Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
OpenClaw, an open-source integration tool, has a flaw in how it verifies messages from Feishu (a workplace chat platform). If administrators set it up with only a verification token and skip the encryption key, attackers on the internet can send fake Feishu events that OpenClaw will trust and act on. That trust can trigger downstream automated actions the attacker chose.
Executive priority
High priority for teams using OpenClaw with Feishu integrations. Schedule the upgrade within the next standard patch cycle and require encryptKey to be configured before re-enabling the webhook. If OpenClaw drives automated actions on production systems, treat this as an expedited change rather than a routine update.
Technical view
The vulnerability (CWE-347, improper signature verification) affects OpenClaw versions before 2026.3.12 running in Feishu webhook mode with verificationToken set but no encryptKey. Because the token alone is not a cryptographic signature, unauthenticated remote attackers who reach the webhook endpoint can submit forged Feishu event payloads. Accepted events can invoke connected tools, giving high integrity impact per the 8.8 CVSS v4.0 score.
Likely exposure
Any internet-reachable OpenClaw instance configured in Feishu webhook mode without encryptKey is exposed. Deployments behind private networks, VPNs, or with encryptKey configured are not exposed by this specific flaw. Sources do not enumerate installed base or a scan estimate.
Exploitation context
No public reports of in-the-wild exploitation and not listed in CISA KEV per the source bundle. However, the flaw is unauthenticated and network-reachable, so the practical barrier is discovery of the webhook URL. Treat as high pre-exploitation risk pending further vendor telemetry or public PoC.
Researcher notes
CWE-347 confirms this is a signature-verification gap, not a token leak. The CVSS 4.0 vector (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N, VI:H) aligns with unauthenticated remote forgery with high integrity impact. Validation should focus on whether the fixed release rejects payloads that carry a valid verificationToken but no valid encrypted signature, and whether misconfiguration warnings are surfaced on startup.
Mitigation direction
- Upgrade OpenClaw to version 2026.3.12 or later as directed by the GitHub Security Advisory.
- Configure encryptKey alongside verificationToken so Feishu payloads are cryptographically verified.
- Restrict webhook endpoint access to Feishu source ranges or place it behind an authenticated gateway.
- Audit downstream tools OpenClaw can invoke and apply least-privilege scopes to reduce blast radius.
- Monitor vendor advisory channels for follow-up guidance and any newly disclosed variants.
Validation and detection
- Inventory OpenClaw deployments and record installed versions against the 2026.3.12 fix line.
- Review configuration for Feishu webhook mode and confirm whether encryptKey is set.
- Confirm webhook endpoints are not directly reachable from the public internet where not required.
- Review OpenClaw and downstream tool logs for unexpected Feishu event invocations.
- Re-test after upgrade to confirm forged events lacking valid signatures are rejected.
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-347: 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-2026-32974 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
- 8.8 (4.0)
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA: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:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N——VulnCheckCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L3.94.7VulnCheckVulnerability scoring details
Base CVSS 4.0 score
8.8HighVector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Base CVSS 3.1 score
8.6HighVector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L
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-g353-mgv3-8pcj)CVE reference, VulnCheck · vendor-advisory
- VulnCheck Advisory: OpenClaw < 2026.3.12 - Forged Event Injection via Feishu Webhook Verification TokenCVE 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.
Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature
Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.