LiveActive security incident?Get immediate response
CVE Record

CVE-2024-14041: ML-KEM (Kyber) decapsulation leaks private key information through non-constant-time division in message decoding and ciphertext compression (KyberSlash)

In Bouncy Castle for Java from 1.73 to before 1.78, three ML-KEM (CRYSTALS-Kyber) routines divided secret-derived polynomial coefficients by the modulus q: Poly.toMsg, which decodes the decrypted message, and the ciphertext compression routines Poly.compressPoly and PolyVec.compressPolyVec. An attacker able to measure the timing of a large number of decapsulations performed with the same long-term private key can recover that key. These are the KyberSlash1 (Poly.toMsg) and KyberSlash2 (ciphertext compression) divisions. Compression performed during encapsulation operates on values that become the public ciphertext and is not affected.

HighCVSS 8.2Not KEV-listedUpdated
Glexia's TakeAutomated analysishigh

Security readout for executives and security teams

Plain-English summary

This flaw affects Bouncy Castle Java’s Kyber/ML-KEM implementation. If an attacker can observe timing across many decapsulation operations using the same long-term private key, they may recover that key. It is serious for systems using affected post-quantum cryptography, but exploitation requires precise timing conditions and repeated access.

Executive priority

Treat as high priority where Bouncy Castle Java powers post-quantum key exchange or cryptographic services. For organizations not using ML-KEM/Kyber, urgency is lower. The main business risk is compromise of cryptographic private keys under specialized but credible timing conditions.

Technical view

BC-JAVA versions 1.73 to before 1.78 used non-constant-time division on secret-derived Kyber polynomial coefficients in Poly.toMsg, Poly.compressPoly, and PolyVec.compressPolyVec. The issue maps to KyberSlash1 and KyberSlash2. Encapsulation-side compression on public ciphertext values is stated as not affected.

Likely exposure

Exposure is limited to applications using affected Bouncy Castle Java versions for ML-KEM/CRYSTALS-Kyber decapsulation with reusable long-term private keys. Organizations not using Bouncy Castle Java or not using these Kyber routines are unlikely to be affected.

Exploitation context

No KEV listing or provided source indicates active exploitation. Practical attack conditions require measuring timing over many decapsulations against the same private key, making this higher effort but potentially high impact for exposed cryptographic services.

Researcher notes

Focus analysis on reachable decapsulation paths and key reuse. The source states Poly.toMsg and ciphertext compression divisions are affected; encapsulation compression is not. Evidence provided does not establish public exploitation, exploit maturity, or impact beyond affected Bouncy Castle Java implementations.

Mitigation direction

  • Upgrade Bouncy Castle Java to version 1.78 or later, per the affected range.
  • Identify applications bundling or depending on bcprov 1.73 through pre-1.78 versions.
  • Prioritize services performing ML-KEM/Kyber decapsulation with long-lived private keys.
  • Review vendor advisory and patch commits for implementation-specific guidance.
  • Consider key rotation after upgrade if exposed long-term keys handled repeated decapsulation requests.

Validation and detection

  • Inventory Java dependencies for Bouncy Castle bcprov versions.
  • Confirm whether applications use ML-KEM or CRYSTALS-Kyber functionality.
  • Check whether decapsulation uses long-term private keys.
  • Verify deployed libraries are upgraded to 1.78 or later.
  • Document systems where affected routines were reachable by untrusted clients.
Prepared
Confidence
high
Sources
6

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.

cwe · low confidence lookup

CWE-208: Exact CWE lookup

Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.

Open ATT&CK lookup
description · low confidence lookup

Credential and access behavior lookup

The CVE wording references authentication or credential exposure, so valid-account and credential-access review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.

Open ATT&CK lookup
cve · low confidence lookup

CVE-2024-14041 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
High
CVSS
8.2 (4.0)
Known Exploited
No
Published

Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/U:Amber

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.

1CVSS vectors
3Timeline events
1ADP providers
5Source links

SSVC decision data

CISA-ADPCISA Coordinator
Timestamp
Version
2.0.3
Exploitation: noneAutomatable: noTechnical Impact: partial

CVSS vector scores

1 official score

We collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.

ScoreVersionSeverityVectorExploitImpactSource
8.2CVSS 4.0HighCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/U:Amberbcorg

Vulnerability scoring details

Base CVSS 4.0 score

8.2High
CVSS 4.0 vector shape for CVE-2024-14041Attack VectorAttack ComplexityAttack RequirementsPrivileges RequiredUser InteractionVS ConfidentialityVS IntegrityVS AvailabilitySS ConfidentialitySS IntegritySS Availability

Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/U:Amber

Attack Vector
NetworkAdjacentLocalPhysical
Attack Complexity
LowHigh
Attack Requirements
NonePresent
Privileges Required
NoneLowHigh
User Interaction
NonePassiveActive
VS Confidentiality
HighLowNone
VS Integrity
HighLowNone
VS Availability
HighLowNone
SS Confidentiality
HighLowNone
SS Integrity
HighLowNone
SS Availability
HighLowNone

Vulnerability timeline

Timeline events are normalized from CVE metadata, CNA source timelines, ADP timelines, and KEV metadata when present.

  1. CVE reservedCVE Program

    The CVE ID was reserved by the assigning CNA.

  2. CVE publishedCVE Program

    The CVE record was published.

  3. CVE updatedCVE Program

    The CVE record metadata indicates this as the latest update time.

ADP provider summaries

CISA-ADPCISA ADP Vulnrichment
other:ssvc
Affected products

Products and packages named in the record

VendorProductVersion / packageStatus
Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc.BC-JAVAbcprov, 1.73unaffected
Weakness

CWE details

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

CWE-208 · source CWE mapping

Observable Timing Discrepancy

Observable Timing Discrepancy represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.