« Volver al listado

CVE-2026-71887

Estado: Pendiente de análisisAlta (8.2)—

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the high-level OpenPGP API accepted a data signature made by a signing subkey whose Subkey Binding signature carried no embedded Primary Key Binding (cross-certification) signature, in the case where that binding omits a Key Flags subpacket. RFC 9580 sec. 5.2.1.8 and sec. 10.1.3 require the embedded Primary Key Binding signature on any subkey that can issue signatures; it is the subkey's own statement that it belongs to the primary key it is bound under.

Leer descripción completaMostrar menos

OpenPGPCertificate resolved the subkey's key flags two different ways. isSigningKey() goes through getKeyFlags() and getApplyingSubpacket(), which falls back to the primary key's direct-key or primary User ID self-signature when the binding signature omits the subpacket, so the subkey inherited the primary's SIGN_DATA and counted as signing-capable; verifyEmbeddedPrimaryKeyBinding(), which enforces the requirement, reads the binding signature's own hashed subpackets, found no SIGN_DATA there, and returned early as a non-signing key without ever demanding the back signature. The same subkey was therefore signing-capable - so its signatures were attributed to the certificate and OpenPGPSignature.OpenPGPDocumentSignature.isValid() returned true - while being exempt from cross-certification, where GnuPG refuses the identical certificate and message. An attacker needs only the victim's public signing subkey, which is public material: they bind it to their own primary key with a Subkey Binding signature they are able to make, carrying no Key Flags and no embedded Primary Key Binding signature, which they cannot make without the subkey's private key, and a relying party verifying one of the victim's genuinely signed messages against that certificate is told the signature is valid and given the attacker's certificate as its issuer. Because a certificate's User IDs are self-asserted, a verifier that pins on the subkey's fingerprint or key ID while taking the identity from the enclosing certificate reports a real signature under an attacker-chosen identity. This is misattribution of a genuine signature rather than forgery of a new one: no private key is recovered, and the signature must be one the grafted subkey actually made. The low-level PGPSignature / PGPPublicKeyRing API performs no binding checks by design and is unaffected. Key Flags are a statement about the key the carrying signature refers to (RFC 9580 sec. 5.2.3.29), so a subkey no longer inherits them from the certificate-wide signatures of the primary key: a Subkey Binding signature that omits the subpacket now leaves the subkey with no capabilities rather than the primary's, which makes the flags the cross-certification check consults the same flags every other decision consults. Preferences and the other subpackets a direct-key signature carries are inherited as before, and the primary key itself, whose flags legitimately come from its own direct-key or User ID self-signature, is unaffected.

CVSS

Probabilidad de explotación (EPSS)

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System, de FIRST) estima la probabilidad de que una vulnerabilidad sea explotada en 30 días. Complementa a CVSS (impacto) y a CISA KEV (explotación confirmada).

🎯 Técnicas ATT&CK

Cómo se explota esta vulnerabilidad y qué consigue el atacante, en el lenguaje de MITRE ATT&CK.

Vulnerabilidad en API OpenPGP de Bouncy Castle accesible remotamente (AV:N) sin autenticación (PR:N) que permite falsificar identidad de firmante válido mediante re-vinculación maliciosa de subclaves públicas; impacto de integridad crítica (VI:H) sobre verificación de firmas digitales y cadena de co

Inferido por nuestro agente de análisis a partir de la descripción oficial, el vector CVSS y la CWE, y comprobado por un supervisor. Puede contener errores.

🛡️ Mitigaciones ATT&CK que cubren estas técnicas

Vulnerability ScanningPrivileged Account ManagementUpdate SoftwareRestrict Registry PermissionsNetwork SegmentationLimit Access to Resource Over Network

Tecnologías afectadas (1)

⚠ Inferidas por IA a partir de la descripción — NVD aún no ha analizado esta CVE; no son CPE verificados.

