was found in Keycloak. An unauthenticated remote attacker can trigger an application level Denial of Service (DoS) by sending a highly compressed SAMLRequest through the SAML Redirect Binding. The server fails to enforce size limits during DEFLATE decompression,…

more

leading to an OutOfMemoryError (OOM) and subsequent process termination. This vulnerability allows an attacker to disrupt the availability of the service.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1499 Endpoint Denial of Service Impact
Adversaries may perform Endpoint Denial of Service (DoS) attacks to degrade or block the availability of services to users.
T1499.003 Application Exhaustion Flood Impact
Adversaries may target resource intensive features of applications to cause a denial of service (DoS), denying availability to those applications.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-4634Same product: Redhat Build Of Keycloak
CVE-2026-9704Same product: Redhat Build Of Keycloak
CVE-2026-9801Same product: Redhat Build Of Keycloak
CVE-2026-3429Same product: Redhat Build Of Keycloak
CVE-2026-37981Same product: Redhat Build Of Keycloak
CVE-2026-4629Same product: Redhat Build Of Keycloak
CVE-2026-16108Same product: Redhat Build Of Keycloak
CVE-2026-9791Same product: Redhat Build Of Keycloak
CVE-2026-9689Same product: Redhat Build Of Keycloak
CVE-2026-7507Same product: Redhat Build Of Keycloak

Affected Assets

redhat
build of keycloak
26.4 — 26.4.10

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Input validation can reject or limit decompression of data whose expansion ratio exceeds safe thresholds.

DoS protection limits the resource-exhaustion impact when a decompression bomb is processed.

Resource allocation controls bound memory/CPU consumption that a data-amplification attack would otherwise exhaust.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure-development practices include input-validation and resource-limit checks that prevent improper handling of compressed data.

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring of compute resources can detect exhaustion caused by decompression bombs.

PR.IR-04 partial match
prevents

Capacity planning and monitoring directly limits the availability impact of data-amplification attacks.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

finds

Security testing can uncover decompression-bomb vulnerabilities before release.

mitigates

Redundancy helps availability but does not address the root cause of the weakness.

finds

Monitoring can detect anomalous resource usage but does not prevent the weakness.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle includes input validation and resource-limit checks that mitigate data-amplification attacks.

prevents

Application security requirements can mandate limits on decompression size and ratio.

prevents

Secure architecture principles encourage defensive design against resource-exhaustion threats.

References