CVE-2026-71889

HIGHPre-NVD 8.78.7—
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

This high-severity CVE scores 8.7 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).

Triggered by: NVD CVSS baseline
Sources: epss, secondary
Trending — 4 sources updated this week
8.7EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationSerious severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet.
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS: 8.7Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

An upstream fix is merged but not yet released — mitigate (WAF / firewall / segmentation) until the release ships, then apply it.

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).

CVSS v3
8.7
EG Score
8.7HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
44
EG Risk 44/100CISA 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
Severity87% × 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, 2026
Upstream fix merged — awaiting tagged release. Sources: github_commit.
github_commit

commit 06dcff2f5103 (bcgit/bc-java)

Fix landed in bcgit/bc-java commit 06dcff2f5103 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/06dcff2f51037095de126986285c998e3455ab85
generic

CVE‐2026‐71889 · bcgit/bc-java Wiki · GitHub

https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/wiki/CVE%E2%80%902026%E2%80%9071889

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-71889(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 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.

  1. 2026-10-04 08:01 UTCGHSA enrichment
  2. 2026-10-03 20:43 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-03 20:43 UTCGHSA enrichment
  4. 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-10-03 09:25 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-03 08:46 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-03 08:44 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Related CVEs(same CWE)

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-71889?
CVE-2026-71889 is a high vulnerability published on October 3, 2026. 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…
When was CVE-2026-71889 disclosed?
CVE-2026-71889 was first published on October 3, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-71889 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-71889 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (5th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-71889?
CVE-2026-71889 has a CVSS base score of 8.7 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-71889?
An upstream fix for CVE-2026-71889 has been merged but is not yet in a tagged release. Until it ships, restrict network exposure of the affected system or apply the vendor's mitigation, then update to the release that contains the fix. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-71889 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-71889

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-71889?

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

Book a Demo →Browse All CVEs