Is there a patch available for EUVD-2026-21110?

Yes, a patch is available for EUVD-2026-21110. Update the affected software to the latest version immediately.

Openclaw EUVD-2026-21110

Q: What is the CVSS score of EUVD-2026-21110?

EUVD-2026-21110 has a CVSS 4.0 base score of 6.9 (Medium). CVSS vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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 exploitation probability: 0.1%.

| CVE-2026-35626 MEDIUM

Asymmetric Resource Consumption (Amplification) (CWE-405)

2026-04-09 VulnCheck

GHSA-36cp-mh65-x882

Denial Of Service Openclaw

6.9

CVSS 4.0 · NVD

Severity by source

NVD PRIMARY

6.9 MEDIUM

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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

Primary rating from NVD · only source for this CVE.

CVSS VectorNVD

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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

Attack Vector

Network

Attack Complexity

Low

Privileges Required

None

User Interaction

None

Scope

Lifecycle Timeline

EUVD ID Assigned

Apr 09, 2026 - 21:45 euvd

EUVD-2026-21110

Analysis Generated

Apr 09, 2026 - 21:45 vuln.today

Patch released

Apr 09, 2026 - 21:45 nvd

Patch available

CVE Published

Apr 09, 2026 - 21:26 nvd

MEDIUM 6.9

Blast Radius

ecosystem impact

† from your stack dependencies † transitive graph · vuln.today resolves 4-path depth

5 npm packages depend on openclaw (5 direct, 0 indirect)

Ecosystem-wide dependent count for version 2026.3.22.

DescriptionCVE.org

OpenClaw before 2026.3.22 contains an unauthenticated resource exhaustion vulnerability in voice call webhook handling that buffers request bodies before provider signature checks. Attackers can send large or malicious webhook requests to exhaust server resources without authentication by bypassing signature validation.

AnalysisAI

Unauthenticated resource exhaustion in OpenClaw before 2026.3.22 allows remote attackers to cause denial of service by sending large or malicious webhook requests to the voice call handler, which buffers request bodies before validating provider signatures. The vulnerability requires only network access (AV:N, PR:N) and can be exploited with low complexity, making it a practical attack vector for disrupting service availability.

Technical ContextAI

OpenClaw's voice call webhook endpoint processes incoming requests without performing cryptographic signature validation before buffering the entire request body into memory. This is an instance of CWE-405 (Unverified Password Change), more broadly categorized as improper input validation and resource management. The vulnerability stems from the order of operations: the application should validate webhook authenticity (via provider signatures) before accepting and buffering potentially large payloads. Instead, the application accepts and buffers first, allowing unauthenticated attackers to trigger memory exhaustion. The affected component is the webhook handler for voice call integrations, suggesting this affects applications using OpenClaw's VoIP or telephony provider integrations.

RemediationAI

Vendor-released patch: OpenClaw 2026.3.22 or later. Upgrade to the patched version immediately by updating the OpenClaw package and restarting services. Two upstream commits (630f1479c44f78484dfa21bb407cbe6f171dac87 and 651dc7450b68a5396a009db78ef9382633707ead) are referenced in the official GitHub advisory at https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-rm59-992w-x2mv. As a temporary workaround pending patch deployment, implement request size limits and rate limiting on the webhook endpoint using a reverse proxy (e.g., nginx, Apache) to reject excessively large requests before they reach OpenClaw. Additionally, verify that webhook signature validation is performed before any request body buffering, and consider restricting webhook access to known provider IP ranges if feasible.