In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the high-level OpenPGP certificate API accepted a third-party certification or trust delegation from any component key of the issuing certificate, without requiring that component to have been granted the authority to certify. OpenPGPCertificate.getCertificationBy() and getDelegationBy() resolve a third-party signature by matching its issuer key identifier against every key of the third-party certificate, then verify the issuing component's binding chain and the signature itself; nothing checked that the issuing component carried the RFC 9580 sec. 5.2.3.29 certification key flag (CERTIFY_OTHER) when the signature was created. A subkey bound only with SIGN_DATA - the online signing subkey of exactly the offline-primary arrangement those key flags exist to express - could therefore issue a positive User ID certification over an attacker-controlled identity, or a full-trust depth-one direct-key delegation of introducer trust, and the API returned it as a valid signature chain attributed to the third-party certificate. An application treating getCertificationBy(...).isValid() or getDelegationBy(...) as an identity or trusted-introducer decision would attribute the attacker's assertion to the offline primary key. The same held for a legacy RSA subkey bound only for encryption, whose algorithm is nonetheless able to sign. This does not forge the primary key's signature or recover any private key; it promotes an already-compromised restricted subkey to the primary key's identity-issuing authority, defeating the containment the key-flag separation provides. A third-party certification or delegation is now attributed to the issuing certificate only when the component key that made it is the primary key, or is a subkey holding CERTIFY_OTHER when the signature was created, so certification-capable subkeys continue to be accepted; primary keys are accepted whatever their key flags say, since a primary key is certification-capable by construction and certificates carrying no key flags subpacket at all are common. Third-party revocations are deliberately outside the rule, since declining to honour one would keep trust alive rather than withdraw it.
CVE-2026-71886
This high-severity CVE scores 8.2 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.2% (5th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs). 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).
- High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
An upstream fix is merged but not yet released — mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation) until the release ships, then apply it.
- CVSS v3
- 8.2
- EG Score
- 8.2HIGHmedium confidence
- EG Risk
- 41EG 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 computedSeverity82% × 45%Exploitation0% × 40%Automatability30% × 15%CISA SSVC: Track at low or medium mission impact; Track or Attend at high (mission-essential systems).Action: An upstream fix is merged but not yet in a tagged release. 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 until it ships, then apply the release. - EPSS PROB
- 0.2%
- EPSS %ILE
- 5th
- KEV
- Not listed
CISA SSVCTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track or Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
An upstream fix is merged but not yet in a tagged release. 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 until it ships, then apply the release.
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 3, 2026
Last Modified
October 3, 2026
Advisory Details (2)
Auto-updated Oct 3, 2026commit f0d5c8535aef (bcgit/bc-java)
Fix landed in bcgit/bc-java commit f0d5c8535aef — awaiting tagged release
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/f0d5c8535aeff3f34b7b6b6289ee78c2ea36a3fbCVE‐2026‐71886 · bcgit/bc-java Wiki · GitHub
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/wiki/CVE%E2%80%902026%E2%80%9071886Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-71886(1)
These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.
Weakness Classification(2)
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Data Freshness Timeline
(refreshed 7× in last 7d / 7× 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.
- 2026-10-04 09:57 UTCGHSA enrichment
- 2026-10-03 21:41 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-03 21:41 UTCGHSA enrichment
- 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescore
- 2026-10-03 09:25 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-03 08:57 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-03 08:54 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked
Related CVEs(same CWE)
Frequently asked(5)
What is CVE-2026-71886?
When was CVE-2026-71886 disclosed?
Is CVE-2026-71886 actively exploited?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-71886?
How do I remediate CVE-2026-71886?
Dependency Blast Radius
Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-71886
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-71886?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.