CVE-2026-53633
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 · uneditedVitest is a testing framework powered by Vite. From 3.0.0 until 3.2.5, 4.1.8, and 5.0.0-beta.4, Vitest Browser Mode exposed a cdp() API that forwarded raw Chrome DevTools Protocol methods without being gated by allowWrite or allowExec, allowing a remote client with exposed browser API metadata to use CDP Page.setDownloadBehavior and Runtime.evaluate to overwrite vite.config.ts and execute attacker-controlled Node.js code. This issue is fixed in versions 3.2.5, 4.1.8, and 5.0.0-beta.
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 analysis · high confidenceVitest Browser Mode exposes a cdp() API that forwards raw Chrome DevTools Protocol methods without being gated by allowWrite or allowExec controls. This allows a remote attacker with exposed browser API metadata to use CDP methods (Page.setDownloadBehavior and Runtime.evaluate) to overwrite vite.config.ts and execute arbitrary Node.js code on the server.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed Vitest versionRun 'npm list vitest' or check package.json dependencies to determine the exact version of Vitest installed in your projectAffected if Version is lower than 3.2.5, 4.1.8, or 5.0.0-beta (or if the version cannot be determined)
-
Verify Browser Mode configurationSearch for 'browser: true' in vitest.config.ts, vitest.config.js, or vitest.workspace.ts files, and check if the project uses @vitest/browser packageAffected if Browser Mode is enabled (browser: true setting exists in Vitest configuration)
-
Check Vitest server network exposureExamine configuration for 'host: true' or similar settings in vitest.config, and review startup scripts for --host flag or exposed port configurationsAffected if The Vitest server is configured to listen on network interfaces accessible to untrusted networks (host binding to non-localhost)
-
Inspect allowWrite and allowExec settingsReview vitest.config.ts for allowFiles, allowWrite, or allowExec options under browser configuration to see if they are properly restrictedAffected if allowWrite or allowExec controls are not explicitly configured or are set to permissive values (such as allowing arbitrary file writes)
-
Check for exposed browser API metadataReview network configuration and determine if Vitest's browser API endpoints (typically on port 5173 or configured port) are accessible from untrusted networksAffected if Vitest server with Browser Mode is exposed to the internet or untrusted internal networks
A user is affected if they are running Vitest versions below 3.2.5/4.1.8/5.0.0-beta with Browser Mode enabled and the server is network-exposed, allowing remote attackers to leverage the unrestricted cdp() API.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 · scopedUpgrade Vitest to version 3.2.5, 4.1.8, or 5.0.0-beta or later. If immediate upgrading is not feasible, disable Vitest Browser Mode and ensure the Vitest server is not exposed to untrusted networks.
Upgrade to Vitest 3.2.5 (for 3.x users), 4.1.8 (for 4.x users), or 5.0.0-beta (for 5.x beta users)
- Check the currently installed Vitest version by running `npm list vitest` or viewing package.json
- Determine which major version branch you are currently on (3.x, 4.x, or 5.x)
- Upgrade to the appropriate fixed version: run `npm install [email protected]` for 3.x users, `npm install [email protected]` for 4.x users, or `npm install [email protected]` for 5.x beta users
- After upgrading, verify the new version is installed with `npm list vitest`
- Test that your existing test suite runs correctly with the updated version
- If using Browser Mode, ensure the cdp() API now properly enforces allowWrite/allowExec restrictions
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-53633 — 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-2026-53633 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