OpenClaw: Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision
CVE-2026-41299 is a high-severity reliance on untrusted inputs in a security decision vulnerability in OpenClaw, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.1 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. The record lists version 2026.3.28 as the first without the flaw, so updating OpenClaw to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.2% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update OpenClaw to 2026.3.28 or a later version.
- Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
Affected products and versions
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- LowSome restricted data can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- NoneAvailability is not affected.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N. Scored by CNA (vulncheck.com).
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 4.0 | 7.1 | High | CNA (vulncheck.com) |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.1 | High | CNA (vulncheck.com) |
Official description
OpenClaw before 2026.3.28 contains an authorization bypass vulnerability in the chat.send gateway method where ACP-only provenance fields are gated by self-declared client metadata from WebSocket handshake rather than verified authorization state. Authenticated operator clients can spoof ACP identity labels and inject reserved provenance fields intended only for the ACP bridge by manipulating client metadata during connection.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision
The product uses a protection mechanism that relies on the existence or values of an input, but the input can be modified by an untrusted actor in a way that bypasses the protection mechanism.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. With a stateless protocol such as HTTP, use a framework that maintains the state for you. Examples include ASP.NET View State and the OWASP ESAPI Session Management feature. Be careful of language features that provide state support, since these might be provided as a convenience to the programmer and may not be considering security.
- For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
- When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.
More Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision vulnerabilities (CWE-807)
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Third-party and government advisories
Other vulnerabilities in OpenClaw
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.3 High severity
- 8.3 High severity
Recent Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision vulnerabilities
- 8.1 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 8.1 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.