Incomplete Internal State Distinction

OpenClaw before 2026.3.31 contains a configuration management vulnerability where startup migration treats empty-array settings as missing values. Attackers can restart the application to rehydrate revoked Tlon configuration from file state, bypassing intended revocation controls.Show less

OpenClaw before 2026.3.31 contains an authentication boundary vulnerability where Telegram legacy allowFrom migration incorrectly fans default-account trust into all named accounts. Attackers can exploit this trust propagation to bypass authentication controls and gain unauthorized access to named accounts.Show less

OpenClaw before 2026.3.31 contains a trust-decline vulnerability that preserves attacker-discovered endpoints in remote onboarding flows. Attackers can route gateway credentials to malicious endpoints by having their discovered URL survive the trust decline process into manual prompts requiring operator acceptance.Show less

The TLS engine in Kwik commit 745fd4e2 does not track the current state of the connection. This vulnerability can allow Client Hello messages to be overwritten at any time, including after a connection has been established.Show less

An Incomplete Internal State Distinction vulnerability in the packet forwarding engine (PFE) of Juniper Networks Junos OS on SRX 4600 and SRX 5000 Series allows an adjacent attacker to cause a Denial of Service (DoS). If an SRX is configured in L2 transparent mode the receipt of a specific genuine packet can cause a single Packet Processing Engines (PPE) component of the PFE to run into a loop, which in turn will render the PPE unavailable. Each packet will cause one PPE to get into a loop, leading to a gradual performance degradation until all PPEs are unavailable and all traffic processing stops. To recover the affected FPC need to be restarted. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS on SRX 4600 and SRX 5000 Series: 20.1 version 20.1R1 and later versions; 20.2 versions prior to 20.2R3-S7; 20.3 version 20.3R1 and later versions; 20.4 versions prior to 20.4R3-S7; 21.1 versions prior to 21.1R3-S5; 21.2 versions prior to 21.2R3-S3; 21.3 versions prior to 21.3R3-S3; 21.4 versions prior to 21.4R3-S1; 22.1 versions prior to 22.1R3; 22.2 versions prior to 22.2R2; 22.3 versions prior to 22.3R1-S1, 22.3R2. Show less

libspdm is a sample implementation that follows the DMTF SPDM specifications. A vulnerability has been identified in SPDM session establishment in libspdm prior to version 2.3.1. If a device supports both DHE session and PSK session with mutual authentication, the attacker may be able to establish the session with `KEY_EXCHANGE` and `PSK_FINISH` to bypass the mutual authentication. This is most likely to happen when the Requester begins a session using one method (DHE, for example) and then uses the other method's finish (PSK_FINISH in this example) to establish the session. The session hashes would be expected to fail in this case, but the condition was not detected. This issue only impacts the SPDM responder, which supports `KEY_EX_CAP=1 and `PSK_CAP=10b` at same time with mutual authentication requirement. The SPDM requester is not impacted. The SPDM responder is not impacted if `KEY_EX_CAP=0` or `PSK_CAP=0` or `PSK_CAP=01b`. The SPDM responder is not impacted if mutual authentication is not required. libspdm 1.0, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 are all impacted. Older branches are not maintained, but users of the 2.3 branch may receive a patch in version 2.3.2. The SPDM specification (DSP0274) does not contain this vulnerability.Show less

A security issue was discovered in kube-apiserver that could allow node updates to bypass a Validating Admission Webhook. Clusters are only affected by this vulnerability if they run a Validating Admission Webhook for Nodes that denies admission based at least partially on the old state of the Node object. Validating Admission Webhook does not observe some previous fields.Show less

In Eclipse Californium version 2.3.0 to 2.6.0, the certificate based (x509 and RPK) DTLS handshakes accidentally fails, because the DTLS server side sticks to a wrong internal state. That wrong internal state is set by a previous certificate based DTLS handshake failure with TLS parameter mismatch. The DTLS server side must be restarted to recover this. This allow clients to force a DoS.Show less