CVE-2023-27325
Parallels Desktop ≤ 18.1.0_\(53311\)
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2023-27325 is a high-severity Improper Initialization (CWE-665) vulnerability in Parallels Parallels Desktop. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, ranked at the 28th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-31101
Vulnerability Data
Parallels Desktop Updater Improper Initialization Local Privilege Escalation Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows local attackers to escalate privileges on affected installations of Parallels Desktop. An attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target host system in…
more
order to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the Updater service. The issue results from the lack of proper initialization of environment variables. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to escalate privileges and execute arbitrary code in the context of root. . Was ZDI-CAN-18253.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation directly exercises initialization paths and can reveal missing or incorrect resource setup.
Engineering principles applied during design and implementation can require explicit initialization to a known state.
Requiring the system to fail to a known state structurally reduces the chance that uninitialized resources remain reachable.
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.
A.8.25 mandates security requirements, checkpoints, secure coding, testing and developer capability in the SDLC which reaches improper initialization as a design/coding defect, but leaves a bounded remainder (e.g. initialization of third-party components or libraries chosen in procurement, and post-deployment configuration defaults).
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles (least privilege, default-deny, fail-securely, distrust-external-input, hardening) plus explicit design reviews that can catch and block many uninitialized-resource cases before they ship, but leaves a bounded remainder (e.g. vendor libraries, runtime-initialization bugs, or post-review code changes) that can still be present and exploitable.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid uninitialized variables and mandate proper resource initialization before use.
Security testing can detect uninitialized variables but does not itself enforce initialization practices.
defining, enforcing, and monitoring secure configuration templates (including defaults, disabled services, changed vendor passwords, minimized privileges) directly stops most improper-initialization cases from being exploitable; the bounded remainder is initialization logic inside custom application code that no configuration template reaches
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.
- No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-665, a class-level weakness. Rules are authored against its narrower children: CWE-770.