CVE-2026-53830
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 · uneditedOpenClaw before 2026.4.22 contains a webhook secret revocation bypass vulnerability allowing callers with old Slack and Zalo webhook secrets to remain active after secrets.reload. Attackers can exploit the stale-secret window to deliver webhook events after operator-expected secret revocation, potentially accepting previous credentials.
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 · high confidenceOpenClaw fails to immediately invalidate Slack and Zalo webhook secrets during the secrets.reload operation. After an administrator revokes secrets, attackers possessing the old secrets can continue delivering malicious webhook events during the stale-secret window until the new secrets are fully propagated.
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< 2026.4.22CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed OpenClaw versionRun the command to display the OpenClaw version (such as 'openclaw --version' or check the application's about/info endpoint)Affected if The displayed version is lower than 2026.4.22 (e.g., 2026.4.21, 2026.4.0, etc.)
-
Check for configured Slack webhook integrationInspect the OpenClaw configuration files or database for any Slack webhook URL or secret configuration entriesAffected if A Slack webhook URL or secret is present in the configuration
-
Check for configured Zalo webhook integrationInspect the OpenClaw configuration files or database for any Zalo webhook URL or secret configuration entriesAffected if A Zalo webhook URL or secret is present in the configuration
-
Verify secrets.reload was recently invokedReview application logs for recent 'secrets.reload' or 'secret rotation' command invocationsAffected if The secrets.reload operation was executed and old credentials were supposed to be revoked but webhook secrets may still be active
You are affected if your OpenClaw version is below 2026.4.22 AND you have Slack or Zalo webhook integrations configured, especially if secrets.reload was recently called to revoke credentials.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 · scoped2026.4.22
Upgrade to OpenClaw 2026.4.22 or later. In the meantime, monitor webhook activity for unauthorized events using the old secret values and consider rotating all webhook endpoints entirely rather than relying on secret.reload.
OpenClaw 2026.4.22
- Upgrade OpenClaw to version 2026.4.22 or later to address the stale-secret window vulnerability
- After upgrade, verify that webhook secrets are properly revoked when secrets.reload is executed
- Test webhook functionality to confirm old Slack and Zalo webhook secrets no longer function after revocation
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-53830 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-53830 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
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.
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.
- 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