Search Results
There are 13 CVE Records that match your search.
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| CVE-2023-33201 | Bouncy Castle For Java before 1.74 is affected by an LDAP injection vulnerability. The vulnerability only affects applications that use an LDAP CertStore from Bouncy Castle to validate X.509 certificates. During the certificate validation process, Bouncy Castle inserts the certificate's Subject Name into an LDAP search filter without any escaping, which leads to an LDAP injection vulnerability. |
| CVE-2019-0379 | SAP Process Integration, business-to-business add-on, versions 1.0, 2.0, does not perform authentication check properly when the default security provider is changed to BouncyCastle (BC), leading to Missing Authentication Check |
| CVE-2017-13098 | 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." |
| CVE-2016-2427 | ** DISPUTED ** The AES-GCM specification in RFC 5084, as used in Android 5.x and 6.x, recommends 12 octets for the aes-ICVlen parameter field, which might make it easier for attackers to defeat a cryptographic protection mechanism and discover an authentication key via a crafted application, aka internal bug 26234568. NOTE: The vendor disputes the existence of this potential issue in Android, stating "This CVE was raised in error: it referred to the authentication tag size in GCM, whose default according to ASN.1 encoding (12 bytes) can lead to vulnerabilities. After careful consideration, it was decided that the insecure default value of 12 bytes was a default only for the encoding and not default anywhere else in Android, and hence no vulnerability existed." |
| CVE-2016-1000346 | In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the other party DH public key is not fully validated. This can cause issues as invalid keys can be used to reveal details about the other party's private key where static Diffie-Hellman is in use. As of release 1.56 the key parameters are checked on agreement calculation. |
| CVE-2016-1000345 | In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the DHIES/ECIES CBC mode vulnerable to padding oracle attack. For BC 1.55 and older, in an environment where timings can be easily observed, it is possible with enough observations to identify when the decryption is failing due to padding. |
| CVE-2016-1000343 | In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the DSA key pair generator generates a weak private key if used with default values. If the JCA key pair generator is not explicitly initialised with DSA parameters, 1.55 and earlier generates a private value assuming a 1024 bit key size. In earlier releases this can be dealt with by explicitly passing parameters to the key pair generator. |
| CVE-2016-1000342 | In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier ECDSA does not fully validate ASN.1 encoding of signature on verification. It is possible to inject extra elements in the sequence making up the signature and still have it validate, which in some cases may allow the introduction of 'invisible' data into a signed structure. |
| CVE-2016-1000341 | In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier DSA signature generation is vulnerable to timing attack. Where timings can be closely observed for the generation of signatures, the lack of blinding in 1.55, or earlier, may allow an attacker to gain information about the signature's k value and ultimately the private value as well. |
| CVE-2016-1000339 | In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the primary engine class used for AES was AESFastEngine. Due to the highly table driven approach used in the algorithm it turns out that if the data channel on the CPU can be monitored the lookup table accesses are sufficient to leak information on the AES key being used. There was also a leak in AESEngine although it was substantially less. AESEngine has been modified to remove any signs of leakage (testing carried out on Intel X86-64) and is now the primary AES class for the BC JCE provider from 1.56. Use of AESFastEngine is now only recommended where otherwise deemed appropriate. |
| CVE-2016-1000338 | In Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the DSA does not fully validate ASN.1 encoding of signature on verification. It is possible to inject extra elements in the sequence making up the signature and still have it validate, which in some cases may allow the introduction of 'invisible' data into a signed structure. |
| CVE-2015-7940 | The Bouncy Castle Java library before 1.51 does not validate a point is withing the elliptic curve, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain private keys via a series of crafted elliptic curve Diffie Hellman (ECDH) key exchanges, aka an "invalid curve attack." |
| CVE-2013-1624 | The TLS implementation in the Bouncy Castle Java library before 1.48 and C# library before 1.8 does not properly consider timing side-channel attacks on a noncompliant MAC check operation during the processing of malformed CBC padding, which allows remote attackers to conduct distinguishing attacks and plaintext-recovery attacks via statistical analysis of timing data for crafted packets, a related issue to CVE-2013-0169. |
|
You can also search by reference using the CVE Reference Maps.
For More Information: CVE Request Web Form (select “Other” from dropdown)
|
||
