GHSA-v2ww-5rh7-2h5v CVE-2026-53853
OpenClaw: Linux and macOS exec allowlists skipped configured argument patterns
- Severity
- 7.6 / 10
- High · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.35%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 28.31% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Fix
2026.5.12- Upgrade openclaw to this version or later
Description
Summary
OpenClaw's exec allowlist supported optional argPattern entries to restrict the arguments accepted for an allowlisted executable. In affected releases, Linux and macOS gateways skipped argPattern checks and treated a matching executable path as sufficient to satisfy the allowlist.
This meant an operator could configure an allowlist entry that appeared to permit only a narrow argv shape, but OpenClaw would allow other argv for the same executable without an approval prompt when tools.exec.security was set to allowlist.
This issue is limited to direct enforcement of configured argPattern values. OpenClaw's exec approvals remain best-effort guardrails and do not attempt to semantically model every interpreter, loader, package script, shell feature, or transitive file a command may use.
Affected configurations
This affects OpenClaw gateway deployments that meet all of these conditions:
- the gateway runs on Linux or macOS
- exec is configured with
tools.exec.security: "allowlist" - at least one exec allowlist entry uses
argPattern - the allowlisted executable accepts security-relevant arguments or flags
Path-only allowlist entries are not additionally affected by this issue, because those entries intentionally allow any arguments for the matched executable. Windows was not affected by this specific bug because the affected code path already applied argPattern checks on Windows.
Impact
If an untrusted or lower-trust sender can influence a tool-enabled agent to call exec, they may be able to run disallowed arguments for an executable that the operator intended to restrict with argPattern. Depending on the executable, those arguments can cause host-side file access, network access, or command execution that should have required an approval prompt.
The practical impact depends on the operator's allowlist and channel exposure. Examples of higher-risk allowlisted executables include tools with interpreter, loader, subprocess, network, or plugin flags such as git, python, node, bash, find, tar, and ssh.
This is not a bypass of all exec approval semantics. It is a bypass of the direct argPattern predicate that the operator configured and that the exec tool description advertised as enforced at runtime.
Patched Versions
The first stable patched version is 2026.5.12.
Mitigations
Upgrade to openclaw@2026.5.12 or later. Before upgrading, operators who use exec allowlist mode should review entries that combine an executable path with argPattern, especially for interpreter-like or subprocess-capable tools.
Affected versions
npm
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| openclaw | < 2026.5.12 |
2026.5.12 |
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 → 2026.5.12
- npm
npm install openclaw@2026.5.12- yarn
yarn add openclaw@2026.5.12- pnpm
pnpm add openclaw@2026.5.12
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 7.6
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- High
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- High
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- Low
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
- Exploit maturity
- Not defined
- Scope
- X
CVSS 3.1 7.1
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- Low
Weakness
CWE-693: Protection Mechanism Failure
The product does not use or incorrectly uses a protection mechanism that provides sufficient defense against directed attacks against the product.
CWE-863: Incorrect Authorization
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
- Architecture and Design: Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor [REF-7].
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework [REF-233] and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature [REF-45].
- Architecture and Design: For web applications, make sure that the access control mechanism is enforced correctly at the server side on every page. Users should not be able to access any unauthorized functionality or information by simply requesting direct access to that page. One way to do this is to ensure that all pages containing sensitive information are not cached, and that all such pages restrict access to requests that are accompanied by an active and authenticated session token associated with a user who has the required permissions to access that page.
- System Configuration, Installation: Use the access control capabilities of your operating system and server environment and define your access control lists accordingly. Use a "default deny" policy when defining these ACLs.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why 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 |
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