dbcve.org
Uncontrolled Resource ConsumptionWeakness · CWE-400

CVE-2025-9341

MEDIUM · 5.9 CVSS v4.0 Published 2025-08-22
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
64/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
Uncontrolled Resource Consumption vulnerability in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS bc-fips on All (API modules), Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java LTS bcprov-lts8on on All (API modules) allows Excessive Allocation. This vulnerability is associated with program files org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCBC.Java, org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCBC.Java. This issue affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS: 2.1.0; Bouncy Castle for Java LTS: from 2.73.0 through 2.73.7.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

The vulnerability exists in AESNativeCBC.java implementations within the Bouncy Castle Java cryptography library. It allows excessive memory allocation due to insufficient bounds checking on input parameters during AES CBC mode operations. An attacker could potentially trigger memory exhaustion by providing specially crafted inputs to encryption/decryption operations.

MitigationUpgrade Bouncy Castle FIPS to version 2.1.1 or later, and Bouncy Castle LTS to version 2.73.8 or later. Validate that the upgrade does not break existing cryptographic functionality in dependent applications.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Local
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
Authentication
None
User interaction
None
Scope
P

CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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:P/AU:N/R:U/V:C/RE:M/U:Amber

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Locate the Bouncy Castle library in your environment
    Search for JAR files named 'bc-fips*.jar', 'bouncycastle*.jar', 'bcpkix*.jar', or 'bcprov*.jar' in your application dependencies, lib directories, or classpath. Use commands like 'find . -name "*bouncy*"' or inspect your build tool dependencies (Maven pom.xml, Gradle build.gradle).
    Affected if Bouncy Castle library is present in your environment
  2. Identify the Bouncy Castle version
    Check the MANIFEST.MF file inside the JAR for 'Implementation-Version' or 'Bundle-Version', or look at your dependency management system for the declared version. Common locations: Maven Central artifact 'org.bouncycastle:bc-fips' or 'org.bouncycastle:bcprov-jdk15on'.
    Affected if Version is earlier than 2.1.1 for FIPS or earlier than 2.73.8 for LTS
  3. Determine if your application uses AES CBC mode
    Search your codebase for AES CBC related code: look for 'AES/CBC', 'CBCMode', 'AESNativeCBC', or similar cipher transformation strings in your Java source files, configuration files, and runtime parameters. Inspect any custom cryptographic implementations that interact with Bouncy Castle's CBC functionality.
    Affected if Your code performs AES CBC encryption or decryption via Bouncy Castle

You are affected if Bouncy Castle FIPS earlier than 2.1.1 or LTS earlier than 2.73.8 is present AND your application performs AES CBC mode operations using the vulnerable AESNativeCBC implementation.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade Bouncy Castle FIPS to version 2.1.1 or later, and Bouncy Castle LTS to version 2.73.8 or later. Validate that the upgrade does not break existing cryptographic functionality in dependent applications.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,720
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,752.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-9341 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-9341 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data