Skip to content

GHSA-94pw-c6m8-p9p9 CVE-2026-35621

OpenClaw: Gateway operator.write Can Reach Admin-Class Channel Allowlist Persistence via chat.send

High npm
Severity
7.1 / 10
High · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.26%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 18.38% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management
Fix
2026.3.24
Upgrade openclaw to this version or later

Description

Fixed in OpenClaw 2026.3.24, the current shipping release.

Summary

The shared /allowlist command persists channel authorization config through writeConfigFile(...) but does not re-validate gateway client scopes for internal gateway callers. Because chat.send is intentionally reachable to operator.write callers and still creates a generic command-authorized internal context, an authenticated write-scoped gateway client can indirectly mutate channel allowFrom and groupAllowFrom policy that direct config.patch correctly reserves to operator.admin.

This is not just a generic code smell. The current code already shows the intended boundary by adding sink-side internal admin checks to shared /config and /plugins writes, but /allowlist was left behind.

Details

The gateway's documented scope split is clear:

  • chat.send is a write-scoped action.
  • direct config mutation is an admin-scoped action.

The vulnerable path is:

  1. A gateway client authenticates with operator.write.
  2. The client calls chat.send, which is intentionally allowed for that scope.
  3. chat.send builds an internal message context with CommandAuthorized: true and carries GatewayClientScopes into the reply pipeline.
  4. resolveCommandAuthorization(...) converts that internal message into isAuthorizedSender=true in the common case where no stricter commands.allowFrom override is configured.
  5. /allowlist add|remove accepts that generic command authorization and proceeds into its config-backed edit path.
  6. The handler clones the parsed config, calls plugin.allowlist.applyConfigEdit(...), validates the result, and persists it with writeConfigFile(validated.config).
  7. No sink-side check requires operator.admin before the persistent write occurs.

That creates a direct control-plane mismatch:

  • config.patch rejects the same caller with missing scope: operator.admin.
  • /allowlist add dm ... or /allowlist add group ... reached through chat.send can still rewrite channel authorization state.

Impact

  • A gateway client intentionally limited to operator.write can persist first-party channel authorization policy.
  • The caller can widen DM or group allowlists for channels using the shared /allowlist plumbing.
  • This weakens the repo's documented control-plane privilege split between ordinary write actions and admin-only persistent authorization mutation.

Remediation

1) Add the Missing Sink-Side Internal Admin Check to /allowlist

Mirror the existing hardened pattern from /config and /plugins.

Before any config-backed /allowlist add|remove write, require:

  • operator.admin for internal gateway channels

This should happen before plugin.allowlist.applyConfigEdit(...) and before writeConfigFile(...).

2) Keep Pairing-Store and Config-Write Policy Checks, but Do Not Treat Them as Scope Enforcement

configWrites policy and pairing-store behavior are useful secondary controls, but they do not replace the missing privilege check between operator.write and operator.admin.

Affected versions

npm

PackageVulnerableFixed in
openclaw
< 2026.3.24
2026.3.24

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

openclaw npm → 2026.3.24

npm
npm install openclaw@2026.3.24
yarn
yarn add openclaw@2026.3.24
pnpm
pnpm add openclaw@2026.3.24

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 7.1

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/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
Attack requirements
None
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
None
Integrity (vulnerable system)
High
Availability (vulnerable system)
None
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None
Exploit maturity
Not defined
Scope
X

CVSS 3.1 6.5

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

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Weakness

CWE-269: Improper Privilege Management

The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
  • Architecture and Design: Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
  • Architecture and Design: Consider following the principle of separation of privilege. Require multiple conditions to be met before permitting access to a system resource.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-3x84-qq85-fj65
OpenClaw: Browser CDP discovery could accept blocked WebSocket URLs
High Also affects openclaw
GHSA-9c3v-684m-579c
OpenClaw MCP SSE redirects could forward Authorization headers
Medium Also affects openclaw
GHSA-f397-5vjw-v2c2
OpenClaw: Shell inline-command parsing could miss an allowlist check
High Also affects openclaw
GHSA-rx78-29qr-5hq8
OpenClaw: Workspace-derived service PATH could influence trash command selection
High Also affects openclaw
GHSA-ccwh-wwpp-6wg5
OpenClaw: Host environment sanitizer missed two Node.js control variables
High Also affects openclaw
GHSA-985f-72mj-8gf7
OpenClaw: Tool group policy callers could accept unvalidated group IDs
Medium Also affects openclaw
GHSA-9v8j-9c9g-w66c
OpenClaw: Bootstrap token replay could widen pending pairing scopes
Medium Also affects openclaw
GHSA-c226-q6fx-6j6c
OpenClaw: macOS Swift exec allowlist missed combined POSIX inline flags
Medium Also affects openclaw
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor