Skip to content
Patch Next
Sign inAdd to your agent

← Actionable
Medium, CVSS 5.3amended

OpenClaw: Discord DM reaction ingress missed dmPolicy/allowFrom checks in restricted setups

CVE-2026-32028GHSA-354r-7mfh-7rh2

What to do

Vendor fix available. Upgrade each affected package to the fixed version on its release line (openclaw 2026.2.25), redeploy, then verify what is actually installed.

This page has no inventory attached, so it cannot say whether you are affected. A vendor fix is not proof that your deployment is fixed.

Add to your agent

Affected packages

  • npm openclaw

    Affected
    <= 2026.2.24
    Fixed in
    2026.2.25

Sources

Severity and exploitation
Exploitation
No confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next marks exploitation only from CISA KEV.
CVSS 4.0
5.3 · 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 · score source
EPSS
  • CVE-2026-32028: 0.21% estimated exploitation activity in the next 30 days; percentile 10.66 (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-03). This is a model estimate, not proof of exploitation or customer exposure.
Source description

As published by the source; long descriptions are shortened.

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 /…

Dates and revisions
Published by the source
Last modified by the source
Source last checked
  1. Revision 3 · amended ·

    Amended from ghsa record GHSA-354r-7mfh-7rh2

  2. Revision 2 · amended ·

    Reviewed OSV alias/range/CVSS4 correction; package source scopes and original publication preserved. No customer finding resolved.

  3. Revision 1 · created ·

    Published from osv record GHSA-354r-7mfh-7rh2

Agent brief

Preview the exact text before you copy it. Commands are read-only suggestions; review them before running anything.

# Patch Next advisory brief: CVE-2026-32028

Advisory: OpenClaw: Discord DM reaction ingress missed dmPolicy/allowFrom checks in restricted setups
IDs: CVE-2026-32028, GHSA-354r-7mfh-7rh2
Record: https://patchnext.com/advisories/cve-2026-32028 (revision 3, source checked 26 Oct 2026, 12:46 UTC)
Inventory: none attached. This brief comes from a public page and does not say whether any deployment is affected.
Severity: Medium (CVSS 5.3)
Exploitation: no confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next confirms exploitation only from CISA KEV.
Vendor response: Vendor fix available; fixed versions by package: openclaw 2026.2.25. A vendor fix does not mean a deployment is fixed.

## Affected components
- npm openclaw: affected <= 2026.2.24; fixed in 2026.2.25

## Suggested inspection (read-only)
- `npm ls openclaw --all`: lists every installed copy and version, including transitive ones. Run in the project root after `npm ci`.

## Supported action
Upgrade each affected component to a fixed version on its release line. For a transitive dependency, upgrade the parent package or add an override or constraint, then regenerate the lockfile. Redeploy every environment that ran an affected version.

## Required regression checks
- Run the test suite and a production build.
- Exercise the features that depend on openclaw.
- Repeat the inspection and confirm that only fixed versions remain installed.

## Rollback considerations
- Keep the previous lockfile and deployment artifact. Rolling back reinstates the vulnerable version, so apply any documented mitigation while you fix forward.

## Unresolved questions
- Which deployments run an affected version?
- Exploitation status can change. Check again before lowering the priority.
- Mark the work resolved only after the fixed version is verified in production.

## Sources
- Verified: https://osv.dev/vulnerability/GHSA-354r-7mfh-7rh2 (OSV record GHSA-354r-7mfh-7rh2 lists affected ranges: npm openclaw >=0 <2026.2.25 (fixed))
- Verified: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-354r-7mfh-7rh2 (GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-354r-7mfh-7rh2 lists affected ranges: npm openclaw >=0 <=2026.2.24)

Commands are suggestions: review each one before running it.

Loading voting…