LiveActive security incident?Get immediate response
CVE Record

CVE-2016-1000344: In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the DHIES implementation allowed the use of ECB...

In the Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the DHIES implementation allowed the use of ECB mode. This mode is regarded as unsafe and support for it has been removed from the provider.

UnknownCVSS not scoredNot KEV-listedUpdated
Discuss exposureBack to CVEs
Glexia's TakeAutomated analysisunknown

Security readout for executives and security teams

Plain-English summary

Older Bouncy Castle Java crypto code allowed DHIES encryption to use ECB mode, which is considered unsafe. The source bundle says this support was removed, but provides no CVSS score and no active-exploitation evidence. Business urgency depends on whether your applications or vendor products bundle Bouncy Castle JCE Provider 1.55 or earlier and use DHIES.

Executive priority

Treat as dependency remediation with targeted urgency. Prioritize systems protecting sensitive data, customer data, authentication material, or regulated information. Do not assume broad emergency exposure without evidence that affected Bouncy Castle versions and DHIES are present.

Technical view

CVE-2016-1000344 affects Bouncy Castle JCE Provider 1.55 and earlier. Its DHIES implementation allowed ECB mode. ECB is unsafe because repeated plaintext patterns can produce repeated ciphertext patterns. The bundled sources do not provide CVSS, CWE, exploit status, or complete downstream affected-product mapping.

Likely exposure

Likely exposure is Java software, appliances, or vendor products bundling Bouncy Castle JCE Provider 1.55 or earlier, especially where DHIES is used. Exposure is less likely if Bouncy Castle is newer or DHIES is not reachable. The bundle does not fully enumerate downstream affected products.

Exploitation context

No source in the bundle states active exploitation, and KEV is false. The issue is a cryptographic weakness rather than a directly described remote code execution path. Practical risk depends on protocol design, DHIES use, attacker visibility into encrypted data, and whether ECB mode can be negotiated or selected.

Researcher notes

Evidence is limited to the CVE description and linked advisories. Validate exact package lineage, shaded or bundled library copies, and downstream vendor fixed versions. Avoid claiming exploitability beyond the documented unsafe ECB allowance in DHIES.

Mitigation direction

  • Upgrade Bouncy Castle JCE Provider beyond affected 1.55-and-earlier releases.
  • Use vendor-supported fixes from Red Hat, Oracle, NetApp, or relevant product suppliers.
  • Disable or avoid DHIES configurations that permit ECB mode where configurable.
  • Review vendor guidance before applying compensating controls in packaged products.

Validation and detection

  • Inventory applications and products for Bouncy Castle JCE Provider 1.55 or earlier.
  • Confirm whether DHIES is used in application cryptographic flows.
  • Check vendor advisories for fixed package versions in managed platforms.
  • Verify deployed runtimes use the remediated provider, not only build files.
Prepared
Confidence
medium
Sources
7

Public sources used

Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.

Potential ATT&CK relevance

Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context

These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.

ATT&CK lookup starting points

Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.

cve · low confidence lookup

CVE-2016-1000344 mapping review

Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.

Open ATT&CK lookup
Vulnerability profileCVE Program record
Severity
Unknown
CVSS
Not scored
Known Exploited
No
Published
Official CVE source material

CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5

These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.

0CVSS vectors
0Timeline events
0ADP providers
6Source links

CVSS and timeline data

No CVSS vectors or timeline events were available in the normalized CVE source material.

Source materials

Affected products

Products and packages named in the record

VendorProductVersion / packageStatus
n/an/an/aListed
Weakness

CWE details

No CWE listed

CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.