CVE-2026-33306 (GCVE-0-2026-33306)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-03-24 00:08 – Updated: 2026-03-24 15:39
VLAI?
Title
bcrypt-ruby has an Integer Overflow that Causes Zero Key-Strengthening Iterations at Cost=31 on JRuby
Summary
bcrypt-ruby is a Ruby binding for the OpenBSD bcrypt() password hashing algorithm. Prior to version 3.1.22, an integer overflow in the Java BCrypt implementation for JRuby can cause zero iterations in the strengthening loop. Impacted applications must be setting the cost to 31 to see this happen. The JRuby implementation of bcrypt-ruby (`BCrypt.java`) computes the key-strengthening round count as a signed 32-bit integer. When `cost=31` (the maximum allowed by the gem), signed integer overflow causes the round count to become negative, and the strengthening loop executes **zero iterations**. This collapses bcrypt from 2^31 rounds of exponential key-strengthening to effectively constant-time computation — only the initial EksBlowfish key setup and final 64x encryption phase remain. The resulting hash looks valid (`$2a$31$...`) and verifies correctly via `checkpw`, making the weakness invisible to the application. This issue is triggered only when cost=31 is used or when verifying a `$2a$31$` hash. This problem has been fixed in version 3.1.22. As a workaround, set the cost to something less than 31.
Severity ?
4.5 (Medium)
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U
CWE
  • CWE-190 - Integer Overflow or Wraparound
Assigner
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
bcrypt-ruby bcrypt-ruby Affected: < 3.1.22
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-33306",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-03-24T15:38:08.809169Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-03-24T15:39:03.590Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "bcrypt-ruby",
          "vendor": "bcrypt-ruby",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c 3.1.22"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "bcrypt-ruby is a Ruby binding for the OpenBSD bcrypt() password hashing algorithm. Prior to version 3.1.22, an integer overflow in the Java BCrypt implementation for JRuby can cause zero iterations in the strengthening loop.  Impacted applications must be setting the cost to 31 to see this happen. The JRuby implementation of bcrypt-ruby (`BCrypt.java`) computes the key-strengthening round count as a signed 32-bit integer. When `cost=31` (the maximum allowed by the gem), signed integer overflow causes the round count to become negative, and the strengthening loop executes **zero iterations**. This collapses bcrypt from 2^31 rounds of exponential key-strengthening to effectively constant-time computation \u2014 only the initial EksBlowfish key setup and final 64x encryption phase remain. The resulting hash looks valid (`$2a$31$...`) and verifies correctly via `checkpw`, making the weakness invisible to the application. This issue is triggered only when cost=31 is used or when verifying a `$2a$31$` hash. This problem has been fixed in version 3.1.22. As a workaround, set the cost to something less than 31."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
            "attackVector": "LOCAL",
            "baseScore": 4.5,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-190",
              "description": "CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-03-24T00:08:00.451Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/security/advisories/GHSA-f27w-vcwj-c954",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/security/advisories/GHSA-f27w-vcwj-c954"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/commit/831ce64cb0a9502130fa93a28bfd9527a5fa45c4",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/commit/831ce64cb0a9502130fa93a28bfd9527a5fa45c4"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/releases/tag/v3.1.22",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/releases/tag/v3.1.22"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-f27w-vcwj-c954",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "bcrypt-ruby has an Integer Overflow that Causes Zero Key-Strengthening Iterations at Cost=31 on JRuby"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-33306",
    "datePublished": "2026-03-24T00:08:00.451Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-03-18T21:23:36.675Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-03-24T15:39:03.590Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "epss": {
      "cve": "CVE-2026-33306",
      "date": "2026-04-26",
      "epss": "9e-05",
      "percentile": "0.00943"
    },
    "nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2026-33306\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"published\":\"2026-03-24T01:17:02.037\",\"lastModified\":\"2026-03-30T14:07:23.300\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Analyzed\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"bcrypt-ruby is a Ruby binding for the OpenBSD bcrypt() password hashing algorithm. Prior to version 3.1.22, an integer overflow in the Java BCrypt implementation for JRuby can cause zero iterations in the strengthening loop.  Impacted applications must be setting the cost to 31 to see this happen. The JRuby implementation of bcrypt-ruby (`BCrypt.java`) computes the key-strengthening round count as a signed 32-bit integer. When `cost=31` (the maximum allowed by the gem), signed integer overflow causes the round count to become negative, and the strengthening loop executes **zero iterations**. This collapses bcrypt from 2^31 rounds of exponential key-strengthening to effectively constant-time computation \u2014 only the initial EksBlowfish key setup and final 64x encryption phase remain. The resulting hash looks valid (`$2a$31$...`) and verifies correctly via `checkpw`, making the weakness invisible to the application. This issue is triggered only when cost=31 is used or when verifying a `$2a$31$` hash. This problem has been fixed in version 3.1.22. As a workaround, set the cost to something less than 31.\"},{\"lang\":\"es\",\"value\":\"bcrypt-ruby es un enlace Ruby para el algoritmo de hash de contrase\u00f1as bcrypt() de OpenBSD. Antes de la versi\u00f3n 3.1.22, un desbordamiento de entero en la implementaci\u00f3n Java de BCrypt para JRuby puede causar cero iteraciones en el bucle de fortalecimiento. Las aplicaciones afectadas deben estar configurando el costo en 31 para que esto ocurra. La implementaci\u00f3n de JRuby de bcrypt-ruby (\u0027BCrypt.java\u0027) calcula el recuento de rondas de fortalecimiento de clave como un entero con signo de 32 bits. Cuando \u0027cost=31\u0027 (el m\u00e1ximo permitido por la gema), el desbordamiento de entero con signo hace que el recuento de rondas se vuelva negativo, y el bucle de fortalecimiento ejecuta cero iteraciones. Esto colapsa bcrypt de 2^31 rondas de fortalecimiento exponencial de clave a una computaci\u00f3n en tiempo efectivamente constante \u2014 solo quedan la configuraci\u00f3n inicial de clave EksBlowfish y la fase final de cifrado 64x. El hash resultante parece v\u00e1lido (\u0027$2a$31$...\u0027) y se verifica correctamente a trav\u00e9s de \u0027checkpw\u0027, haciendo que la debilidad sea invisible para la aplicaci\u00f3n. Este problema se activa solo cuando se usa cost=31 o al verificar un hash \u0027$2a$31$\u0027. Este problema ha sido solucionado en la versi\u00f3n 3.1.22. Como soluci\u00f3n alternativa, configure el costo en algo menor que 31.\"}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV40\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"4.0\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X\",\"baseScore\":4.5,\"baseSeverity\":\"MEDIUM\",\"attackVector\":\"LOCAL\",\"attackComplexity\":\"HIGH\",\"attackRequirements\":\"PRESENT\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"NONE\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"vulnConfidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"vulnIntegrityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"vulnAvailabilityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"subConfidentialityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"subIntegrityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"subAvailabilityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"exploitMaturity\":\"UNREPORTED\",\"confidentialityRequirement\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"integrityRequirement\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"availabilityRequirement\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedAttackVector\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedAttackComplexity\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedAttackRequirements\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedPrivilegesRequired\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedUserInteraction\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedVulnConfidentialityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedVulnIntegrityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedVulnAvailabilityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedSubConfidentialityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedSubIntegrityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedSubAvailabilityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"Safety\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"Automatable\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"Recovery\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"valueDensity\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"vulnerabilityResponseEffort\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"providerUrgency\":\"NOT_DEFINED\"}}],\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"nvd@nist.gov\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N\",\"baseScore\":7.5,\"baseSeverity\":\"HIGH\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"LOW\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"NONE\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"UNCHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"integrityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"NONE\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":3.9,\"impactScore\":3.6}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-190\"}]}],\"configurations\":[{\"nodes\":[{\"operator\":\"OR\",\"negate\":false,\"cpeMatch\":[{\"vulnerable\":true,\"criteria\":\"cpe:2.3:a:bcrypt-ruby_project:bcrypt-ruby:*:*:*:*:*:ruby:*:*\",\"versionEndExcluding\":\"3.1.22\",\"matchCriteriaId\":\"0D02AC8C-3DF6-4BED-A30A-FA0463020503\"}]}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/commit/831ce64cb0a9502130fa93a28bfd9527a5fa45c4\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"tags\":[\"Patch\"]},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/releases/tag/v3.1.22\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"tags\":[\"Product\",\"Release