CVE-2023-27328
Parallels Desktop ≤ 18.1.1_\(53328\)
Raw vector
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/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-2023-27328 is a high-severity aka Blind XPath Injection (CWE-91) vulnerability in Parallels Parallels Desktop. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Security Account Manager (T1003.002); ranked at the 23th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-31104
Vulnerability Data
Parallels Desktop Toolgate XML Injection 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 guest system in…
more
order to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the Toolgate component. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of a user-supplied string before using it to construct an XML document. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to escalate privileges and execute arbitrary code in the context of the hypervisor. Was ZDI-CAN-19187.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Input validation directly stops unneutralized XML metacharacters from reaching the parser.
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.
Secure SDLC directly requires input neutralization and validation that eliminates XML injection flaws.
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.
Logging can record injection attempts for detection but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring can detect exploitation but provides no preventive control over XML handling.
A.8.25 mandates secure SDLC practices (secure coding guidelines, security requirements, checkpoints, testing including code scans) that reach XML injection when developers follow them, but leaves a minority slice where implementation is incomplete or the outsourced supplier assurance fails.
A.8.26 requires identifying and specifying security requirements (including resilience against SQL injections and input validation) determined via risk assessment; this can address XML injection for some applications but leaves a bounded remainder where requirements are scoped narrowly, not fully enforced in code, or miss XML-specific neutralization.
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles, secure architecture patterns (defense-in-depth, least privilege, distrust external input, fail securely), design reviews against known attack patterns, and data validation/sanitization guidance that reach a slice of XML injection cases, but leaves the dominant code-level neutralization defect untouched without further implementation-specific controls.