VulnerabilityPublished 11 Mar 2026Updated 12 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-31856: parse-server · SQL Injection

Affects parse-serverSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.3 Critical : upgrade to 9.6.0-alpha.3 or 8.6.29 as a priority.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

9.3Critical

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

Contested

Critical score, yet low EPSS after six months

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 38% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 9.6.0-alpha.3, 8.6.29

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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: High
Vulnerable system integrity: High
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: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence 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 11 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 9.6.0-alpha.3 or 8.6.29; parse-server to 8.6.29.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
parse-communityparse-server	Affected >=9.0.0 <9.6.0-alpha.3	Fixed in 9.6.0-alpha.3
parse-communityparse-server	Affected <8.6.29	Fixed in 8.6.29
npmparse-server`pkg:npm/parse-server`Other threats	Affected <8.6.29	Fixed in 8.6.29

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

AI-suggested

Organizations should urgently upgrade parse-server deployments to versions 9.6.0-alpha.3 or later, or 8.6.29 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. Until upgrades are applied, restrict access to the Parse Server REST API to trusted networks and authenticated users only, employing network segmentation and firewall rules to limit exposure. Implement Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious SQL injection patterns targeting Increment operations with dot notation. Review and audit all API endpoints that accept write requests to ensure they do not allow untrusted input to be directly used in database queries. Employ runtime application self-protection (RASP) tools if available to monitor and block injection attempts dynamically. Additionally, conduct thorough security testing and code reviews focusing on database query construction and input validation. Monitoring database logs for anomalous queries and unusual access patterns can help detect exploitation attempts early. Finally, educate developers on secure coding practices, emphasizing parameterized queries and input sanitization to prevent similar vulnerabilities.

Description

Parse Server is an open source backend that can be deployed to any infrastructure that can run Node.js. A SQL injection vulnerability exists in the PostgreSQL storage adapter when processing Increment operations on nested object fields using dot notation (e.g., stats.counter). The amount value is interpolated directly into the SQL query without parameterization or type validation. An attacker who can send write requests to the Parse Server REST API can inject arbitrary SQL subqueries to read any data from the database, bypassing CLPs and ACLs. MongoDB deployments are not affected. This vulnerability is fixed in 9.6.0-alpha.3 and 8.6.29.

Impact

The SQL injection vulnerability in parse-server's PostgreSQL adapter poses a severe risk to organizations using affected versions. Exploitation can lead to unauthorized data disclosure by bypassing critical access controls such as CLPs and ACLs, compromising the confidentiality of sensitive information stored in the backend database. Since the vulnerability requires no authentication or user interaction, attackers can remotely exploit it over the network, increasing the attack surface significantly. This can result in data breaches, intellectual property theft, and exposure of personally identifiable information (PII), potentially leading to regulatory penalties and reputational damage. Additionally, attackers might leverage the injection to perform further database manipulation or pivot to other internal systems, escalating the impact. Organizations relying on parse-server with PostgreSQL backends, especially those exposing the REST API publicly or to untrusted networks, are at high risk. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently provides a window for proactive mitigation, but the critical severity demands immediate attention.

CWE-89Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command (SQL Injection) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #2OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Parameterization
If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Query Parameterization (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
XML External Entity Prevention (opens in a new tab)
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.3.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Object Relational Mapping Injection (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering (opens in a new tab)
Expanding Control over the Operating System from the Database (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection (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 18 Mar 2026, 19:04 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-89

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats