CVE-2024-6153
Parallels Desktop ≤ 18.1.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-6153 is a high-severity Protection Mechanism Failure (CWE-693) vulnerability in Parallels Parallels Desktop. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, ranked at the 21th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-47297
Vulnerability Data
Parallels Desktop Updater Protection Mechanism Failure Software Downgrade Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows local attackers to downgrade Parallels software on affected installations of Parallels Desktop. An attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target host system…
more
in order to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the Updater service. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of version information before performing an update. An attacker can leverage this in conjunction with other vulnerabilities to escalate privileges and execute arbitrary code in the context of root. Was ZDI-CAN-19481.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 8 hardening rules · 6 OS baselines
V6.3.3V6.6.3V10.2.2
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Implements a reliable, tamperproof protection mechanism whose completeness can be assured.
Procedures for training on protection mechanisms reduce the chance of protection mechanism failures being present or exploitable.
Documented procedures to implement assessment, authorization, and monitoring controls prevent these protection mechanisms from failing due to undefined processes.
Direct evaluation of whether controls produce desired security outcomes detects protection mechanism failures and enables remediation.
Requires assessment that protection mechanisms are correctly implemented and producing intended security outcomes.
The POA&M process ensures identified weaknesses in protection mechanisms are documented and scheduled for remediation, reducing the duration they remain exploitable.
Ongoing control assessments and analysis of monitoring data enable timely detection and response when protection mechanisms fail.
Impact analysis identifies changes that could weaken or disable existing protection mechanisms.
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.
Enforcing authentication directly implements a core protection mechanism whose absence or misuse is the CWE.
Defining and enforcing access authorizations is a protection mechanism; proper use prevents the CWE.
Cryptographic and integrity controls are protection mechanisms whose correct deployment mitigates the CWE.
Encryption and integrity protections for transit are explicit protection mechanisms.
Logical network protections are protection mechanisms whose failure matches the CWE.
Hardened configuration baselines ensure protection mechanisms are correctly applied and maintained.
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.
Systematic verification that security mechanisms operate according to defined standards reduces the likelihood that protection mechanisms are bypassed or disabled.
Hardening devices, disabling vulnerable protocols, and maintaining accurate network diagrams reduce the likelihood that a protection mechanism is misconfigured or left in a weak state.
Requiring defined escalation paths, crisis activation criteria, and coordination procedures strengthens the overall protection mechanism so that a single control failure is less likely to leave the organization exposed.
By requiring a documented categorization and decision process for security events, the control ensures that protection mechanisms are not bypassed or ignored when anomalies occur.
Identifying and remediating control weaknesses that contributed to an incident reduces the likelihood that protection mechanisms will fail again.
Post-incident analysis that feeds updated risk assessments and additional controls directly reduces the chance that previously exploited weaknesses will recur.