CVE-2026-41334
Openclaw ≤ 2026.3.31
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/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-2026-41334 is a high-severity Failing Open (CWE-636) vulnerability in Openclaw Openclaw. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application Exhaustion Flood (T1499.003); ranked at the 24th 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 SC-5 (Denial-of-service Protection) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25318
Vulnerability Data
OpenClaw before 2026.3.31 contains a decompression bomb vulnerability in image processing that fails to properly enforce pixel-limit guards on sips. Attackers can exploit this by uploading oversized images to cause denial of service through excessive memory consumption.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Decompression bomb enables application exhaustion flood via memory DoS on image upload/processing.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces validation of image inputs (pixel dimensions, decompression size) before processing to block oversized uploads that trigger the decompression bomb.
Provides explicit denial-of-service protection mechanisms that limit excessive memory allocation during image decompression.
Can enforce information flow policies that restrict the size or format of data crossing system boundaries during image uploads.
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 explicitly include designing error and failure handling to remain in a secure state.
Least-privilege policy and enforcement directly counters the permissive-access fallback example in the CWE.
Hardened baselines and configuration management reduce the chance that error paths default to insecure settings.
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.
The control forces an explicit evaluation step before any response, reducing the chance that a failure condition will default to an unsafe open state.