How severe is GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p?

GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p has a CVSS score of 6.5/10, rated MEDIUM. Review your exposure and patch according to your risk tolerance.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p?

GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p affects the following packages: openclaw (npm). Ecosystems affected: npm.

How do I fix GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p?

Update openclaw to 2026.3.11 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p in my npm dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for openclaw, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

How do I mitigate GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

Is GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p?

GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.2%, placing it in the 10th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p?

GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p is classified as CWE-639 (CWE-639). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p was published on March 13, 2026 and was last updated on July 8, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

📦

📦 npm

Not in CISA KEV

MEDIUM severity

OpenClaw: Channel commands could bypass account-scoped `configWrites` restrictionsGHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p

MEDIUM

GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.5) CWE-639 vulnerability in openclaw. A fix is available for openclaw — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Also known asCVE-2026-32976

Published

Mar 13, 2026

Updated

Jul 8, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Oct 30, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk-0.13%

Lower risk than most CVEs10th percentile — riskier than 10% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

How urgent is this, really

Where this sits among everything scored

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected

How broadly this vulnerability is actually deployed: weekly install volume shows current usage, and reverse-dependency count shows how many other packages break if it stays unpatched.

132other npm packages depend on this — each one inherits the vulnerability until it's patched upstream

openclawnpm

3.4Mdownloads / week

Description

Summary

In affected versions of openclaw, channel-initiated config mutations were authorized against the originating account's configWrites policy but did not consistently re-check the targeted account scope. An authorized sender on one account could mutate protected sibling-account configuration when the target account had configWrites: false.

Impact

This is an account-scoped policy bypass inside a single gateway deployment. Channel commands such as /config set channels.<provider>.accounts.<id>... and config-backed /allowlist ... --config --account <id> could modify protected sibling-account configuration.

Affected Packages and Versions

Package: openclaw (npm)
Affected versions: <= 2026.3.8
Fixed in: 2026.3.11

Technical Details

The mutation path validated the origin account scope but did not consistently authorize every resolved target scope. Ambiguous collection and root writes under channels and channels.<provider>.accounts could therefore reach protected account configuration from channel command surfaces.

Fix

OpenClaw now authorizes config mutations against both the origin scope and each resolved target scope, and it rejects ambiguous root and collection writes from channel commands unless the caller is an internal gateway client with operator.admin. The fix shipped in [email protected].

Workarounds

Upgrade to 2026.3.11 or later.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
📦npm	`openclaw`	all versions	2026.3.11`npm install openclaw@2026.3.11`

Affected Products

1 product · 1 configurations

Application

openclawopenclaw

< 2026.3.11

range

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for openclaw, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update openclaw to 2026.3.11 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-8jhh-jcqg-mj5p is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary In affected versions of `openclaw`, channel-initiated config mutations were authorized against the originating account's `configWrites` policy but did not consistently re-check the targeted account scope. An authorized sender on one account could mutate protected sibling-account configuration when the target account had `configWrites: false`. ## Impact This is an account-scoped policy bypass inside a single gateway deployment. Channel commands such as `/config set channels.<provider>.accounts.<id>...` and config-backed `/allowlist ... --config --account <id>` could modify protected