Legion Of The Bouncy Castle Java Crytography Api
Approved changes feed: RSS · Atom
cpe:2.3:a:bouncycastle:legion-of-the-bouncy-castle-java-crytography-api:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
part: a version: * update: *
| Vendor | Bouncycastle (8993aee6-be06-52a7-a5ab-9d1fe290e16e) |
|---|---|
| Product | Legion Of The Bouncy Castle Java Crytography Api (23612aff-08c3-5519-a1e0-8a869212f694) |
| Edition | * |
| Language | * |
| Software edition | * |
| Target software | * |
| Target hardware | * |
| Other | * |
| Notes | Imported from purl2cpe mapping |
PURL mappings
| PURL | Source | Last updated |
|---|---|---|
pkg:github/bcgit/bc-csharp |
purl2cpe | 2026-06-01 10:12:20.908656 |
Vulnerability references
| Identifier | cpeApplicability | Submitted | db.gcve.eu details | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE:CVE-2024-30172 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 06:35:29.134534 |
Details available
An issue was discovered in Bouncy Castle Java Cryptography APIs before 1.78. An Ed25519 verification code infinite loop can occur via a crafted signature and public key.
Published: 2024-05-09T00:00:00.000Z
Updated: 2024-11-05T17:15:29.205Z |
Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2018-5382 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:11:50.705497 |
Bouncy Castle BKS-V1 keystore files vulnerable to trivial hash collisions
The default BKS keystore use an HMAC that is only 16 bits long, which can allow an attacker to compromise the integrity of a BKS keystore. Bouncy Castle release 1.47 changes the BKS format to a format which uses a 160 bit HMAC instead. This applies to any BKS keystore generated prior to BC 1.47. For situations where people need to create the files for legacy reasons a specific keystore type "BKS-V1" was introduced in 1.49. It should be noted that the use of "BKS-V1" is discouraged by the library authors and should only be used where it is otherwise safe to do so, as in where the use of a 16 bit checksum for the file integrity check is not going to cause a security issue in itself.
Published: 2018-04-16T13:00:00.000Z
Updated: 2024-09-16T16:27:56.228Z |
Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2018-1000613 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:10:25.813733 |
Details available
Legion of the Bouncy Castle Legion of the Bouncy Castle Java Cryptography APIs 1.58 up to but not including 1.60 contains a CWE-470: Use of Externally-Controlled Input to Select Classes or Code ('Unsafe Reflection') vulnerability in XMSS/XMSS^MT private key deserialization that can result in Deserializing an XMSS/XMSS^MT private key can result in the execution of unexpected code. This attack appear to be exploitable via A handcrafted private key can include references to unexpected classes which will be picked up from the class path for the executing application. This vulnerability appears to have been fixed in 1.60 and later.
Published: 2018-07-09T20:00:00.000Z
Updated: 2024-11-14T20:37:00.531Z Reference links
|
Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2018-1000180 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:10:25.590655 |
Details available
Bouncy Castle BC 1.54 - 1.59, BC-FJA 1.0.0, BC-FJA 1.0.1 and earlier have a flaw in the Low-level interface to RSA key pair generator, specifically RSA Key Pairs generated in low-level API with added certainty may have less M-R tests than expected. This appears to be fixed in versions BC 1.60 beta 4 and later, BC-FJA 1.0.2 and later.
Published: 2018-06-05T13:00:00.000Z
Updated: 2024-08-05T12:33:49.372Z |
Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2017-13098 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:08:48.447132 |
BouncyCastle JCE TLS Bleichenbacher/ROBOT
HIGH (7.5)
BouncyCastle TLS prior to version 1.0.3, when configured to use the JCE (Java Cryptography Extension) for cryptographic functions, provides a weak Bleichenbacher oracle when any TLS cipher suite using RSA key exchange is negotiated. An attacker can recover the private key from a vulnerable application. This vulnerability is referred to as "ROBOT."
Published: 2017-12-13T01:00:00.000Z
Updated: 2024-09-16T18:39:22.646Z |
Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2016-1000352 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:07:16.941044 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2016-1000346 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:07:16.940461 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2016-1000345 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:07:16.940059 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2016-1000344 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:07:16.939676 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2016-1000343 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:07:16.939314 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2016-1000342 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:07:16.938852 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2016-1000341 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:07:16.938430 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2016-1000340 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:07:16.937995 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2016-1000339 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:07:16.936114 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2016-1000338 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 05:07:16.932131 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
CVE:CVE-2007-6721 |
vulnerable | 2026-06-08 04:50:09.576605 | db.gcve.eu details were skipped to keep the page responsive. | Imported from gcve-enriched-dumps CVE data |
Contribute
You can submit an edit proposal for this CPE entry or suggest a related product/vendor addition using the action button above.