Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-34595

Memory Safety in Parseplatform Parse-Server ≤ 8.6.70

Memory Safety
Published
31 March 2026
Modified
24 July 2026
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v4 5.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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:X
EPSS Score 0.0025 17th percentile
Risk Priority 32 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-34595 is a medium-severity Type Confusion (CWE-843) vulnerability in Parseplatform Parse-Server. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 17th 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

Vulnerability Data

Parse Server is an open source backend that can be deployed to any infrastructure that can run Node.js. Prior to versions 8.6.70 and 9.7.0-alpha.18, an authenticated user with find class-level permission can bypass the protectedFields class-level permission setting on LiveQuery…

more

subscriptions. By sending a subscription with a $or, $and, or $nor operator value as a plain object with numeric keys and a length property (an "array-like" object) instead of an array, the protected-field guard is bypassed. The subscription event firing acts as a binary oracle, allowing the attacker to infer whether a protected field matches a given test value. This issue has been patched in versions 8.6.70 and 9.7.0-alpha.18.

CWE(s)
CWE-843

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
attack.mitre.org →
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
attack.mitre.org →
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
attack.mitre.org →
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
attack.mitre.org →
T1212 Exploitation for Credential Access Credential Access
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to collect credentials.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-31875Same product: Parseplatform Parse-Server
CVE-2026-30850Same product: Parseplatform Parse-Server
CVE-2026-31800Same product: Parseplatform Parse-Server
CVE-2026-34574Same product: Parseplatform Parse-Server
CVE-2026-33421Same product: Parseplatform Parse-Server
CVE-2026-33527Same product: Parseplatform Parse-Server
CVE-2026-30947Same product: Parseplatform Parse-Server
CVE-2026-34532Same product: Parseplatform Parse-Server
CVE-2026-30854Same product: Parseplatform Parse-Server
CVE-2026-30965Same product: Parseplatform Parse-Server

Affected Assets

parseplatform
parse-server
9.7.0 · ≤ 8.6.70 · 9.0.0 — 9.7.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.5.2
  • V3.2.3
  • V15.3.5

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation good match

Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and type-aware analysis) directly finds type-confusion flaws before deployment.

SA-8 Security and Privacy Engineering Principles partial match

Engineering principles can require use of type-safe languages, static typing, and runtime type checks that structurally avoid allocating one type and accessing another.

SI-16 Memory Protection partial match

Memory-protection controls limit the blast radius when a type-confusion access occurs but do not stop the flaw itself.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly prevent type-confusion flaws via safe typing, static analysis, and code review while the control itself addresses many additional weaknesses.

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.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing in development can detect type-confusion vulnerabilities through fuzzing and static analysis.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure SDLC mandates type-safe design and review that can catch type-confusion flaws.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

Application security requirements can specify strong typing and interface contracts that reduce type confusion.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
prevents

Secure architecture principles promote type-safe languages and memory-safety mechanisms that mitigate type confusion.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure coding standards directly forbid unsafe type casts and require static-analysis checks for type confusion.

References