CVE-2026-35670
Openclaw ≤ 2026.3.22
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/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:XSummary
CVE-2026-35670 is a medium-severity Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision (CWE-807) vulnerability in Openclaw Openclaw. Its CVSS base score is 6.0 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 15th 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-24 (Access Control Decisions) 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-2026-35670 is a webhook reply delivery vulnerability in OpenClaw versions before 2026.3.22. It stems from the use of mutable username matching instead of stable numeric user identifiers, enabling attackers to rebind chat replies to unintended users. By manipulating username changes, attackers can redirect webhook-triggered replies, bypassing the intended recipient binding recorded in webhook events. The issue is classified under CWE-807 with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.9 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N).
Attackers with low privileges can exploit this over the network, though it requires high attack complexity and no user interaction. Successful exploitation allows redirection of replies intended for specific users to others, potentially exposing sensitive information in replies (high confidentiality impact) and enabling minor manipulation of reply delivery (low integrity impact).
Mitigation involves updating to OpenClaw 2026.3.22 or later, as indicated by patches in GitHub commits 630f1479c44f78484dfa21bb407cbe6f171dac87 and 7ade3553b74ee3f461c4acd216653d5ba411f455. Further details are available in the GitHub security advisory at GHSA-wv46-v6xc-2qhf and the VulnCheck advisory on webhook reply rebinding via username resolution in Synology Chat.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-21486
Vulnerability Data
OpenClaw before 2026.3.22 contains a webhook reply delivery vulnerability that allows attackers to rebind chat replies to unintended users by exploiting mutable username matching instead of stable numeric user identifiers. Attackers can manipulate username changes to redirect webhook-triggered replies to…
more
different users, bypassing the intended recipient binding recorded in webhook events.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Explicitly requires that every access decision be based on authoritative, protected decision data rather than caller-supplied inputs.
Input validation can reject malformed or attacker-controlled values before they reach a security decision point.
Access enforcement requires decisions to be made from trusted policy data rather than modifiable client-supplied inputs.
Information-flow enforcement applies rules to validated, internal attributes instead of untrusted external values.
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.
Strong authentication mechanisms directly prevent security decisions from depending on modifiable, untrusted inputs.
Verification and protection of identity assertions stops reliance on attacker-controlled values for authorization decisions.
Proper management of identities/credentials reduces the chance that security decisions will be driven by untrusted inputs.
Policy-driven, least-privilege authorization reduces opportunities to bypass controls via tampered inputs.
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.
Secure coding standards directly prohibit using untrusted inputs for security-critical decisions.
Security testing in development catches input-validation flaws before deployment.
Monitoring can detect exploitation but does not stop the underlying weakness.
Application security requirements explicitly call for validation of inputs used in security decisions.
Secure architecture principles mandate treating all external inputs as untrusted.
Access-control rules can be bypassed if they rely on untrusted inputs.