OpenClaw < 2026.3.12 - Webhook Rate Limiting Bypass via Pre-Authentication Secret Validation
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 27/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.35% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to CISA the attack is automatable: targets can be found by mass scanning.
- Fixed version: OpenClaw OpenClaw 2026.3.12.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to OpenClaw OpenClaw 2026.3.12 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
OpenClaw before 2026.3.12 applies rate limiting only after successful webhook authentication, allowing attackers to bypass rate limits and brute-force webhook secrets. Attackers can submit repeated authentication requests with invalid secrets without triggering rate limit responses, enabling systematic secret guessing and subsequent forged webhook submission.
- Published
- Mar 31, 2026
- Updated
- Jul 24, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.4% · 28th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-307
Report tools
Action score
27
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 27 / 40 · 6.9 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.4%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- yes
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · VulnCheck
- 6.9
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/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.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| openclaw | openclaw | cpe:2.3:a:openclaw:openclaw |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- openclaw openclawbefore 2026.3.12
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (VulnCheck). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
OpenClaw OpenClaw
- 2026.3.12not affected
- before 2026.3.12affected · semver
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | openclaw | before 2026.3.12 | 2026.3.12 |
Same product
openclaw: all recordsOther 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 conne42Plan
- CVE-2026-30741A remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability in OpenClaw Agent Platform v2026.2.6 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a Request-Si39Monitor
- CVE-2026-43534OpenClaw < 2026.4.10 - Unsanitized External Input in Agent Hook Events37Monitor
- CVE-2026-33579OpenClaw < 2026.3.28 - Privilege Escalation via Missing Caller Scope Validation in Device Pair Approval37Monitor
- CVE-2026-32917OpenClaw < 2026.3.13 - Remote Command Injection via Unsanitized iMessage Attachment Paths in SCP37Monitor
- CVE-2026-32987OpenClaw < 2026.3.13 - Bootstrap Setup Code Replay via Device Pairing37Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| OpenClaw OpenClaw | 2026.3.12 | Vendor (CNA) |
| npm:openclaw | 2026.3.12 | Package 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.
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.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- Peng Zhou (@zpbrent)reporter
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
- CVE-2026-3202512 days apartOpenClaw < 2026.2.25 - Password Brute-Force via Browser-Origin WebSocket Authentication Bypass30Monitor
- CVE-2026-335800 days apartOpenClaw < 2026.3.28 - Brute Force Attack via Missing Rate Limiting on Webhook Shared Secret Authentication25Monitor
- CVE-2026-356239 days apartOpenClaw < 2026.3.25 - Brute-Force Attack via Missing Webhook Password Rate Limiting25Monitor
- CVE-2026-356289 days apartOpenClaw < 2026.3.25 - Brute-Force Attack via Missing Telegram Webhook Rate Limiting25Monitor
- CVE-2026-356469 days apartOpenClaw < 2026.3.25 - Pre-Authentication Rate-Limit Bypass in Webhook Token Validation25Monitor
- CVE-2026-62220107 days apartOpenClaw 2026.2.25 < 2026.5.26 WebSocket Rate Limit Bypass25Monitor
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
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet 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
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-307 · Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication AttemptsCVSS vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/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.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Dictionary-based Password AttackCAPEC-16likelihood: Medium · High
- Password Brute ForcingCAPEC-49likelihood: Medium · High
- Use of Known Domain CredentialsCAPEC-560likelihood: High · High
- Password SprayingCAPEC-565likelihood: High · High
- Credential StuffingCAPEC-600likelihood: High · High
- Use of Known Kerberos CredentialsCAPEC-652likelihood: Medium · High
- Use of Known Operating System CredentialsCAPEC-653likelihood: High · High
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (1 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.