dbcve.org
OpenclawApplication

CVE-2026-32973

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-03-29
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 2026.3.11 or later.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
OpenClaw before 2026.3.11 contains an exec allowlist bypass vulnerability where matchesExecAllowlistPattern improperly normalizes patterns with lowercasing and glob matching that overmatches on POSIX paths. Attackers can exploit the ? wildcard matching across path segments to execute commands or paths not intended by operators.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · moderate confidence

OpenClaw's matchesExecAllowlistPattern function contains an exec allowlist bypass where improper pattern normalization (lowercasing combined with glob matching) allows the ? wildcard to match across path segment boundaries in POSIX paths. Attackers can craft paths that satisfy the allowlist pattern but resolve to unintended commands or paths.

MitigationUpgrade to OpenClaw 2026.3.11 or later which fixes the pattern normalization, or implement explicit path segment boundary checks in the allowlist matching logic to ensure wildcards cannot traverse path separators.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
OpenclawApplication
Affected:< 2026.3.11

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Determine OpenClaw installed version
    Run the command to retrieve the OpenClaw version (such as openclaw --version, openclaw -v, or check the package/version file if installed via package manager)
    Affected if The installed version is lower than 2026.3.11 (for example, 2026.3.10, 2026.2.0, etc.)
  2. Identify if execution allowlist is configured
    Locate the configuration file or setting that defines the execution allowlist patterns (commonly named allowlist, exec-allowlist, or similar in the config directory or settings)
    Affected if An execution allowlist pattern is defined and enforced in the configuration
  3. Inspect allowlist pattern syntax
    Examine the allowlist patterns in the configuration file for the presence of lowercase characters combined with ? wildcards that could match across path segment boundaries (for example, patterns like ?se? or ??u?e? on POSIX systems)
    Affected if The allowlist contains ? wildcard characters alongside lowercase letters in patterns used for path matching
  4. Verify allowlist enforcement behavior
    Test whether the allowlist can be bypassed by providing paths with embedded characters that the ? wildcard might match across segment boundaries (for example, paths containing characters that could be interpreted as crossing / delimiters)
    Affected if The ? wildcard pattern matches paths that should be blocked according to intended allowlist boundaries but are incorrectly permitted due to improper normalization

You are affected if OpenClaw version is below 2026.3.11 AND the execution allowlist feature is enabled with patterns containing ? wildcards that may match across path segments due to improper normalization.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

dbcve · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 2026.3.11 or later
Fixed in 2026.3.11
Interim mitigation

Upgrade to OpenClaw 2026.3.11 or later which fixes the pattern normalization, or implement explicit path segment boundary checks in the allowlist matching logic to ensure wildcards cannot traverse path separators.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

OpenClaw 2026.3.11

  1. 1. Identify the current installed version of OpenClaw by checking the application version or package manager
  2. 2. Back up all configuration files, especially any exec allowlist patterns configured in the system
  3. 3. Download OpenClaw version 2026.3.11 or later from the official GitHub repository (github.com/OpenClaw or similar official source)
  4. 4. Install the updated version following the project's standard upgrade procedure
  5. 5. Review and re-validate all exec allowlist patterns after upgrade to ensure they still match intended commands/paths
  6. 6. Test that the allowlist correctly blocks previously exploited patterns using the ? wildcard

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Openclaw Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,480
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,568.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-32973 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-32973 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data