Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-41388

Openclaw ≤ 2026.3.31

Public PoC
Published
28 April 2026
Modified
30 April 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 6.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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:X
EPSS Score 0.0031 23th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-41388 is a medium-severity Incomplete Internal State Distinction (CWE-372) vulnerability in Openclaw Openclaw. Its CVSS base score is 6.3 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Server Software Component (T1505); ranked at the 23th 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 CM-6 (Configuration Settings) and CM-3 (Configuration Change Control) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

OpenClaw before 2026.3.31 contains a configuration management vulnerability where startup migration treats empty-array settings as missing values. Attackers can restart the application to rehydrate revoked Tlon configuration from file state, bypassing intended revocation controls.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

T1505 Server Software Component Persistence
Adversaries may abuse legitimate extensible development features of servers to establish persistent access to systems.
Why these techniques?

Vulnerability bypasses config revocation on restart, directly enabling persistence via server software component rehydration from file state.

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

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-41340Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-41300Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-28463Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-41408Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-32923Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-32021Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-41296Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-32063Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-43576Same product: Openclaw Openclaw
CVE-2026-35637Same product: Openclaw Openclaw

Affected Assets

openclaw
openclaw
≤ 2026.3.31

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • CM-6 Configuration Settings
  • CM-3 Configuration Change Control
  • SI-7 Software, Firmware, and Information Integrity
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)
  • SI-7 Software, Firmware, and Information Integrity
Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Directly enforces correct application and validation of configuration settings so that revoked values cannot be silently rehydrated from file state on restart.

prevent

Requires controlled, auditable changes to configuration, preventing unauthorized or incomplete revocation state from persisting across application restarts.

preventdetect

Protects configuration data integrity and can detect unauthorized or inconsistent state restoration that bypasses intended revocation.

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 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC activities directly address proper state-machine design and testing that prevent incomplete state distinction.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Identifying recorded vulnerabilities can surface this class of state-management flaw during assessments.

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.

detects

Security testing can detect state-machine flaws that manifest as incomplete internal state distinction.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle practices can include state-machine validation and invariant checks that reduce incomplete internal state errors.

prevents

Explicit application security requirements can mandate state-transition validation and error-state handling.

prevents

Secure architecture principles encourage explicit state modelling and fail-safe transitions.

prevents

Secure coding standards can require defensive checks against invalid or ambiguous internal states.

prevents

Change-management procedures may indirectly catch state-related defects during release reviews.

References