In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, validation of an MLS (RFC 9420) external commit's proposal list, org.bouncycastle.mls.protocol.Group.validateExternalCachedProposals, counted the proposals by type and bounded the removed leaf index but never established that the removed leaf had anything to do with the joiner. RFC 9420 sec. 12.2 permits at most one Remove proposal in an external commit, with which the joiner removes an old version of themselves, and requires that where one is present the LeafNode in the commit's path field meet the criteria it would have to meet in an Update for the removed leaf, in particular that its credential present identifiers acceptable for the removed participant. The ordinary proposal-list validator's self-remove rule is deliberately not applied on this path, because a resync commit legitimately removes a leaf the joiner owns, but nothing was put in its place. Any party holding the group's public GroupInfo, which is precisely what an external joiner is meant to be given, could therefore commit a Remove naming any member's LeafIndex and have every member apply it, evicting that member and taking over their slot in the ratchet tree. The credential check that should have prevented this existed only in the gRPC interop harness and so protected no other caller of the public Group.externalJoin and Group.handle API. An external commit carrying a Remove is now accepted only when the removed leaf's credential is identical to the one in the joiner's own new leaf, on both the sending and the receiving side.
CVE-2026-71890
This high-severity CVE scores 8.7 under a secondary CVSS source (NVD's own analysis pending). EPSS exploit probability: 0.2% (14th 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
- 8.7
- EG Score
- 8.7HIGHmedium confidence
- EG Risk
- 44EG 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 computedSeverity87% × 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
- 14th
- 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 7e8bb10eb90b (bcgit/bc-java)
Fix landed in bcgit/bc-java commit 7e8bb10eb90b — awaiting tagged release
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/7e8bb10eb90baddf3f10b8679f627462b9522d24CVE‐2026‐71890 · bcgit/bc-java Wiki · GitHub
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/wiki/CVE%E2%80%902026%E2%80%9071890Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-71890(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.
- 2026-10-04 08:01 UTCGHSA enrichment
- 2026-10-03 20:43 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-03 20:43 UTCGHSA enrichment
- 2026-10-03 14:26 UTCEPSS rescore
- 2026-10-03 09:25 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-03 09:04 UTCEG score recompute
- 2026-10-03 09:04 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked
Related CVEs(same CWE)
Frequently asked(5)
What is CVE-2026-71890?
When was CVE-2026-71890 disclosed?
Is CVE-2026-71890 actively exploited?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-71890?
How do I remediate CVE-2026-71890?
Dependency Blast Radius
Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-71890
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-71890?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.