Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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:XSummary
CVE-2026-4598 is a high-severity Infinite Loop (CWE-835) vulnerability in Kjur Jsrsasign. Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 43th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-4598 is a denial-of-service vulnerability in versions of the jsrsasign JavaScript package prior to 11.1.1. The flaw exists in the bnModInverse function within the ext/jsbn2.js file, where the BigInteger.modInverse implementation triggers an infinite loop upon receiving zero or negative inputs, such as modInverse(0, m) or modInverse(-1, m). This CWE-835 issue carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H).
The vulnerability can be exploited remotely by any unauthenticated attacker with network access, requiring low complexity and no user interaction. By supplying crafted inputs to the affected function, an attacker can cause the hosting process to hang permanently, resulting in a high-impact denial of service without affecting confidentiality or integrity.
Advisories recommend updating to jsrsasign version 11.1.1 or later, which addresses the issue via a fix in commit ca5b027240287a1e71fe63019fc4400332594323 and pull request #648 on the project's GitHub repository. Further details, including a proof-of-concept, are provided in the GitHub Gist at https://gist.github.com/Kr0emer/a1bf5cd4547cc630d2dcc5e761de8264 and the Snyk advisory at https://security.snyk.io/vuln/SNYK-JS-JSRSASIGN-15370938.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-14371
Vulnerability Data
Versions of the package jsrsasign before 11.1.1 are vulnerable to Infinite loop via the bnModInverse function in ext/jsbn2.js when the BigInteger.modInverse implementation receives zero or negative inputs, allowing an attacker to hang the process permanently by supplying such crafted values…
more
(e.g., modInverse(0, m) or modInverse(-1, m)).
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.1.1V1.4.2V2.1.1V2.2.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover unreachable loop exit conditions through static analysis, fuzzing, or execution tracing.
SI-10 directly requires validation of information inputs, which structurally prevents type-validation failures from being introduced or exploitable.
Flaw remediation processes identify and correct infinite-loop defects reported from testing or operations.
Requiring documented development processes and secure coding standards reduces introduction of loops whose termination conditions are unreachable.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing can uncover infinite-loop conditions before release.
Secure development life cycle mandates practices that can detect and prevent infinite-loop defects.
Application security requirements can specify loop-termination rules, indirectly reducing the weakness.
Secure architecture principles promote defensive input handling and type enforcement at system boundaries.
Secure coding standards directly address loop termination and prevent infinite loops.
Change management can require review of loop logic when code is modified.