Every CVE Search/ Get API key

CVE-2026-71892

CMS key-transport recipient key-size validation never runs for RFC 9709 HKDF-derived keys

6.9 MediumFix available

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the opt-in key-size validation on CMS key-transport recipients, org.bouncycastle.cms.jcajce.JceKeyTransRecipient.setKeySizeValidation(true), never ran for a message using RFC 9709 content-encryption key derivation (id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256). The branch that should have selected the actual content-encryption algorithm carried in the key derivation AlgorithmIdentifier's parameters compared the encrypted-key byte array against the id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256 object identifier, a comparison between a byte array and an ASN1ObjectIdentifier that is false for every possible input, so the check fell through to a key-size lookup on the outer wrapper OID. That OID identifies a key-derivation construction rather than a cipher and has no registered key size, so the size comparison was skipped entirely. A key-transport EnvelopedData or AuthEnvelopedData whose transported, HKDF-derived content-encryption key did not match the key size of the advertised content-encryption algorithm was therefore accepted even with validation explicitly enabled, silently defeating the only mechanism the API offers for enforcing recovered key size. The recipient now dispatches on the content-encryption AlgorithmIdentifier's algorithm OID, so validation checks the recovered key against the inner content-encryption algorithm. Messages with a matching key size, non-HKDF messages, and recipients that do not enable validation are unaffected. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 2.0.13 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.13 (2.1.X series).

Attack profile

How easy it is to exploit

Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges needed
None
User interaction
None

What an attacker can affect

Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

Exploit likelihood

0.17%Unchanged since Oct 3, 2026
90%50%10%1%

What each source reports

CVE List Score used 6.9

CMS key-transport recipient key-size validation never runs for RFC 9709 HKDF-derived keys

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the opt-in key-size validation on CMS key-transport recipients, org.bouncycastle.cms.jcajce.JceKeyTransRecipient.setKeySizeValidation(true), never ran for a message using RFC 9709 content-encryption key derivation (id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256). The branch that should have selected the actual content-encryption algorithm carried in the key derivation AlgorithmIdentifier's parameters compared the encrypted-key byte array against the id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256 object identifier, a comparison between a byte array and an ASN1ObjectIdentifier that is false for every possible input, so the check fell through to a key-size lookup on the outer wrapper OID. That OID identifies a key-derivation construction rather than a cipher and has no registered key size, so the size comparison was skipped entirely. A key-transport EnvelopedData or AuthEnvelopedData whose transported, HKDF-derived content-encryption key did not match the key size of the advertised content-encryption algorithm was therefore accepted even with validation explicitly enabled, silently defeating the only mechanism the API offers for enforcing recovered key size. The recipient now dispatches on the content-encryption AlgorithmIdentifier's algorithm OID, so validation checks the recovered key against the inner content-encryption algorithm. Messages with a matching key size, non-HKDF messages, and recipients that do not enable validation are unaffected. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 2.0.13 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.13 (2.1.X series).

Record
CVE-2026-71892
CVSS 4.0
6.9 MediumCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/U:Amber
Weakness
CWE-697
Updated
2026-11-02
EUVDEUVD-2026-91989 6.9

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the opt-in key-size validation on CMS key-transport recipients, org.bouncycastle.cms.jcajce.JceKeyTransRecipient.setKeySizeValidation(true), never ran for a message using RFC 9709 content-encryption key derivation (id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256). The branch that should have selected the actual content-encryption algorithm carried in the key derivation AlgorithmIdentifier's parameters compared the encrypted-key byte array against the id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256 object identifier, a comparison between a byte array and an ASN1ObjectIdentifier that is false for every possible input, so the check fell through to a key-size lookup on the outer wrapper OID. That OID identifies a key-derivation construction rather than a cipher and has no registered key size, so the size comparison was skipped entirely. A key-transport EnvelopedData or AuthEnvelopedData whose transported, HKDF-derived content-encryption key did not match the key size of the advertised content-encryption algorithm was therefore accepted even with validation explicitly enabled, silently defeating the only mechanism the API offers for enforcing recovered key size. The recipient now dispatches on the content-encryption AlgorithmIdentifier's algorithm OID, so validation checks the recovered key against the inner content-encryption algorithm. Messages with a matching key size, non-HKDF messages, and recipients that do not enable validation are unaffected. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 2.0.13 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.13 (2.1.X series).