Bouncycastle — Bouncy CastleAI

CWE

Referencias

JSON original (NVD)

Mostrar
{
  "id": "CVE-2026-71887",
  "cveTags": [],
  "metrics": {
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2026-71887",
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "no"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "partial"
            }
          ],
          "version": "2.0.3",
          "timestamp": "2026-10-05T16:04:02.766987Z"
        }
      }
    ],
    "cvssMetricV40": [
      {
        "type": "Secondary",
        "source": "91579145-5d7b-4cc5-b925-a0262ff19630",
        "cvssData": {
          "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "version": "4.0",
          "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "baseScore": 8.2,
          "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
          "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/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",
          "exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "providerUrgency": "AMBER",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
          "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
          "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
          "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
          "integrityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackVector": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "availabilityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedUserInteraction": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackComplexity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
          "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
          "confidentialityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackRequirements": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedPrivilegesRequired": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "affected": [
    {
      "source": "91579145-5d7b-4cc5-b925-a0262ff19630",
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "repo": "https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java",
          "vendor": "Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc.",
          "modules": [
            "pg"
          ],
          "product": "BC-JAVA",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "1.81",
              "lessThan": "1.86",
              "versionType": "maven"
            }
          ],
          "platforms": [
            "all"
          ],
          "packageURL": "pkg:maven/org.bouncycastle/bcpg-jdk18on",
          "packageName": "bcpg",
          "programFiles": [
            "OpenPGPCertificate"
          ],
          "collectionURL": "https://www.bouncycastle.org/download/bouncy-castle-java/",
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "published": "2026-10-03T09:17:05.067",
  "references": [
    {
      "url": "https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/b51452fa48ccb578fc16b8222fce9eedf92c94d6",
      "source": "91579145-5d7b-4cc5-b925-a0262ff19630"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/wiki/CVE%E2%80%902026%E2%80%9071887",
      "source": "91579145-5d7b-4cc5-b925-a0262ff19630"
    }
  ],
  "vulnStatus": "Awaiting Analysis",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "type": "Secondary",
      "source": "91579145-5d7b-4cc5-b925-a0262ff19630",
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-345"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-347"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the high-level OpenPGP API accepted a data signature made by a signing subkey whose Subkey Binding signature carried no embedded Primary Key Binding (cross-certification) signature, in the case where that binding omits a Key Flags subpacket. RFC 9580 sec. 5.2.1.8 and sec. 10.1.3 require the embedded Primary Key Binding signature on any subkey that can issue signatures; it is the subkey's own statement that it belongs to the primary key it is bound under. OpenPGPCertificate resolved the subkey's key flags two different ways. isSigningKey() goes through getKeyFlags() and getApplyingSubpacket(), which falls back to the primary key's direct-key or primary User ID self-signature when the binding signature omits the subpacket, so the subkey inherited the primary's SIGN_DATA and counted as signing-capable; verifyEmbeddedPrimaryKeyBinding(), which enforces the requirement, reads the binding signature's own hashed subpackets, found no SIGN_DATA there, and returned early as a non-signing key without ever demanding the back signature. The same subkey was therefore signing-capable - so its signatures were attributed to the certificate and OpenPGPSignature.OpenPGPDocumentSignature.isValid() returned true - while being exempt from cross-certification, where GnuPG refuses the identical certificate and message. An attacker needs only the victim's public signing subkey, which is public material: they bind it to their own primary key with a Subkey Binding signature they are able to make, carrying no Key Flags and no embedded Primary Key Binding signature, which they cannot make without the subkey's private key, and a relying party verifying one of the victim's genuinely signed messages against that certificate is told the signature is valid and given the attacker's certificate as its issuer. Because a certificate's User IDs are self-asserted, a verifier that pins on the subkey's fingerprint or key ID while taking the identity from the enclosing certificate reports a real signature under an attacker-chosen identity. This is misattribution of a genuine signature rather than forgery of a new one: no private key is recovered, and the signature must be one the grafted subkey actually made. The low-level PGPSignature / PGPPublicKeyRing API performs no binding checks by design and is unaffected. Key Flags are a statement about the key the carrying signature refers to (RFC 9580 sec. 5.2.3.29), so a subkey no longer inherits them from the certificate-wide signatures of the primary key: a Subkey Binding signature that omits the subpacket now leaves the subkey with no capabilities rather than the primary's, which makes the flags the cross-certification check consults the same flags every other decision consults. Preferences and the other subpackets a direct-key signature carries are inherited as before, and the primary key itself, whose flags legitimately come from its own direct-key or User ID self-signature, is unaffected."
    }
  ],
  "lastModified": "2026-10-06T14:49:40.823",
  "sourceIdentifier": "91579145-5d7b-4cc5-b925-a0262ff19630"
}