Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
OpenClaw before 2026.2.25 could let a lower-privileged authenticated node connection impersonate the Control UI pairing identity. That can bypass intended pairing checks and reach node event execution flows. This is mainly an integrity risk because it may allow unauthorized actions, not because public unauthenticated access is described.
Executive priority
Prioritize remediation for production OpenClaw deployments because the issue can bypass a trust boundary and affect event execution integrity. Treat as high priority, especially in multi-node or shared environments.
Technical view
The flaw is an authentication bypass in the trusted-proxy Control UI pairing mechanism. The source bundle says client.id=control-ui was accepted without proper device identity verification. An authenticated node role websocket client could use that identifier to skip pairing requirements and access node event execution flows. CVSS is 7.1 with low complexity and PR:L.
Likely exposure
OpenClaw deployments running versions earlier than 2026.2.25 are the relevant exposure. Risk is higher where node role websocket clients can reach the trusted-proxy Control UI pairing path.
Exploitation context
The bundle does not cite active exploitation, and KEV is false. Exploitation requires authenticated node-role websocket access, so this is not described as a fully unauthenticated internet attack.
Researcher notes
Key evidence is the CVSS vector PR:L/UI:N/AC:L and CWE-807: reliance on untrusted input in a security decision. The sources do not provide public exploit confirmation or broader product impact beyond OpenClaw before 2026.2.25.
Mitigation direction
- Upgrade OpenClaw to 2026.2.25 or later.
- Review the GitHub advisory and patch commit for vendor-specific guidance.
- Restrict access to node websocket and trusted-proxy interfaces where feasible.
- Investigate suspicious node-role clients before restoring normal trust assumptions.
Validation and detection
- Inventory OpenClaw instances and confirm every deployment is version 2026.2.25 or later.
- Verify the patch enforcing device identity verification is present.
- Review logs for unexpected control-ui client identifiers from node-role connections.
- Confirm trusted-proxy Control UI pairing paths are not broadly reachable.
Public sources used
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
CWE-807: Exact CWE lookup
Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCredential and access behavior lookup
The CVE wording references authentication or credential exposure, so valid-account and credential-access review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCVE-2026-32057 mapping review
Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.
Open ATT&CK lookup- Severity
- High
- CVSS
- 7.1 (3.1)
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N
CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
SSVC decision data
CVSS vector scores
2 official scoresWe collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N2.84.2VulnCheckCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N——VulnCheckVulnerability scoring details
Base CVSS 4.0 score
6MediumVector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Base CVSS 3.1 score
7.1HighVector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N
Vulnerability timeline
Timeline events are normalized from CVE metadata, CNA source timelines, ADP timelines, and KEV metadata when present.
- CVE reservedCVE Program
The CVE ID was reserved by the assigning CNA.
- CVE publishedCVE Program
The CVE record was published.
- CVE updatedCVE Program
The CVE record metadata indicates this as the latest update time.
ADP provider summaries
Source materials
- CVE List V5 sourceCVE List V5
- GitHub Security Advisory (GHSA-vvgp-4c28-m3jm)CVE reference, VulnCheck · vendor-advisory
- Patch CommitCVE reference, VulnCheck · patch
- VulnCheck Advisory: OpenClaw < 2026.2.25 - Authentication Bypass via Control UI client.id ParameterCVE reference, VulnCheck · third-party-advisory
Products and packages named in the record
CWE details
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.
Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision
Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.