CVE-2026-13505

Zeroisation of sensitive key material on garbage collection relies on finalization

HIGH
8.7
CVSS Score
Published: August 8, 2026 at 12:59 AM UTC
Updated: October 23, 2026 at 08:10 PM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorBouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA)

Using BC-FJA by Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc.?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect BC-FJA - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
HIGH8.7
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.4%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

In Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA) before bc-fips 1.0.2.7 (1.0.X series), 2.0.2 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.3 (2.1.X series), sensitive key material held by the AES and DESede engines, the SP 800-90A DRBGs, SymmetricSecretKey and the PBKD and scrypt parameter classes was zeroised on garbage collection by overriding Object.finalize. Finalization runs at an unspecified time and in an unspecified order and is serviced by a single finalizer thread, so where objects carrying a finalizer are allocated faster than that thread retires them the pending-finalization queue grows without bound: disposal falls arbitrarily far behind, which can contribute to an OutOfMemoryError under load, and the key material those objects hold stays resident in the heap for as long as they are queued, defeating the purpose of the zeroisation. The behaviour was not a problem on Java 8 or Java 11; it is later JVMs, on which finalization has been deprecated and progressively de-emphasised, where it becomes one. Disposal of these classes now runs from a java.lang.ref.Cleaner registered in the multi-release jdk1.9 overlay, so on Java 9 and later it no longer depends on the finalizer being scheduled. Bouncy Castle for Java (bcprov) and Bouncy Castle for Java LTS are not affected, as neither implements the finalizer-based zeroisation scheme.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

1.0.0 ≤ v < 1.0.2.72.0.0 ≤ v < 2.0.22.1.0 ≤ v < 2.1.31.0.02.0.02.1.0
Affected range stops below 1.0.2.7, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 2.0.2, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 2.1.3, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet. What the record does show:

References (1)

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitAutomatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

8.7HIGHbcorg
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusAWAITING ANALYSIS
CWE
CWE-772

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card