Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:L/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:XSummary
CVE-2026-32055 is a high-severity Path Traversal (CWE-22) vulnerability in Openclaw Openclaw. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 25th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-32055, published on 2026-03-21, is a path traversal vulnerability (CWE-22) in OpenClaw versions prior to 2026.2.26. The issue lies in the workspace boundary validation logic, which improperly resolves aliases for in-workspace symlinks pointing to non-existent out-of-root targets. This flaw permits the initial write operation to bypass the workspace boundary, enabling file creation in arbitrary locations on the filesystem.
With a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.6 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L), the vulnerability can be exploited over the network by attackers possessing low privileges, such as authenticated users with workspace access. Exploitation requires no user interaction and allows arbitrary file writes outside the workspace, resulting in high integrity impact through unauthorized file creation, alongside limited confidentiality and availability effects.
Patches addressing the vulnerability are available in OpenClaw repository commits 1aef45bc060b28a0af45a67dc66acd36aef763c9 and 46eba86b45e9db05b7b792e914c4fe0de1b40a23. The GitHub Security Advisory GHSA-mgrq-9f93-wpp5 and VulnCheck advisory at https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-workspace-path-boundary-bypass-via-non-existent-symlink provide further details, recommending an upgrade to OpenClaw 2026.2.26 or later to mitigate the issue.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-13956
Vulnerability Data
OpenClaw versions prior to 2026.2.26 contain a path traversal vulnerability in workspace boundary validation that allows attackers to write files outside the workspace through in-workspace symlinks pointing to non-existent out-of-root targets. The vulnerability exists because the boundary check improperly resolves…
more
aliases, permitting the first write operation to escape the workspace boundary and create files in arbitrary locations.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Enforces the intended directory access authorizations that path traversal would otherwise bypass.
Input validation directly neutralizes special path elements before pathname construction occurs.
Least privilege reduces the impact of any unauthorized file access obtained via traversal.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Patching/maintenance can remediate known path-traversal flaws in deployed software (partial prevention of exploitability) but does nothing to stop the coding defect from being introduced in the first place.
PR.AA-05 defines and reviews access policies but does not address code-level pathname neutralization, so neither direction prevents CWE-22.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development catches path traversal via static/dynamic analysis.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and path sanitization that directly prevent path traversal.
Application security requirements include rules for safe file handling and canonicalization.
Secure architecture principles require least-privilege file access and directory isolation.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe path construction and mandate safe APIs.
Information access restriction limits which files an application may read or write.