Notes\"]},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/security/advisories/GHSA-f27w-vcwj-c954\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"tags\":[\"Mitigation\",\"Vendor Advisory\"]}]}}",
    "vulnrichment": {
      "containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2026-33306\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2026-03-24T15:38:08.809169Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-03-24T15:38:54.236Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"title\": \"bcrypt-ruby has an Integer Overflow that Causes Zero Key-Strengthening Iterations at Cost=31 on JRuby\", \"source\": {\"advisory\": \"GHSA-f27w-vcwj-c954\", \"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"metrics\": [{\"cvssV4_0\": {\"version\": \"4.0\", \"baseScore\": 4.5, \"attackVector\": \"LOCAL\", \"baseSeverity\": \"MEDIUM\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U\", \"userInteraction\": \"NONE\", \"attackComplexity\": \"HIGH\", \"attackRequirements\": \"PRESENT\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"NONE\", \"subIntegrityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"vulnIntegrityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"subAvailabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"vulnAvailabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"subConfidentialityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"vulnConfidentialityImpact\": \"HIGH\"}}], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"bcrypt-ruby\", \"product\": \"bcrypt-ruby\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"\u003c 3.1.22\"}]}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/security/advisories/GHSA-f27w-vcwj-c954\", \"name\": \"https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/security/advisories/GHSA-f27w-vcwj-c954\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_CONFIRM\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/commit/831ce64cb0a9502130fa93a28bfd9527a5fa45c4\", \"name\": \"https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/commit/831ce64cb0a9502130fa93a28bfd9527a5fa45c4\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_MISC\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/releases/tag/v3.1.22\", \"name\": \"https://github.com/bcrypt-ruby/bcrypt-ruby/releases/tag/v3.1.22\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_MISC\"]}], \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"bcrypt-ruby is a Ruby binding for the OpenBSD bcrypt() password hashing algorithm. Prior to version 3.1.22, an integer overflow in the Java BCrypt implementation for JRuby can cause zero iterations in the strengthening loop.  Impacted applications must be setting the cost to 31 to see this happen. The JRuby implementation of bcrypt-ruby (`BCrypt.java`) computes the key-strengthening round count as a signed 32-bit integer. When `cost=31` (the maximum allowed by the gem), signed integer overflow causes the round count to become negative, and the strengthening loop executes **zero iterations**. This collapses bcrypt from 2^31 rounds of exponential key-strengthening to effectively constant-time computation \\u2014 only the initial EksBlowfish key setup and final 64x encryption phase remain. The resulting hash looks valid (`$2a$31$...`) and verifies correctly via `checkpw`, making the weakness invisible to the application. This issue is triggered only when cost=31 is used or when verifying a `$2a$31$` hash. This problem has been fixed in version 3.1.22. As a workaround, set the cost to something less than 31.\"}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-190\", \"description\": \"CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"shortName\": \"GitHub_M\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-03-24T00:08:00.451Z\"}}}",
      "cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2026-33306\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-03-24T15:39:03.590Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2026-03-18T21:23:36.675Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"datePublished\": \"2026-03-24T00:08:00.451Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"GitHub_M\"}",
      "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
      "dataVersion": "5.2"
    }
  }
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.