GHSA-354R-7MFH-7RH2

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-03 21:25 – Updated: 2026-03-20 21:13
VLAI?
Summary
OpenClaw: Discord DM reaction ingress missed dmPolicy/allowFrom checks in restricted setups
Details

Summary

In OpenClaw <= 2026.2.24, Discord direct-message reaction notifications did not consistently apply the same DM authorization checks (dmPolicy / allowFrom) that are enforced for normal DM message ingress.

In restrictive DM setups, a non-allowlisted Discord user who can react to a bot-authored DM message could still enqueue a reaction-derived system event in the session.

This is a reaction-only ingress inconsistency. By itself it does not directly execute commands; practical impact depends on downstream automation/tool policy.

Details

The DM message path already enforces dmPolicy/allowFrom authorization, but the DM reaction-notification path previously allowed event enqueue under reaction mode checks without that same authorization gate.

Fix in main aligns reaction ingress with normal message preflight for Discord DM/group-DM/guild policy boundaries and applies equivalent DM reaction authorization hardening for Slack to keep channel behavior consistent.

Affected Packages / Versions

  • npm package: openclaw
  • Affected: <= 2026.2.24
  • Patched: >= 2026.2.25

Fix Commit(s)

  • aedf62ac7e669a89c7b299201bf6537dc6b12e0e

Release Process Note

patched_versions is pre-set to the release (2026.2.25) so after npm release the advisory is published.

Thanks @tdjackey for reporting.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2026.2.24"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "openclaw"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2026.2.25"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-32028"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-863"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-03T21:25:34Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-03-19T22:16:37Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\nIn OpenClaw `\u003c= 2026.2.24`, Discord direct-message reaction notifications did not consistently apply the same DM authorization checks (`dmPolicy` / `allowFrom`) that are enforced for normal DM message ingress.\n\nIn restrictive DM setups, a non-allowlisted Discord user who can react to a bot-authored DM message could still enqueue a reaction-derived system event in the session.\n\nThis is a reaction-only ingress inconsistency. By itself it does not directly execute commands; practical impact depends on downstream automation/tool policy.\n\n### Details\nThe DM message path already enforces `dmPolicy`/`allowFrom` authorization, but the DM reaction-notification path previously allowed event enqueue under reaction mode checks without that same authorization gate.\n\nFix in `main` aligns reaction ingress with normal message preflight for Discord DM/group-DM/guild policy boundaries and applies equivalent DM reaction authorization hardening for Slack to keep channel behavior consistent.\n\n### Affected Packages / Versions\n- `npm` package: `openclaw`\n- Affected: `\u003c= 2026.2.24`\n- Patched: `\u003e= 2026.2.25` \n\n### Fix Commit(s)\n- `aedf62ac7e669a89c7b299201bf6537dc6b12e0e`\n\n### Release Process Note\n`patched_versions` is pre-set to the release (`2026.2.25`) so after npm release the advisory is published.\n\nThanks @tdjackey for reporting.",
  "id": "GHSA-354r-7mfh-7rh2",
  "modified": "2026-03-20T21:13:11Z",
  "published": "2026-03-03T21:25:34Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-354r-7mfh-7rh2"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-32028"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/aedf62ac7e669a89c7b299201bf6537dc6b12e0e"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-missing-authorization-check-in-discord-dm-reaction-ingress"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "OpenClaw: Discord DM reaction ingress missed dmPolicy/allowFrom checks in restricted setups"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.


Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…