High Cryptography

CVE-2026-71889 — PKIXCertPathReviewer does not apply X.509 name constraints to the target certificate

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).

Published Oct 3, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: bcorg

Low

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.

How the score was calculated

EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+1
Technical severity (high)+6
Automatable exploitation (SSVC)+3

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation

Not confirmed

Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.

EPSS FIRST

0.17%

ahead of 6% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026

Affects

Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc.

BC-FJA and 2 more

CVSS base

8.7

High · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

Yes

can an attacker script the kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-FJA, Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-JAVA, Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-LTS-JAVA).
The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (cryptography), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status	Source
Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc.	BC-FJA	≥ 1.0.4 and < 1.0.13≥ 2.0.0 and < 2.0.13≥ 2.1.0 and < 2.1.13	Vulnerable	CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc.	BC-JAVA	< 1.86	Vulnerable	CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc.	BC-LTS-JAVA	≥ 2.73.0 and < 2.73.13	Vulnerable	CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector

Network

Attack complexity

Low

Attack requirements

None

Privileges required

None

User interaction

None

Scope

Confidentiality (vulnerable system)

None

Integrity (vulnerable system)

High

Availability (vulnerable system)

None

Confidentiality (subsequent)

None

Integrity (subsequent)

None

Availability (subsequent)

None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Scored by
8.7	CVSS 4.0	High	—	—	91579145-5d7b-4cc5-b925-a0262ff19630 via NIST National Vulnerability Database
8.7	CVSS 4.0	High	—	—	bcorg via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

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

(score shown at the top: 91579145-5d7b-4cc5-b925-a0262ff19630)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.17%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
Check TLS negotiations and unexpected certificates in the component’s traffic.

web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPS

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

2026
Affected products added · legion of the bouncy castle inc./bc-java, legion of the bouncy castle inc./bc-lts-java, legion of the bouncy castle inc.
Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
SSVC assessment updated
Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Record published
Oct 13, 2026
CVSS changed · 8.7
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Source status changed · → Awaiting Analysis
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Record created in this database
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVE published
Oct 3, 2026 · bcorg

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

2 on the record

github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/06dcff2f51037095de126986285c998e3455ab85
patch, NIST National Vulnerability Database
github.com/bcgit/bc-java/wiki/CVE%E2%80%902026%E2%80%9071889
vendor-advisory, NIST National Vulnerability Database

Elsewhere on this site

Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc.
every CVE for this vendor

Cryptography
same class

CWE-295
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

High CVE-2026-71884 Packet CTR reports a full success length after the counter is exhausted 6d
High CVE-2026-85515 OpenPGP message truncation not reported, bypassing the SEIPDv1 integrity check 12d
Medium CVE-2026-97873 Legacy PBES1 and PKCS#12 PBE iteration count honoured unbounded in the raw JCA provider 12d
Medium CVE-2026-71892 CMS key-transport recipient key-size validation never runs for RFC 9709 HKDF-derived keys 12d
High CVE-2026-71890 MLS external commit can remove an arbitrary group member 12d
High CVE-2026-71891 BLS12-381 key validation accepts a public key built on a foreign curve 12d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-71889 is "PKIXCertPathReviewer does not apply X.509 name constraints to the target certificate", rated High. It affects BC-FJA (Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc.); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 8.7 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.17% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.