Record
EUVD-2026-91989
CVSS 4.0
6.9 MediumCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/U:Amber
Updated
2026-11-02
GitHub AdvisoriesGHSA-x42w-4gqh-qrvm 6.9

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the opt-in key-size validation on CMS key-transport...

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the opt-in key-size validation on CMS key-transport recipients, org.bouncycastle.cms.jcajce.JceKeyTransRecipient.setKeySizeValidation(true), never ran for a message using RFC 9709 content-encryption key derivation (id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256). The branch that should have selected the actual content-encryption algorithm carried in the key derivation AlgorithmIdentifier's parameters compared the encrypted-key byte array against the id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256 object identifier, a comparison between a byte array and an ASN1ObjectIdentifier that is false for every possible input, so the check fell through to a key-size lookup on the outer wrapper OID. That OID identifies a key-derivation construction rather than a cipher and has no registered key size, so the size comparison was skipped entirely. A key-transport EnvelopedData or AuthEnvelopedData whose transported, HKDF-derived content-encryption key did not match the key size of the advertised content-encryption algorithm was therefore accepted even with validation explicitly enabled, silently defeating the only mechanism the API offers for enforcing recovered key size. The recipient now dispatches on the content-encryption AlgorithmIdentifier's algorithm OID, so validation checks the recovered key against the inner content-encryption algorithm. Messages with a matching key size, non-HKDF messages, and recipients that do not enable validation are unaffected. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 2.0.13 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.13 (2.1.X series).

Record
GHSA-x42w-4gqh-qrvm
CVSS 4.0
6.9 MediumCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:Amber
Weakness
CWE-697
Updated
2026-11-02
NVD 6.9

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the opt-in key-size validation on CMS key-transport recipients, org.bouncycastle.cms.jcajce.JceKeyTransRecipient.setKeySizeValidation(true), never ran for a message using RFC 9709 content-encryption key derivation (id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256). The branch that should have selected the actual content-encryption algorithm carried in the key derivation AlgorithmIdentifier's parameters compared the encrypted-key byte array against the id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256 object identifier, a comparison between a byte array and an ASN1ObjectIdentifier that is false for every possible input, so the check fell through to a key-size lookup on the outer wrapper OID. That OID identifies a key-derivation construction rather than a cipher and has no registered key size, so the size comparison was skipped entirely. A key-transport EnvelopedData or AuthEnvelopedData whose transported, HKDF-derived content-encryption key did not match the key size of the advertised content-encryption algorithm was therefore accepted even with validation explicitly enabled, silently defeating the only mechanism the API offers for enforcing recovered key size. The recipient now dispatches on the content-encryption AlgorithmIdentifier's algorithm OID, so validation checks the recovered key against the inner content-encryption algorithm. Messages with a matching key size, non-HKDF messages, and recipients that do not enable validation are unaffected. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 2.0.13 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.13 (2.1.X series).

Record
CVE-2026-71892
CVSS 4.0
6.9 MediumCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:Amber
Weakness
CWE-697
Updated
2026-11-02
OSV 6.9

CMS key-transport recipient key-size validation never runs for RFC 9709 HKDF-derived keys

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the opt-in key-size validation on CMS key-transport recipients, org.bouncycastle.cms.jcajce.JceKeyTransRecipient.setKeySizeValidation(true), never ran for a message using RFC 9709 content-encryption key derivation (id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256). The branch that should have selected the actual content-encryption algorithm carried in the key derivation AlgorithmIdentifier's parameters compared the encrypted-key byte array against the id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256 object identifier, a comparison between a byte array and an ASN1ObjectIdentifier that is false for every possible input, so the check fell through to a key-size lookup on the outer wrapper OID. That OID identifies a key-derivation construction rather than a cipher and has no registered key size, so the size comparison was skipped entirely. A key-transport EnvelopedData or AuthEnvelopedData whose transported, HKDF-derived content-encryption key did not match the key size of the advertised content-encryption algorithm was therefore accepted even with validation explicitly enabled, silently defeating the only mechanism the API offers for enforcing recovered key size. The recipient now dispatches on the content-encryption AlgorithmIdentifier's algorithm OID, so validation checks the recovered key against the inner content-encryption algorithm. Messages with a matching key size, non-HKDF messages, and recipients that do not enable validation are unaffected. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 2.0.13 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.13 (2.1.X series).

