Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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-2026-32917 is a critical-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Openclaw Openclaw. Its CVSS base score is 9.2 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 21% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) 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-2026-32917 is a remote command injection vulnerability (CWE-78) in OpenClaw versions before 2026.3.13. The flaw exists in the iMessage attachment staging flow, where unsanitized remote attachment paths containing shell metacharacters are passed directly to the SCP remote operand without validation. This allows attackers to execute arbitrary commands on configured remote hosts when remote attachment staging is enabled. Published on 2026-03-31, the vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), marking it as critical.
The vulnerability can be exploited remotely by unauthenticated attackers (PR:N) over the network (AV:N) with low attack complexity (AC:L) and no user interaction (UI:N). By sending iMessage attachments with specially crafted paths embedding shell metacharacters, attackers can inject commands that execute on the targeted remote hosts during the SCP-based staging process, potentially achieving high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts (C:H/I:H/A:H).
Advisories recommend updating to OpenClaw 2026.3.13 or later to mitigate the issue, as detailed in the project's GitHub commit a54bf71b4c0cbe554a84340b773df37ee8e959de, the GitHub Security Advisory GHSA-g2f6-pwvx-r275, and the VulnCheck advisory on the remote command injection via unsanitized iMessage attachment paths in SCP.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-17371
Vulnerability Data
OpenClaw before 2026.3.13 contains a remote command injection vulnerability in the iMessage attachment staging flow that allows attackers to execute arbitrary commands on configured remote hosts. The vulnerability exists because unsanitized remote attachment paths containing shell metacharacters are passed directly…
more
to the SCP remote operand without validation, enabling command execution when remote attachment staging is enabled.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.5V1.2.8V15.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect command sanitization during development.
Input validation directly neutralizes or rejects special characters that would otherwise alter OS command structure.
Least privilege reduces the permissions available to any process that could be subverted by injected commands.
Least functionality restricts available OS commands and interpreters, limiting the blast radius of injection.
Secure engineering principles require proper neutralization of untrusted input before command construction.
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.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.
Routine patching/maintenance can remediate known command-injection CVEs in dependencies (partial forward) but does nothing to stop developers from introducing improper neutralization in custom code (none reverse).
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 and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.