How severe is GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq?

GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq has a CVSS score of 4.8/10, rated MEDIUM. Review your exposure and patch according to your risk tolerance.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq?

GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq affects the following packages: openclaw (npm). Ecosystems affected: npm.

How do I fix GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq?

Update openclaw to 2026.2.25 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq in my npm dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for openclaw. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

How do I mitigate GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq 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.

How does O3 Security protect against GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq?

O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Is GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq 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-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq?

GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.3%, placing it in the 20th 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.

When was GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq was published on March 2, 2026 and was last updated on March 30, 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

GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq

MEDIUM

OpenClaw: system.run approval identity mismatch could execute a different binary than displayed

Also known asCVE-2026-32065

Published

Mar 2, 2026

Updated

Mar 30, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.3%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk20th percentile+0.24%

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

Blast Radius

1 pkg affected

Weekly download volume for affected packages — a proxy for how broadly this vulnerability is deployed.

openclawnpm

3.7Mdownloads / week

Description

Summary

system.run approvals in OpenClaw used rendered command text as the approval identity while trimming argv token whitespace. Runtime execution still used raw argv. A crafted trailing-space executable token could therefore execute a different binary than what the approver saw.

Affected Packages / Versions

Package: openclaw (npm)
Affected versions: <= 2026.2.24
Patched versions: >= 2026.2.25

Impact

This is an approval-integrity bypass that can lead to unexpected command execution under the OpenClaw runtime user when an attacker can influence command argv and reuse/obtain a matching approval context.

Trust Model Note

OpenClaw does not treat adversarial multi-user sharing of one gateway host/config as a supported security boundary. This finding is still valid in supported deployments because it breaks the operator approval boundary itself (approved display command vs executed argv).

Fix Commit(s)

03e689fc89bbecbcd02876a95957ef1ad9caa176

Release Process Note

patched_versions is pre-set to the release (2026.2.25). Advisory published with npm release 2026.2.25.

OpenClaw thanks @tdjackey for reporting.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
📦npm	`openclaw`	all versions	2026.2.25

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for openclaw. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.
Fix
Update openclaw to 2026.2.25 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq 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.
How O3 protects you
O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary `system.run` approvals in OpenClaw used rendered command text as the approval identity while trimming argv token whitespace. Runtime execution still used raw argv. A crafted trailing-space executable token could therefore execute a different binary than what the approver saw. ### Affected Packages / Versions - Package: `openclaw` (npm) - Affected versions: `<= 2026.2.24` - Patched versions: `>= 2026.2.25` ### Impact This is an approval-integrity bypass that can lead to unexpected command execution under the OpenClaw runtime user when an attacker can influence `command` argv and r

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq across npm dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works