BC-JAVA: Uncontrolled Recursion
CVE-2026-59645 is a high-severity uncontrolled recursion vulnerability in BC-JAVA from Legion of the Bouncy Castle, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.5 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists version 1.85 as the first without the flaw, so updating BC-JAVA to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.41% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update BC-JAVA to 1.85 or a later version.
- Update BC-LTS-JAVA to 2.73.12 or a later version.
- Update BC-FJA to 2.0.7 or 2.1.7, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legion of the Bouncy Castle | BC-JAVA | 1.70 up to, but not including, 1.85 | 1.85 |
| Legion of the Bouncy Castle | BC-LTS-JAVA | 2.73.0 up to, but not including, 2.73.12 | 2.73.12 |
| Legion of the Bouncy Castle | BC-FJA | 2.0.0 up to, but not including, 2.0.7; 2.1.0 up to, but not including, 2.1.7 | 2.0.7, 2.1.7 |
| Bouncycastle | Bcutil-fips | 2.0.2 up to, but not including, 2.0.7; 2.1.4 up to, but not including, 2.1.7 | 2.0.7, 2.1.7 |
| Bouncycastle | Bouncy Castle For Java LTS | 2.73.11 and earlier | Not stated |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- NoneNo data is disclosed.
- Integrity
- NoneNothing can be modified.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H. Scored by NVD.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 4.0 | 8.7 | High | CNA |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.5 | High | NVD |
Official description
In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.85, OER parser recurses without depth limit on self-referential IEEE 1609.2 schema. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java LTS before 2.73.12, and Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcutil-fips 2.0.7 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.7 (2.1.X series).
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Uncontrolled Recursion
The product does not properly control the amount of recursion that takes place, consuming excessive resources, such as allocated memory or the program stack.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Ensure that an end condition will be reached under all logic conditions. The end condition may include checking against the depth of recursion and exiting with an error if the recursion goes too deep. The complexity of the end condition contributes to the effectiveness of this action.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Patches and release notes
Third-party and government advisories
- github.com/bcgit/bc-java/wiki/CVE%E2%80%902026%E2%80%9059645Third Party Advisory
Other vulnerabilities in BC-JAVA
- 8.2 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 8.7 High severity
- 8.7 High severity
- 8.7 High severity
- 8.2 High severity
Recent Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerabilities
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.