Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-41333

Openclaw ≤ 2026.3.31

Public PoC
Published
23 April 2026
Modified
28 April 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 6.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
EPSS Score 0.0039 31th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-41333 is a medium-severity Improper Control of Interaction Frequency (CWE-799) vulnerability in Openclaw Openclaw. Its CVSS base score is 6.3 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Brute Force (T1110); ranked at the 31th 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-7 (Unsuccessful Logon Attempts) and IA-3 (Device Identification and Authentication) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

OpenClaw before 2026.3.31 contains an authentication rate limiting bypass vulnerability that allows attackers to circumvent shared authentication protections using fake device tokens. Attackers can exploit the mixed WebSocket authentication flow to bypass rate limiting controls and conduct brute force attacks…

more

against weak shared passwords.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

T1110 Brute Force Credential Access
Adversaries may use brute force techniques to gain access to accounts when passwords are unknown or when password hashes are obtained.
Why these techniques?

Rate-limit bypass in shared auth flow directly enables brute-force password guessing against weak credentials.

Confidence: HIGH · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-41913Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-41343Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-41346Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-32029Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-32025Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-35623Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-35628Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-62220Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-35646Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-28395Same product: Openclaw Openclaw

Affected Assets

openclaw
openclaw
≤ 2026.3.31

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • AC-7 Unsuccessful Logon Attempts
  • IA-3 Device Identification and Authentication
  • AC-3 Access Enforcement
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Directly enforces limits on unsuccessful authentication attempts, blocking the brute-force attacks enabled by the rate-limiting bypass.

prevent

Requires cryptographic or strong device identification, preventing use of fake device tokens to circumvent shared authentication controls.

prevent

Enforces authentication decisions and access control policies that the mixed WebSocket flow and token bypass violate.

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.IR-01 partial match
prevents

Protecting networks from unauthorized usage can incorporate rate limiting to bound interaction frequency.

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.

mitigates

Network security controls can enforce rate limiting and throttling at the perimeter.

prevents

Application security requirements explicitly include controls on interaction frequency and throttling.

prevents

Secure architecture principles recommend rate-limiting and resource-management mechanisms.

prevents

Secure coding practices can embed input-frequency and throttling checks in code.

degrades

Capacity management directly limits request rates and resource exhaustion that CWE-799 describes.

References