CVE-2026-35666
Openclaw ≤ 2026.3.22
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/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-2026-35666 is a high-severity Use of Incorrectly-Resolved Name or Reference (CWE-706) vulnerability in Openclaw Openclaw. Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Path Interception (T1034); ranked at the 30th 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 AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) — 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-2026-35666 is an allowlist bypass vulnerability (CWE-706) in the system.run approvals of OpenClaw versions prior to 2026.3.22. The flaw occurs because the approval mechanism fails to properly unwrap wrappers around /usr/bin/time, allowing attackers to exploit an unregistered time wrapper. This enables reuse of prior approval states for inner commands, circumventing executable binding restrictions. The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) and was published on 2026-04-10.
Low-privileged users (PR:L) can exploit this vulnerability remotely over the network (AV:N) with low complexity and no user interaction required. By leveraging the /usr/bin/time wrapper, attackers bypass allowlist restrictions to execute unauthorized inner commands, potentially achieving high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts on the affected system.
Mitigation involves upgrading to OpenClaw 2026.3.22 or later, as detailed in the project's security advisory (GHSA-qm9x-v7cx-7rq4) and related commits (39409b6a6dd4239deea682e626bac9ba547bfb14 and 630f1479c44f78484dfa21bb407cbe6f171dac87). Additional analysis is available from VulnCheck's advisory on the allowlist bypass via unregistered time dispatch wrapper.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-21478
Vulnerability Data
OpenClaw before 2026.3.22 contains an allowlist bypass vulnerability in system.run approvals that fails to unwrap /usr/bin/time wrappers. Attackers can bypass executable binding restrictions by using an unregistered time wrapper to reuse approval state for inner commands.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Access enforcement applies authorization checks to the resolved resource, blocking access outside the intended sphere.
Information flow enforcement can constrain flows that result from an incorrectly resolved name or reference.
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.
Secure-development practices directly prevent incorrect name/reference resolution bugs during coding.
Enforced authorization boundaries limit damage from an incorrectly resolved reference.
Logical segmentation and access controls reduce the chance an out-of-sphere resolution succeeds.
Hardened configuration baselines can constrain allowable name-to-resource mappings.
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 can detect incorrect name or reference resolution through fuzzing and negative test cases.
Network segmentation and routing policies reduce the chance that a mis-resolved name leads to an unintended external resource.
Segregated networks limit the blast radius when a name or reference resolves outside the intended control sphere.
Secure SDLC practices include design reviews that can catch incorrect name or reference handling before deployment.
Application security requirements can mandate validation of all external references and names used at runtime.
Secure architecture principles discourage reliance on ambient or globally-resolvable names without explicit scoping.