Node.jsApplication
CVE-2023-32559
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the experimental policy mechanism in all active release lines: 16.x, 18.x and, 20.x. The use of the deprecated API `process.binding()` can bypass the policy mechanism by requiring internal modules and eventually take advantage of `process.binding('spawn_sync')` run arbitrary code, outside of the limits defined in a `policy.json` file. Please note that at the time this CVE was issued, the policy is an experimental feature of Node.js.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisPrivileges are granted, or fail to be dropped, incorrectly, so an action runs with more power than it should. An attacker who reaches that path inherits the excess privilege. The fix is least-privilege throughout, with explicit, checked transitions whenever privilege changes.
General guidance for the improper privilege management class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Node.jsApplication
>= 16.0.0, <= 16.20.1>= 18.0.0, <= 18.17.0>= 20.0.0, <= 20.5.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scopedNode.js 16.20.2, 18.18.0, or 20.6.0 (depending on major version line in use)
- 1. Identify the current Node.js version in use by running `node --version`
- 2. For Node.js 16.x users: Upgrade to version 16.20.2 or later
- 3. For Node.js 18.x users: Upgrade to version 18.18.0 or later
- 4. For Node.js 20.x users: Upgrade to version 20.6.0 or later
- 5. Verify the upgrade was successful by running `node --version`
- 6. If using policy.json, test that the policy mechanism properly restricts access after the upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-32559 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-32559 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data