Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2026-59643· NVD / CVE Program· CNA bcorg

OpenPGP inline-signature policy failures silently ignored

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 34/100)

  • The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
  • Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.24% (FIRST EPSS).
  • Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
  • According to CISA the attack is automatable: targets can be found by mass scanning.
  • Fixed version: Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-FJA 2.0.13; Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-JAVA 1.85.

Low priority for now. Upgrade to Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-FJA 2.0.13; Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-JAVA 1.85 or later.

Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it

Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.85, OpenPGP inline-signature policy failures silently ignored. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bcpg-fips 2.0.13.

HighCVSS 8.7 · v4.0—No exploit Fix available
Published
Aug 2, 2026
Updated
Sep 10, 2026
EPSS
0.2% · 14th percentile

Report tools

JSON

Action score

34

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
34 / 40 · 8.7 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.2%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
none
Automatable
yes
Technical impact
partial

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD
—
CNA · bcorg
8.7
NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.

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/U:Amber

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Get told when this record changes

  • Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
  • No public exploit code on record
  • A fix has been released

If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.

Follow CVE-2026-59643

When you'll hear from us

  • when it enters CISA KEV
  • when exploit code appears or is weaponized
  • when the record is updated (including a fixed version)
  • when EPSS rises 20 points in a week

One daily email digest (06:00 UTC); connect a webhook for KEV listings and weaponized exploits instantly.

Your free account also gets you

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

  • Stack alerts: add the products and versions you run, get the new CVEs that affect them
  • Port scanning: 5 full scans a day (members only)
  • Uptime monitoring: 1 site, instant email when it goes down
  • Verify your domain: subdomains and takeover risk scanned every week
  • 10 scans an hour on the security tools (3 a day without an account), an API key and MCP
All free tools

Sign up with email · Have an account? Sign in

Free account, no card. Unfollow any time.

Don't want an account? Get "Exploited this week" by email every MondayDon't want an account? RSS feed for bouncycastle records

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

Is your version affected? Check it

Noroxi analysis

What does it mean in your environment?

The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

Is your version affected?

Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.

VendorProduct
bouncycastlebc-java
bouncycastlebcpg-fips

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • bouncycastle bc-javabefore 1.85
  • bouncycastle bcpg-fipsbefore 2.0.13

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (bcorg). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

  • Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-FJA

    • 2.0.12 and later · before 2.0.13affected · maven

  • Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-JAVA

    • 1.81 and later · before 1.85affected · maven

Package-level exposure

OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.

EcosystemPackageAffected rangeFix
Debian:12bouncycastleall versions—
Debian:14bouncycastlebefore 1.86-11.86-1

Same product

bouncycastle: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2007-6721The Legion of the Bouncy Castle Java Cryptography API before release 1.38, as used in Crypto Provider Package before 1.36, has unknown impac
    41Plan
  • CVE-2018-1000613Legion of the Bouncy Castle Legion of the Bouncy Castle Java Cryptography APIs 1.58 up to but not including 1.60 contains a CWE-470: Use of
    40Plan
  • CVE-2026-58062Stapled OCSP response accepted without binding to the checked certificate
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2026-8763Name Constraints bypass via trailing dot in rfc822Name and URI
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2026-59650MTI/A0 DH agreement exponentiates unvalidated peer value
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2026-59638JSSE hostname verifier CN-fallback enabled by default despite documented opt-in
    37Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

Product / packageFixed versionSource
Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-FJA2.0.13Vendor (CNA)
Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-JAVA1.85Vendor (CNA)
debian:bouncycastle1.86-1 · Debian:14Package registry (OSV)

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

  • CVE-2026-596390 days apartCMS verifySignatures returns true for SignedData with zero signers
    34Monitor
  • CVE-2026-128601 days apartRSA PKCS#1 verification skips last two hash bytes in NULL-omitted path
    34Monitor

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
  • No account or password is required.
  • No user action is required.
  • No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
Integrity
Availability
Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
X

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-347 · Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

CVSS vector

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

nvd-secondary

Root cause

The verifier takes the algorithm to verify with from the token’s own header. Untrusted data ends up deciding its own verification rule.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-347 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

ts
const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey);

Fixed

ts
const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey, {  algorithms: ["RS256"],  issuer: "https://id.example.com",  audience: "portal",});

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

ATT&CK techniques

—

Change log

  1. Fix✗ → ✓

For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →

References

Show all references (1 more)

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records