GHSA-wv26-j37q-2g7p: OpenClaw's Slack plugin approvals used the exec approver gate for plugin actions
OpenClaw's Slack integration checked plugin action approvals against the exec approver gate. A Slack user who was allowed to approve only exec requests could therefore approve a plugin action as well. Versions before 2026.5.12 are affected. Update the openclaw package to 2026.5.12.
Published Jul 2, 2026 · Analysis Oct 25, 2026
What an attacker can do
OpenClaw can ask a human on Slack to approve risky actions. Operators may keep separate lists of who can approve exec commands and who can approve plugin actions. In affected versions, the Slack plugin approval flow used the exec approver check. Anyone on the exec list passed it, even if they were never meant to approve plugins (CWE-863). The advisory names no config key.
The attacker is an insider or a compromised Slack account that already holds exec approval rights. They can approve a plugin action outside the split the operator set up. The data has no CVSS score. The advisory rates the severity as medium. What the approved plugin action can do depends on which plugins you installed and what you let them request.
The advisory leaves OpenClaw's trusted-operator model unchanged. The flaw matters if your exec approvers and plugin approvers are different groups.
Who is affected
Affected: npm openclaw before 2026.5.12. You are exposed if you use Slack approvals and your exec approvers and plugin approvers are meant to be different people.
npm ls -g openclawDrop -g for a project install. Compare your Slack exec approver list with your intended plugin approver list.
openclaw
- Ecosystem
- npm
- Affected
- < 2026.5.12
- Fixed in
- 2026.5.12
- Check
npm ls openclaw
How to fix it
Update to openclaw 2026.5.12, the first stable patched version.
npm install -g [email protected]Until you can update, keep the approval allowlists aligned, so that exec approvers are people you also trust with plugin actions. Review Slack approval actions manually. The advisory also suggests narrow channel and tool allowlists, not sharing one Gateway between mutually untrusted users, and disabling the feature if you do not need it.
How to tell if you were hit
The advisory gives no log line. Review the history of Slack approval actions for plugin approvals made by users who are on the exec approver list but not on a plugin approver list. Match each approval to the plugin action it released. Beam records agent shell commands, file access and MCP tool calls, which can help show what an approved action then did.
Original advisory
From the GitHub Advisory Database (CC BY 4.0).
Summary
Slack plugin approvals used the exec approver gate for plugin actions. In affected versions, a Slack user authorized only for exec approvals could resolve a plugin approval through the exec approver gate.
This advisory is scoped to the named feature and configuration. It does not change OpenClaw's trusted-operator model: authenticated Gateway operators, installed plugins, and intentional local execution surfaces remain trusted unless a separate policy, approval, allowlist, sandbox, or auth boundary is crossed.
Impact
When the affected feature is enabled and reachable, this could approve a plugin action outside the operator's intended approval split. Practical impact depends on the operator's configuration and whether lower-trust input can reach that path.
Patched Versions
The first stable patched version is 2026.5.12.
Mitigations
keep approval allowlists aligned and review Slack approval actions manually until patched. As general hardening, keep channel and tool allowlists narrow, avoid sharing one Gateway between mutually untrusted users, and disable the affected feature when it is not needed.
Credited to Kherrisan.
Questions
- Which OpenClaw version fixes the Slack plugin approval gate?
2026.5.12. Versions before it are affected.
- Who can exploit this?
A Slack user who is authorized for exec approvals, since the plugin approval used that same gate. A user with no approval rights is not helped by this flaw.
- Does this have a CVSS score?
The data for this entry has no CVSS score and no CVE. The advisory rates it medium and classes it as incorrect authorization (CWE-863).
References
How this page is made: the data panel comes from the GitHub Advisory Database, CISA’s KEV catalog, the NVD and FIRST EPSS, and updates twice a day. The analysis is written by an AI model from the sources listed above and checked by automated rules before it is published. Check versions against the vendor's advisory before you act. Methodology
More OpenClaw vulnerabilities
All OpenClaw entriesCVE-2026-62197
OpenClaw: Browser CDP discovery could accept blocked WebSocket URLs
medium8.5Oct 21, 2026CVE-2026-35630
OpenClaw: QQBot native approval buttons did not enforce configured approver identity
high8.0Jul 2, 2026CVE-2026-53806
OpenClaw: Combined POSIX shell options could confuse exec revalidation
high8.8Jul 2, 2026CVE-2026-53809
OpenClaw: Embedded runner policy could be confused by provider aliases
medium3.8Jul 2, 2026CVE-2026-53810
OpenClaw's marketplace runtime extension metadata could point at unscanned payloads
high8.8Jul 2, 2026CVE-2026-53811
OpenClaw: Matrix allowFrom could bind to mutable display names
high8.8Jul 2, 2026
