WaratekVRT Sign in

CVE-2026-17508

Severity5.3 Medium CVSS 4.0
WeaknessCWE-770
Published2 Oct 2026

Published 42 days ago. NVD often adds the list of affected products days or weeks after a CVE is published, and the other sources we check lag too. The scope and status here may change.

Description

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, several password-based key derivation entry points ran the KDF with cost parameters taken from the untrusted input being processed, without bounding them, so a small input could dictate an arbitrary amount of work before any password or integrity check could reject it. The affected paths are the RFC 9579 PBMAC1 MAC calculator builders, which took the PBKDF2 iteration count and derived-key length straight out of PBMAC1Params (JcePBMac1CalculatorBuilder, and PKCS12PBEUtils.createPBMac1Calculator reached from PKCS12PfxPdu.isMacValid); the scrypt parallelization parameter p in the PKCS#8 and PKCS#12 cost guards, which bounded only the cost parameter N and the block size r even though the scratch buffer scales with r times p, so the configured memory ceiling could be evaded entirely; the raw JCA PBKDF2 provider (org.bouncycastle.jcajce.provider.symmetric.PBEPBKDF2); and the bcrypt round count read from an encrypted OpenSSH v1 private key's own kdfoptions. Each now bounds the parameter before deriving, in line with the caps already applied elsewhere in the tree, with the OpenSSH round count configurable through the new org.bouncycastle.openssh.max_rounds property. This completes the bounding begun in 1.85 for the PKCS#8 / PBES2 decryptors (CVE-2026-15055). 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).

Exploitation status

No public exploit

No exploit has been reported in the sources we check.

  • CISA KEV not listed
  • VulnCheck KEV not listed
  • CISA Vulnrichment exploitation: none
  • Indexed PoC none indexed
  • EPSS 0.42% chance in 30 days

Waratek protection

No exploit published

Within Waratek scope. In the sources we check, nobody has published exploit code for this CVE or reported it being exploited.

A public code fix exists: bcgit/bc-java 20ed9e2.

  • Protection none
  • Action unverified
  • Review automated Upstream data
  • Record active
Decided by Medium or Low severity, no CISA or VulnCheck KEV listing, no PoC clearing the evidence bar, no CISA verdict, no Oracle advisory
Finding This CVE is MEDIUM severity, is not listed in CISA KEV or VulnCheck KEV, has no public exploit or PoC in any indexed source, carries no CISA Vulnrichment finding of a demonstrated exploit, and is not part of an Oracle Critical Patch Update. None of the signals that would put it in front of an engineer is present, and the volume of CVEs below that bar is too great to take one at a time, so no rule is written for it. This is a decision about what we act on, not a finding that the CVE is harmless — a patch may well be derivable, and a low-severity defect can still be one link in a longer chain.
Candidate fix https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/20ed9e203caec91d25cd386ceb6d364e9b068f67 : a commit: the change itself

References

URLTags
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/20ed9e203caec91d25cd386ceb6d364e9b068f67 commit
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/442393bf187c914b1e66fbed4fab532a1fe06c6a
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/480d878aa6f7dc8b20403064f304bbe0decbbb1a
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/766a31026ac24ed3c6cad8662058ba450c338da1
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/882fdab53f6c4c150a5d6a4e6ef1fc05d382385a
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/commit/e72bc0681ff4227fced912ef7394daf7b7d57bb3
https://github.com/bcgit/bc-java/wiki/CVE%E2%80%902026%E2%80%9017508

Timeline

Published2026-10-02By the CVE Program.
NVD record modified2026-10-02NVD's own last-modified date for this record.