Record
CVE-2026-71892
CVSS 4.0
6.9 MediumCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/U:Amber
Weakness
CWE-697
Updated
2026-11-04
OSVDEBIAN-CVE-2026-71892 6.9

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the opt-in key-size validation on CMS key-transport recipients, org.bouncycastle.cms.jcajce.JceKeyTransRecipient.setKeySizeValidation(true), never ran for a message using RFC 9709 content-encryption key derivation (id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256). The branch that should have selected the actual content-encryption algorithm carried in the key derivation AlgorithmIdentifier's parameters compared the encrypted-key byte array against the id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256 object identifier, a comparison between a byte array and an ASN1ObjectIdentifier that is false for every possible input, so the check fell through to a key-size lookup on the outer wrapper OID. That OID identifies a key-derivation construction rather than a cipher and has no registered key size, so the size comparison was skipped entirely. A key-transport EnvelopedData or AuthEnvelopedData whose transported, HKDF-derived content-encryption key did not match the key size of the advertised content-encryption algorithm was therefore accepted even with validation explicitly enabled, silently defeating the only mechanism the API offers for enforcing recovered key size. The recipient now dispatches on the content-encryption AlgorithmIdentifier's algorithm OID, so validation checks the recovered key against the inner content-encryption algorithm. Messages with a matching key size, non-HKDF messages, and recipients that do not enable validation are unaffected. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 2.0.13 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.13 (2.1.X series).

Record
DEBIAN-CVE-2026-71892
CVSS 4.0
6.9 MediumCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:Amber
Updated
2026-11-02
Show 5 moreShow less
OSVUBUNTU-CVE-2026-71892 6.9

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the opt-in key-size validation on CMS key-transport recipients, org.bouncycastle.cms.jcajce.JceKeyTransRecipient.setKeySizeValidation(true), never ran for a message using RFC 9709 content-encryption key derivation (id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256). The branch that should have selected the actual content-encryption algorithm carried in the key derivation AlgorithmIdentifier's parameters compared the encrypted-key byte array against the id-alg-cek-hkdf-sha256 object identifier, a comparison between a byte array and an ASN1ObjectIdentifier that is false for every possible input, so the check fell through to a key-size lookup on the outer wrapper OID. That OID identifies a key-derivation construction rather than a cipher and has no registered key size, so the size comparison was skipped entirely. A key-transport EnvelopedData or AuthEnvelopedData whose transported, HKDF-derived content-encryption key did not match the key size of the advertised content-encryption algorithm was therefore accepted even with validation explicitly enabled, silently defeating the only mechanism the API offers for enforcing recovered key size. The recipient now dispatches on the content-encryption AlgorithmIdentifier's algorithm OID, so validation checks the recovered key against the inner content-encryption algorithm. Messages with a matching key size, non-HKDF messages, and recipients that do not enable validation are unaffected. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 2.0.13 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.13 (2.1.X series).

Record
UBUNTU-CVE-2026-71892
CVSS 4.0
6.9 MediumCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/U:Amber
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVopenSUSE-SU-2026:12090-1 No score

bouncycastle-1.86-1.1 on GA media

These are all security issues fixed in the bouncycastle-1.86-1.1 package on the GA media of openSUSE Tumbleweed.

Record
openSUSE-SU-2026:12090-1
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVopenSUSE-SU-2026:22169-1 No score

Security update for bouncycastle

This update for bouncycastle fixes the following issues:

Update to 1.86:

