CVE-2026-71888

CMS AuthenticatedData exposes attacker-inserted authAttrs when digestAlgorithm is absent

HIGH
8.7
CVSS Score
Published: October 3, 2026 at 08:36 AM UTC
Updated: October 6, 2026 at 02:49 PM UTC
2 products affected across 1 vendorBC JavaBouncy Castle for Java FIPS (BC-FJA)

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

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

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
HIGH8.7
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.1%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the streaming CMS AuthenticatedData parser accepted a message whose digestAlgorithm and authAttrs fields disagreed about whether authenticated attributes were present. RFC 5652 sec. 9.1 pairs the two, requiring that authAttrs be present whenever digestAlgorithm is, and sec. 9.2 makes the MAC cover the DER encoding of authAttrs when they are present and the eContent OCTET STRING directly when they are not. CMSAuthenticatedDataParser has to choose between those two in its constructor, before it can reach authAttrs, which comes later in the SEQUENCE, so it chose on digestAlgorithm alone: for a message with digestAlgorithm absent but authAttrs present it verified the content MAC and then returned the attributes through getAuthAttrs() as though they had been authenticated, when the MAC had never covered them. An attacker able to modify a message in transit could insert an authenticated attribute, such as an RFC 2634 ESSSecurityLabel, into an otherwise valid message while holding neither the key-encryption key nor the content-MAC key, and an application taking an authorization, routing or labelling decision from those attributes would act on attacker-chosen values. The content itself remained MAC-bound. asn1.cms.AuthenticatedData now rejects the mismatched pairing when parsing and CMSAuthenticatedDataParser cross-checks the two fields once authAttrs is read. This is a variant of CVE-2026-59642, which bound the content to the MAC for messages that legitimately carry authAttrs, and which does not address this case. This issue also affects Bouncy Castle for Java LTS before 2.73.13, and 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), and bcutil-fips 2.0.8 (2.0.X series) and 2.1.8 (2.1.X series).

Affected

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

1.0.0 ≤ v < 1.0.132.0.0 ≤ v < 2.0.132.0.0 ≤ v < 2.0.82.1.0 ≤ v < 2.1.132.1.0 ≤ v < 2.1.81.0.02.0.02.1.0
Affected range stops below 1.0.13, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 2.0.13, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 2.0.8, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 2.1.13, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 2.1.8, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
v < 1.861.70 ≤ v < 1.862.73.0 ≤ v < 2.73.131.702.73.0
Affected range stops below 1.86, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Affected range stops below 2.73.13, 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:

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-354

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