Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2026-26327· NVD / CVE Program· CNA GitHub_M

OpenClaw allows unauthenticated discovery TXT records to steer routing and TLS pinning

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Discovery beacons (Bonjour/mDNS and DNS-SD) include TXT records such as `lanHost`, `tailnetDns`, `gatewayPort`, and `gatewayTlsSha256`. TXT records are unauthenticated. Prior to version 2026.2.14, some clients treated TXT values as authoritative routing/pinning inputs. iOS and macOS used TXT-provided host hints (`lanHost`/`tailnetDns`) and ports (`gatewayPort`) to build the connection URL. iOS and Android allowed the discovery-provided TLS fingerprint (`gatewayTlsSha256`) to override a previously stored TLS pin. On a shared/untrusted LAN, an attacker could advertise a rogue `_openclaw-gw._tcp` service. This could cause a client to connect to an attacker-controlled endpoint and/or accept an attacker certificate, potentially exfiltrating Gateway credentials (`auth.token` / `auth.password`) during connection. As of time of publication, the iOS and Android apps are alpha/not broadly shipped (no public App Store / Play Store release). Practical impact is primarily limited to developers/testers running those builds, plus any other shipped clients relying on discovery on a shared/untrusted LAN. Version 2026.2.14 fixes the issue. Clients now prefer the resolved service endpoint (SRV + A/AAAA) over TXT-provided routing hints. Discovery-provided fingerprints no longer override stored TLS pins. In iOS/Android, first-time TLS pins require explicit user confirmation (fingerprint shown; no silent TOFU) and discovery-based direct connects are TLS-only. In Android, hostname verification is no longer globally disabled (only bypassed when pinning).

HighCVSS 7.1 · v4.0—No exploit Fix available
Published
Feb 19, 2026
Updated
Jun 17, 2026
EPSS
0.1% · 2th percentile
Follow this CVE

Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.

Report tools

JSON

Action score

28

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
28 / 40 · 7.1 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.1%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
none
Automatable
no
Technical impact
partial

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD
—
CNA · GitHub_M
7.1
NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.

CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Noroxi analysis

No Noroxi analysis for this record yet

We don't hand-write analysis for the hundreds of thousands of vulnerabilities in the database; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

VendorProduct
openclawopenclaw

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • openclaw openclawbefore 2026.2.14

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

  • openclaw openclaw

    • < 2026.2.14affected

Package-level exposure

OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.

EcosystemPackageAffected rangeFix
npmopenclawbefore 2026.2.142026.2.14

Same product

openclaw: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2026-25253OpenClaw (aka clawdbot or Moltbot) before 2026.1.29 obtains a gatewayUrl value from a query string and automatically makes a WebSocket conne
    42Plan
  • CVE-2026-30741A remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability in OpenClaw Agent Platform v2026.2.6 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a Request-Si
    39Monitor
  • CVE-2026-43534OpenClaw < 2026.4.10 - Unsanitized External Input in Agent Hook Events
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2026-33579OpenClaw < 2026.3.28 - Privilege Escalation via Missing Caller Scope Validation in Device Pair Approval
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2026-32917OpenClaw < 2026.3.13 - Remote Command Injection via Unsanitized iMessage Attachment Paths in SCP
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2026-32987OpenClaw < 2026.3.13 - Bootstrap Setup Code Replay via Device Pairing
    37Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

Product / packageFixed versionSource
npm:openclaw2026.2.14Package registry (OSV)

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

  • CVE-2026-4353475 days apartOpenClaw < 2026.4.10 - Unsanitized External Input in Agent Hook Events
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2026-2845414 days apartOpenClaw < 2026.2.2 - Authorization Bypass via Unauthenticated Telegram Webhook
    32Monitor
  • CVE-2026-254740 days apartOpenClaw has a Telegram webhook request forgery (missing `channels.telegram.webhookSecret`) → auth bypass
    30Monitor
  • CVE-2026-3202928 days apartOpenClaw < 2026.2.21 - Client IP Spoofing via X-Forwarded-For Header Parsing
    25Monitor
  • CVE-2026-4499981 days apartOpenClaw < 2026.4.20 - Improper Trust Labeling in Isolated Cron Awareness Events
    25Monitor
  • CVE-2026-3565950 days apartOpenClaw < 2026.3.22 - Unresolved Service Metadata Routing via Bonjour and DNS-SD Discovery
    20Monitor

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Someone on the same network segment can trigger it.
  • No account or password is required.
  • No user action is required.
  • No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
Integrity
Availability
Attack vector
Adjacent
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
X

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-345 · Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity

CVSS vector

CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/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

nvd-secondary

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

Change log

  1. Fix✗ → ✓

For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →

References

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records