  • CVE-2026-17507: negative signed leaf_index values from unsigned wire encodings can cause heap exhaustion (bsc#1284075).
  • CVE-2026-17508: unbounded KDF iteration and memory parameters can cause resource exhaustion (bsc#1284073).
  • CVE-2026-18036: variable-time modulo and division operations in NTRU implementation can allow timing side-channel attacks (bsc#1284065).
  • CVE-2026-18040: table lookups and variable-time duplicate scanning in HQC can cause cache side-channel leaks (bsc#1284205).
  • CVE-2026-71885: unbound X.509 certificates in MLS LeafNode verification can cause identity impersonation and group message interception (bsc#1284165).
  • CVE-2026-71886: unvalidated CERTIFY_OTHER flags in OpenPGP subkeys can cause unauthorized trust delegations and identity spoofing (bsc#1284212).
  • CVE-2026-71887: missing primary key back-signature validation on subkeys can cause signature misattribution and trust context spoofing (bsc#1284213).
  • CVE-2026-71888: disagreement between digestAlgorithm and authAttrs in CMS parsing can cause unauthenticated attribute injection (bsc#1284215).
  • CVE-2026-71889: skipped leaf certificate evaluation in checkNameConstraints can cause X.509 name constraint bypasses (bsc#1284218).
  • CVE-2026-71890: unbounded Remove proposals in external MLS commits can cause arbitrary group member eviction and session takeover (bsc#1284219).
  • CVE-2026-71891: forged ECPoint curves in BLS12-381 key validation can cause aggregate signature verification bypasses (bsc#1284220).
  • CVE-2026-71892: type mismatch in CMS key-transport validation can cause key-size enforcement bypasses for HKDF-derived content keys (bsc#1284221).
  • CVE-2026-85515: laundered EOF exceptions in OpenPGP message stream processing can cause unregistered truncation errors and integrity check bypasses (bsc#1284222).
  • CVE-2026-97873: unbounded iteration counts in legacy PBES1 and PKCS#12 PBE implementations can cause resource exhaustion (bsc#1284224).
Record
openSUSE-SU-2026:22169-1
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVSUSE-SU-2026:24461-1 No score

Security update for bouncycastle

This update for bouncycastle fixes the following issues:

Update to 1.86:

  • CVE-2026-17507: negative signed leaf_index values from unsigned wire encodings can cause heap exhaustion (bsc#1284075).
  • CVE-2026-17508: unbounded KDF iteration and memory parameters can cause resource exhaustion (bsc#1284073).
  • CVE-2026-18036: variable-time modulo and division operations in NTRU implementation can allow timing side-channel attacks (bsc#1284065).
  • CVE-2026-18040: table lookups and variable-time duplicate scanning in HQC can cause cache side-channel leaks (bsc#1284205).
  • CVE-2026-71885: unbound X.509 certificates in MLS LeafNode verification can cause identity impersonation and group message interception (bsc#1284165).
  • CVE-2026-71886: unvalidated CERTIFY_OTHER flags in OpenPGP subkeys can cause unauthorized trust delegations and identity spoofing (bsc#1284212).
  • CVE-2026-71887: missing primary key back-signature validation on subkeys can cause signature misattribution and trust context spoofing (bsc#1284213).
  • CVE-2026-71888: disagreement between digestAlgorithm and authAttrs in CMS parsing can cause unauthenticated attribute injection (bsc#1284215).
  • CVE-2026-71889: skipped leaf certificate evaluation in checkNameConstraints can cause X.509 name constraint bypasses (bsc#1284218).
  • CVE-2026-71890: unbounded Remove proposals in external MLS commits can cause arbitrary group member eviction and session takeover (bsc#1284219).
  • CVE-2026-71891: forged ECPoint curves in BLS12-381 key validation can cause aggregate signature verification bypasses (bsc#1284220).
  • CVE-2026-71892: type mismatch in CMS key-transport validation can cause key-size enforcement bypasses for HKDF-derived content keys (bsc#1284221).
  • CVE-2026-85515: laundered EOF exceptions in OpenPGP message stream processing can cause unregistered truncation errors and integrity check bypasses (bsc#1284222).
  • CVE-2026-97873: unbounded iteration counts in legacy PBES1 and PKCS#12 PBE implementations can cause resource exhaustion (bsc#1284224).
Record
SUSE-SU-2026:24461-1
Updated
2026-11-04
OSVSUSE-SU-2026:4797-1 No score

Security update for bouncycastle

This update for bouncycastle fixes the following issues:

