CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-100579NVD status: Deferred

OpenClaw: Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key

CVE-2026-100579 is a high-severity authorization bypass through user-controlled key vulnerability in OpenClaw, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.6 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. The record lists version 2026.7.1 as the first without the flaw, so updating OpenClaw to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.23% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update OpenClaw to 2026.7.1 or a later version.
  2. Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
OpenClawOpenClawbefore 2026.7.12026.7.1

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
LowA basic user account is enough.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
LowSome restricted data can be read.
Integrity
HighData or code can be modified at will.
Availability
LowPerformance or availability is reduced.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L. Scored by CNA (vulncheck.com).

Scoring systemScoreSeverityScored by
CVSS 4.07.2HighCNA (vulncheck.com)
CVSS 3.17.6HighCNA (vulncheck.com)

Official description

OpenClaw (npm package 'openclaw') before 2026.7.1 incorrectly trusts requester provenance in message.action. In identity-bearing Gateway deployments (authentication modes that honor caller identity and narrower operator scopes), a write-scoped caller can supply another sender's identifier to the channel authorization checks and invoke a channel action under that spoofed requester identity, reaching operations the channel adapter would have denied to the real caller. Practical impact depends on the enabled channel, the action, and the target account's permissions. Shared-secret token and password callers are full trusted operators under OpenClaw's security model and are out of scope. The issue is fixed in 2026.7.1; as a workaround, restrict message.action to administrators and disable sensitive channel actions that rely on requester identity.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key

The system's authorization functionality does not prevent one user from gaining access to another user's data or record by modifying the key value identifying the data.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • For each and every data access, ensure that the user has sufficient privilege to access the record that is being requested.
  • Make sure that the key that is used in the lookup of a specific user's record is not controllable externally by the user or that any tampering can be detected.
  • Use encryption in order to make it more difficult to guess other legitimate values of the key or associate a digital signature with the key so that the server can verify that there has been no tampering.

More Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerabilities (CWE-639)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Other vulnerabilities in OpenClaw

All OpenClaw vulnerabilities

Recent Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.