CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-71889NVD status: Awaiting Analysis

BC-JAVA: Improper Certificate Validation

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-71889 is a high-severity improper certificate validation vulnerability in BC-JAVA from Legion of the Bouncy Castle, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 8.7 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 1.86 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 0.17% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update BC-JAVA to 1.86 or a later version.
  2. Update BC-LTS-JAVA to 2.73.13 or a later version.
  3. Update BC-FJA to 1.0.13 or 2.0.13 or 2.1.13, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  4. Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Legion of the Bouncy CastleBC-JAVAbefore 1.861.86
Legion of the Bouncy CastleBC-LTS-JAVA2.73.0 up to, but not including, 2.73.132.73.13
Legion of the Bouncy CastleBC-FJA1.0.4 up to, but not including, 1.0.13; 2.0.0 up to, but not including, 2.0.13; 2.1.0 up to, but not including, 2.1.131.0.13, 2.0.13, 2.1.13

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.
Attack requirements
NoneThe attack does not depend on a particular deployment or configuration.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
NoneNo loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
Integrity (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of integrity on the vulnerable system.
Availability (vulnerable system)
NoneNo loss of availability on the vulnerable system.
Confidentiality (other systems)
NoneNo loss of confidentiality on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Integrity (other systems)
NoneNo loss of integrity on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Availability (other systems)
NoneNo loss of availability on systems beyond the vulnerable one.

Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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. Scored by CNA.

Official description

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, neither copy of PKIXCertPathReviewer - org.bouncycastle.pkix.jcajce.PKIXCertPathReviewer nor the legacy org.bouncycastle.x509.PKIXCertPathReviewer - applied X.509 name constraints to the end-entity certificate. checkNameConstraints walked the path with a loop bound of index greater than zero, which is the bound the CA-only steps require, but index zero is the target certificate under the standard CertPath ordering, so the permitted and excluded subtree checks of RFC 5280 sec. 6.1.3 (b) and (c) never ran against the leaf's subject DN or its subjectAltName. A chain whose leaf violated a NameConstraints extension imposed by its own issuing CA therefore reported isValidCertPath() true with an empty error list, while CertPathValidator.getInstance("PKIX", "BC"), which shares no code with the reviewer, rejected the identical chain against the identical trust anchor. An application using the reviewer to make the trust decision rather than for diagnostics alongside a real validation accepted a certificate the constrained CA was never authorised to issue. Both copies now check every certificate in the path including the target, waive the sec. 4.2.1.10 self-issued exemption for the final certificate as sec. 6.1.3 requires, and skip the sec. 6.1.4 (g) constraint-accumulation step for the target. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java LTS before 2.73.13, which carries only the org.bouncycastle.pkix.jcajce copy of the reviewer. It also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpkix-fips 1.0.13 (1.0.X series), 2.0.13 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.13 (2.1.X series).

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Improper Certificate Validation

The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Certificates should be carefully managed and checked to assure that data are encrypted with the intended owner's public key.
  • If certificate pinning is being used, ensure that all relevant properties of the certificate are fully validated before the certificate is pinned, including the hostname.

More Improper Certificate Validation vulnerabilities (CWE-295)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Other vulnerabilities in BC-JAVA

All BC-JAVA vulnerabilities

Recent Improper Certificate Validation vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.