VulnerabilityPublished 24 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-33429: parse-server · Observable Discrepancy

Affects parse-serverSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.3 Medium : upgrade to 9.6.0-alpha.43 or 8.6.54 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 25% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 9.6.0-alpha.43, 8.6.54

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: Present
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
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: Present: The successful attack depends on the presence of specific deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These include: a race condition must be won to successfully exploit the vulnerability (the successfulness of the attack is conditioned on execution conditions that are not under full control of the attacker, or the attack may need to be launched multiple times against a single target before being successful); the attacker must inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim (e.g. vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker).
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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 24 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.43 or 8.6.54; parse-community/parse-server to 8.6.54.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
parse-communityparse-server	Affected >=9.0.0 <9.6.0-alpha.43	Fixed in 9.6.0-alpha.43
parse-communityparse-server	Affected <8.6.54	Fixed in 8.6.54
npmparse-community/parse-server`pkg:npm/parse-community/parse-server`Other threats	Affected <8.6.54	Fixed in 8.6.54

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

AI-suggested

The primary mitigation is to upgrade parse-server to version 8.6.54 or later, or 9.6.0-alpha.43 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. Until upgrades can be applied, organizations should consider disabling LiveQuery subscriptions on protected fields or implementing additional access controls to restrict subscription capabilities to trusted users only. Monitoring LiveQuery event patterns for anomalous subscription behavior may help detect exploitation attempts. Additionally, reviewing application logic to minimize reliance on boolean protected fields that could be inferred via timing analysis can reduce risk. Employing network-level protections such as rate limiting and anomaly detection on LiveQuery endpoints can further mitigate exploitation likelihood. Finally, organizations should audit their parse-server configurations and logs to identify any suspicious subscription activity targeting protected fields.

Description

Parse Server is an open source backend that can be deployed to any infrastructure that can run Node.js. Prior to versions 8.6.54 and 9.6.0, an attacker can subscribe to LiveQuery with a watch parameter targeting a protected field. Although the protected field value is properly stripped from event payloads, the presence or absence of update events reveals whether the protected field changed, creating a binary oracle. For boolean protected fields, the timing of change events is equivalent to knowing the field value. This issue has been patched in versions 8.6.54 and 9.6.0

Impact

This vulnerability can lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information stored in protected fields within parse-server databases. Attackers can remotely infer changes to protected data, potentially revealing confidential boolean flags or other sensitive state indicators. Although the actual data values are not directly exposed, the side-channel leakage can be leveraged to gain insights into protected data changes, which could facilitate further targeted attacks or data inference. Organizations relying on parse-server for backend services, especially those handling sensitive user data or business logic flags, may face confidentiality breaches. The vulnerability does not allow direct data modification or denial of service but compromises data confidentiality through information leakage. Given parse-server's use in various applications worldwide, this could impact a broad range of industries including mobile app backends, IoT platforms, and SaaS providers.

CWE-203Observable Discrepancy (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product behaves differently or sends different responses under different circumstances in a way that is observable to an unauthorized actor.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
Implementation
Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V7.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Black Box Reverse Engineering (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 31 Mar 2026, 20:24 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-203

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats