CVE-2026-71884

HIGHPre-NVD 8.28.2
EchelonGraph scoreLOW confidence

This high-severity CVE scores 8.2 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit-prediction score not yet available (the EPSS model rescores nightly; freshly-published CVEs typically appear within 48 hours). GitHub Security Advisory data not yet ingested — confidence will rise once GHSA publishes (typical lag: hours to days for open-source ecosystem CVEs; never for infrastructure-only CVEs).

Triggered by: NVD CVSS baseline
Sources: secondary
Trending — 3 sources updated this week
8.2EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationSerious severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet.
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: —CVSS: 8.2Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.

In Bouncy Castle for Java LTS before 2.73.13, the native one-shot CTR packet cipher did not check that the requested input length fitted the counter space the IV left. In CTR mode the IV and the block counter share one 16-byte block, so an IV of 13 to 15 bytes leaves a counter of only 1 to 3 bytes, addressing 256, 65536 or 16777216 blocks respectively. Given a longer input the counter wrapped and the keystream repeated from the start of the same packet, and the call then returned the full input length as though every byte had been correctly transformed. Two segments of the message were therefore encrypted under the same keystream, so their plaintexts can be recovered from the ciphertext alone, without the key, while the caller saw neither an exception nor a short length to indicate it. The streaming implementation validates at init and again while processing, and the portable AESCTRPacketCipher rejects such a request with "Counter in CTR/SIC mode out of range.", but the native one-shot path has a single entry point and performed no counter-range validation there. It now preflights the IV-derived counter range and rejects an over-long request before any output is written, so the operation is failure-atomic and never reports success for bytes it did not correctly transform. A counter of four bytes or more cannot be exhausted by a Java int length and is unaffected, as is a full 16-byte IV, where the counter range is the caller's responsibility. Bouncy Castle for Java (bcprov) is not affected, as it ships no native implementations.

CVSS v3
8.2
EG Score
8.2HIGHlow confidence
EG Risk
41
EG Risk 41/100CISA SSVC

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).

How it’s computed
Severity82% × 45%
Exploitation0% × 40%
Automatability30% × 15%
CISA SSVC: Track at low or medium mission impact; Track or Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
Action: No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.
EPSS PROB
—
EPSS %ILE
—
KEV
Not listed

CISA SSVCTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track or Attend at high (mission-essential systems).

No fix is confirmed yet. Restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high, and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix.

Exploitation none (no KEV listing, exploit record or EPSS ≥ 50%) · Automatable unknown (not published for this CVE) · Technical impact partial (CVSS below 9.0). Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it: high means the affected system is essential to your organisation's mission, or its compromise could cause irreversible harm to people. CISA's decision table

Published

October 9, 2026

Last Modified

October 9, 2026

Advisory Details (1)

Auto-updated Oct 9, 2026
No fix on record yet.
generic

CVE‐2026‐71884 · bcgit/bc-java Wiki · GitHub

https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/wiki/CVE%E2%80%902026%E2%80%9071884

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-71884(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 5× in last 7d / 5× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-10 05:23 UTCGHSA enrichment
  2. 2026-10-09 16:55 UTCGHSA enrichment
  3. 2026-10-09 10:47 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-09 09:49 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-09 09:48 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-71884?
CVE-2026-71884 is a high vulnerability published on October 9, 2026. In Bouncy Castle for Java LTS before 2.73.13, the native one-shot CTR packet cipher did not check that the requested input length fitted the counter space the IV left. In CTR mode the IV and the block counter share one 16-byte block, so an IV of 13 to 15 bytes leaves a counter of only 1 to 3 bytes,…
When was CVE-2026-71884 disclosed?
CVE-2026-71884 was first published on October 9, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-71884?
CVE-2026-71884 has a CVSS base score of 8.2 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending). The EG score is currently aggregating — additional source signals are being incorporated as they become available..
How do I remediate CVE-2026-71884?
No fix for CVE-2026-71884 is confirmed yet. Until one is published, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation — for example, keep it off the internet or limit it to trusted networks — and watch the vendor's advisory for the fix. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-71884 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-71884

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-71884?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.