VulnerabilityPublished 10 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-30938: parse-server · Protection Mechanism Failure

Affects parse-serverSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium : upgrade to 9.5.1-alpha.1 or 8.6.12 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 36% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 9.5.1-alpha.1, 8.6.12

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 30 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade parse-server to 9.5.1-alpha.1 or 8.6.12; parse-server to 8.6.12.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
parse-communityparse-server	Affected >=9.0.0 <9.5.1-alpha.1	Fixed in 9.5.1-alpha.1
parse-communityparse-server	Affected <8.6.12	Fixed in 8.6.12
npmparse-server`pkg:npm/parse-server`Other threats	Affected <8.6.12	Fixed in 8.6.12

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately upgrade parse-server to version 8.6.12 or later, or 9.5.1-alpha.1 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. In addition to upgrading, developers should implement Cloud Code beforeSave triggers that perform deep validation of incoming request payloads to detect and block prohibited keywords regardless of their nesting level. This custom validation should recursively scan all nested objects and arrays to ensure no bypass is possible. Regularly audit and update the requestKeywordDenylist entries to cover all sensitive keywords relevant to the application context. Employ runtime monitoring and logging to detect anomalous request patterns that may indicate exploitation attempts. Restrict access to parse-server endpoints using network controls such as IP whitelisting or API gateways to reduce exposure. Finally, maintain an incident response plan to quickly address any suspicious activity related to this vulnerability.

Description

Parse Server is an open source backend that can be deployed to any infrastructure that can run Node.js. Prior to 8.6.12 and 9.5.1-alpha.1, the requestKeywordDenylist security control can be bypassed by placing any nested object or array before a prohibited keyword in the request payload. This is caused by a logic bug that stops scanning sibling keys after encountering the first nested value. Any custom requestKeywordDenylist entries configured by the developer are equally by-passable using the same technique. All Parse Server deployments are affected. The requestKeywordDenylist is enabled by default. This vulnerability is fixed in 8.6.12 and 9.5.1-alpha.1. Use a Cloud Code beforeSave trigger to validate incoming data for prohibited keywords across all classes.

Impact

The vulnerability allows attackers to circumvent keyword-based request filtering, potentially enabling injection of malicious data or commands into the backend. This can compromise data integrity by allowing unauthorized or harmful data to be processed and stored. Confidentiality may be indirectly affected if malicious payloads facilitate further attacks such as privilege escalation or data exfiltration. Availability impact is limited but possible if malformed requests cause processing errors or resource exhaustion. Since no authentication or user interaction is required, the attack surface is broad, exposing all publicly accessible parse-server deployments. Organizations relying on parse-server for critical backend services risk unauthorized data manipulation, which can undermine application trustworthiness, lead to data corruption, or facilitate further exploitation chains. The default enablement of the vulnerable feature increases the likelihood of widespread impact. Although no active exploits are known, the medium CVSS score reflects the moderate severity due to ease of exploitation and potential data integrity impact.

CWE-693Protection Mechanism Failure (opens in a new tab)
Pillar weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product does not use or incorrectly uses a protection mechanism that provides sufficient defense against directed attacks against the product.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Tracing (opens in a new tab)
Directory Indexing (opens in a new tab)
Using Malicious Files (opens in a new tab)
Encryption Brute Forcing (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 10 Mar 2026, 17:07 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-693

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats