VulnTideExploited vulnerabilities, by vendor. Data as of .
Not in CISA KEVPublished CVSS 9.2 criticalEPSS 0.2% probability of exploitation in 30 daysFound by AI: AISLE
Legion of the Bouncy Castle

CVE-2026-71885: MLS X.509 credential not bound to the LeafNode signature key

Is it exploited?

Not on CISA's list. CISA has not added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog as of . If CISA adds it, this page shows it as known exploited.

How likely is exploitation in the next 30 days?
0.2%

EPSS score, percentile 9.6 of all scored records. A probability estimated by FIRST, not a report of exploitation.

How severe?
9.2 Critical

CVSS v4.0 base score, given by the CNA

What should I do?

CISA has set no required action, because the vulnerability is not in KEV.

Advisories and patches (2)

Which versions are affected?

Affected

  • before 1.86

Versions by product

Source: CISA KEV 2026.10.29, as of ; FIRST EPSS, as of ; CVE List, as of . About the data.

What to do

Advisories and patches

This summary is based on the CVE record as of . Check the vendor's advisory before you act: affected versions and fixes can change.

Affected products and versions

As listed in the CVE record.

Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. BC-JAVA
StatusVersions
Affectedbefore 1.86

Versions not listed are: unaffected.

Source: CVE List, as of . About the data.

About this vulnerability

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the Messaging Layer Security (MLS, RFC 9420) implementation did not bind an X.509 credential to a LeafNode's signature_key. LeafNode.verify() checked a leaf's signature against the signature_key carried in the leaf itself, while the credential's X.509 certificate chain was stored but never parsed or validated, so the end-entity certificate's public key was n…

Summary: CVE record, as of .

  • CISA has not added CVE-2026-71885 to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, as of 29 Oct 2026.
  • The CVE record was published on 3 Oct 2026.
  • The CVE record carries a CVSS v4.0 base score of 9.2 (Critical), given by its CNA.
  • FIRST's EPSS model puts the probability of exploitation in the next 30 days at 0.2% (percentile 9.6), as of 29 Oct 2026. EPSS is a statistical estimate, not a report of exploitation.
  • CISA's SSVC assessment in the CVE record: exploitation none, automatable no, technical impact total.
  • The credits in the CVE record name AISLE as finder.

Source: CISA KEV 2026.10.29, as of ; CVE List, as of ; FIRST EPSS, as of . About the data.

Description

MLS X.509 credential not bound to the LeafNode signature key

In Bouncy Castle for Java before 1.86, the Messaging Layer Security (MLS, RFC 9420) implementation did not bind an X.509 credential to a LeafNode's signature_key. LeafNode.verify() checked a leaf's signature against the signature_key carried in the leaf itself, while the credential's X.509 certificate chain was stored but never parsed or validated, so the end-entity certificate's public key was never required to match signature_key as RFC 9420 sec. 5.3 requires. A party could therefore present another party's certificate as its credential while signing the leaf, and the enclosing KeyPackage, with an unrelated key, and be accepted under that other party's identity through KeyPackage.verify() and the Group leaf-validation path. In a deployment that admits external commits without an independent credential-admission check, an unauthenticated attacker could be admitted under a victim's X.509 identity, evict the victim (resynchronization compares whole credentials rather than signing keys), derive the current epoch, decrypt subsequent group messages, and send messages accepted as the victim. TreeKEM.LeafNode now requires the end-entity certificate's subject public key, in the cipher suite's signature encoding, to equal signature_key for an X.509 credential and rejects the leaf otherwise, including an empty chain or a certificate whose key type does not match the cipher suite; certificate-chain and identity validation to a trust anchor remain the application's responsibility per RFC 9420 sec. 5.3.1. Deployments using only basic credentials are unaffected.

Source: CVE List, as of . About the data.

Weakness

CWE-295, CWE-287
  • CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation
  • CWE-287: Improper Authentication

CWE and CAPEC are maintained by MITRE; the entries are those named in the CVE record.

Timeline

DateEvent
CVE record published
CVE record last updated