CVE-2026-30972
Parseplatform Parse-Server ≤ 8.6.23
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2026-30972 is a medium-severity Improper Control of Interaction Frequency (CWE-799) vulnerability in Parseplatform Parse-Server. Its CVSS base score is 6.9 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Brute Force (T1110); ranked at the 27th 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 AC-10 (Concurrent Session Control) and AC-7 (Unsuccessful Logon Attempts) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-30972 is a rate limiting bypass vulnerability in Parse Server, an open source backend deployable on any Node.js infrastructure. In versions prior to 9.5.2-alpha.10 and 8.6.23, the rate limiting middleware operates at the Express middleware layer, but the /batch endpoint processes sub-requests internally through the Promise router. This routing bypasses Express middleware, including rate limiting, allowing attackers to bundle multiple requests targeting a rate-limited endpoint into a single batch request. Deployments relying on Parse Server's built-in rate limiting feature are affected, with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H) and mapped to CWE-799 (Resource Management Errors).
Unauthenticated remote attackers can exploit this vulnerability by crafting a batch request that encapsulates numerous sub-requests to rate-limited endpoints, effectively circumventing configured rate limits. This enables excessive request volumes in a single HTTP call, potentially overwhelming server resources and causing denial of service through resource exhaustion, as indicated by the high availability impact in the CVSS score.
The Parse community addressed this in releases 8.6.23 and 9.5.2-alpha.10, with details available in the GitHub security advisory GHSA-775h-3xrc-c228 and corresponding release notes. Security practitioners should upgrade to these fixed versions and review configurations relying on built-in rate limiting, considering additional server-level protections like external rate limiters.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-10886
Vulnerability Data
Parse Server is an open source backend that can be deployed to any infrastructure that can run Node.js. Prior o 9.5.2-alpha.10 and 8.6.23, Parse Server's rate limiting middleware is applied at the Express middleware layer, but the batch request endpoint…
more
(/batch) processes sub-requests internally by routing them directly through the Promise router, bypassing Express middleware including rate limiting. An attacker can bundle multiple requests targeting a rate-limited endpoint into a single batch request to circumvent the configured rate limit. Any Parse Server deployment that relies on the built-in rate limiting feature is affected. This vulnerability is fixed in 9.5.2-alpha.10 and 8.6.23.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
ac-10 enforces a hard limit on concurrent sessions per user, directly stopping uncontrolled interaction frequency at the session level.
ac-7 directly enforces a limit on the frequency of invalid authentication attempts, structurally preventing the weakness for that interaction class.
sc-5 reduces the impact of excessive request volume (DoS) but does not itself impose the frequency controls whose absence defines the weakness.
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.
Protecting networks from unauthorized usage can incorporate rate limiting to bound interaction frequency.
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.
Network security controls can enforce rate limiting and throttling at the perimeter.
Application security requirements explicitly include controls on interaction frequency and throttling.
Secure architecture principles recommend rate-limiting and resource-management mechanisms.
Secure coding practices can embed input-frequency and throttling checks in code.
Capacity management directly limits request rates and resource exhaustion that CWE-799 describes.