  • CVE-2026-17507: negative signed leaf_index values from unsigned wire encodings can cause heap exhaustion (bsc#1284075).
  • CVE-2026-17508: unbounded KDF iteration and memory parameters can cause resource exhaustion (bsc#1284073).
  • CVE-2026-18036: variable-time modulo and division operations in NTRU implementation can allow timing side-channel attacks (bsc#1284065).
  • CVE-2026-18040: table lookups and variable-time duplicate scanning in HQC can cause cache side-channel leaks (bsc#1284205).
  • CVE-2026-71885: unbound X.509 certificates in MLS LeafNode verification can cause identity impersonation and group message interception (bsc#1284165).
  • CVE-2026-71886: unvalidated CERTIFY_OTHER flags in OpenPGP subkeys can cause unauthorized trust delegations and identity spoofing (bsc#1284212).
  • CVE-2026-71887: missing primary key back-signature validation on subkeys can cause signature misattribution and trust context spoofing (bsc#1284213).
  • CVE-2026-71888: disagreement between digestAlgorithm and authAttrs in CMS parsing can cause unauthenticated attribute injection (bsc#1284215).
  • CVE-2026-71889: skipped leaf certificate evaluation in checkNameConstraints can cause X.509 name constraint bypasses (bsc#1284218).
  • CVE-2026-71890: unbounded Remove proposals in external MLS commits can cause arbitrary group member eviction and session takeover (bsc#1284219).
  • CVE-2026-71891: forged ECPoint curves in BLS12-381 key validation can cause aggregate signature verification bypasses (bsc#1284220).
  • CVE-2026-71892: type mismatch in CMS key-transport validation can cause key-size enforcement bypasses for HKDF-derived content keys (bsc#1284221).
  • CVE-2026-85515: laundered EOF exceptions in OpenPGP message stream processing can cause unregistered truncation errors and integrity check bypasses (bsc#1284222).
  • CVE-2026-97873: unbounded iteration counts in legacy PBES1 and PKCS#12 PBE implementations can cause resource exhaustion (bsc#1284224).

Changes for bouncycastle:

  • Updated to version 1.86.
Record
SUSE-SU-2026:4797-1
Updated
2026-11-02

Affected products

Affected packages

Affected packages
PackageAffectedFixed
bouncycastle
Debian:12
All versions, plus listed versions
1.72-21.77-11.80-11.80-21.80-31.86-1
None known
bouncycastle
Debian:13
All versions, plus listed versions
1.80-31.86-1
None known
bouncycastle
Debian:14
before 1.86-1, plus listed versions
1.80-3
1.86-1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server 16.0
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-160000.1.1
1.86-160000.1.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server for SAP applications 16.0
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-160000.1.1
1.86-160000.1.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Module for Development Tools 15 SP7
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP4-ESPOS
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP4-LTSS
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP5-ESPOS
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP5-LTSS
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
Show 15 moreShow less
Affected packages
PackageAffectedFixed
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP4-LTSS
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP5-LTSS
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server 15 SP6-LTSS
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server for SAP Applications 15 SP4
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server for SAP Applications 15 SP5
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
bouncycastle
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server for SAP Applications 15 SP6
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-150200.3.41.1
1.86-150200.3.41.1
bouncycastle
Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS
All versions, plus listed versions
1.49+dfsg-3ubuntu11.51-4ubuntu11.51-4ubuntu1+esm1
None known
bouncycastle
Ubuntu:Pro:18.04:LTS
All versions, plus listed versions
1.57-11.58-11.59-11.59-1ubuntu0.1~esm1
None known
bouncycastle
Ubuntu:Pro:20.04:LTS
All versions, plus listed versions
1.61-11.61-1ubuntu0.1~esm1
None known
bouncycastle
Ubuntu:Pro:22.04:LTS
All versions, plus listed versions
1.68-21.68-41.68-51.68-5ubuntu0.1~esm1
None known
bouncycastle
Ubuntu:Pro:24.04:LTS
All versions, plus listed versions
1.72-21.77-11.77-1ubuntu0.1~esm1
None known
bouncycastle
Ubuntu:26.10
All versions, plus listed versions
1.80-3
None known
bouncycastle
Ubuntu:26.04:LTS
All versions, plus listed versions
1.80-3
None known
bouncycastle
openSUSE:Tumbleweed
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-1.1
1.86-1.1
bouncycastle
openSUSE:Leap 16.0
From an advisory covering 14 CVEs
before 1.86-160000.1.1
1.86-160000.1.1

History

History
RecordedChangedSources
affected
affected, aliases, facts, referencesOSV
first indexedCVE List, EUVD, GitHub Advisories, NVD, OSV

Dates are when Every CVE recorded each change. Upstream dates may differ.

In short

CVE-2026-71892 is a medium vulnerability (CVSS 6.9) in Legion Of The Bouncy Castle Inc. Bc-fja, published October 3, 2026. No source lists public exploit code. EPSS puts the chance of exploitation in the next 30 days at 0.17%, the 6th percentile. Fixed in bouncycastle 1.86-1.

References

Show 35 moreShow less
MoveEnter Open