How severe is GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69?

GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 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-j4xf-96qf-rx69?

GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 affects the following packages: openclaw (npm). Ecosystems affected: npm.

How do I fix GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69?

Update openclaw to 2026.2.22 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 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-j4xf-96qf-rx69 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-j4xf-96qf-rx69?

O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 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-j4xf-96qf-rx69 actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 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-j4xf-96qf-rx69?

GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 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-j4xf-96qf-rx69?

GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 is classified as CWE-863 (CWE-863). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 was published on March 3, 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-j4xf-96qf-rx69

MEDIUM

OpenClaw has a Feishu allowFrom authorization bypass via display-name collision

Also known asCVE-2026-32021

Published

Mar 3, 2026

Updated

Mar 30, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk10th percentile+0.16%

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

4.3Mdownloads / week

Description

Summary

Feishu allowlist authorization could be bypassed by display-name collision.

Details

channels.feishu.allowFrom is documented as an ID-based allowlist (open_id list), but Feishu policy matching accepted mutable sender display names in the same namespace. An attacker could set a display name equal to an allowlisted ID string and pass authorization checks.

The fix enforces ID-only matching for Feishu allowlist checks, normalizes Feishu ID prefixes during comparison, and ignores mutable display names for authorization.

Impact

Deployments using Feishu allowlist-based authorization could incorrectly authorize non-allowlisted senders when a colliding display name was used.

Affected Packages / Versions

Package: openclaw (npm)
Latest published version at triage time: 2026.2.21-2
Affected range: <= 2026.2.21-2
Planned patched version: >= 2026.2.22

Fix Commit(s)

4ed87a667263ed2d422b9d5d5a5d326e099f92c7

Release Process Note

patched_versions is pre-set to the planned next release (>= 2026.2.22) so the advisory is ready to publish once that npm release is available.

OpenClaw thanks @jiseoung for reporting.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
📦npm	`openclaw`	all versions	2026.2.22

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 2026.2.22 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 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-j4xf-96qf-rx69 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-j4xf-96qf-rx69. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary Feishu allowlist authorization could be bypassed by display-name collision. ### Details `channels.feishu.allowFrom` is documented as an ID-based allowlist (open_id list), but Feishu policy matching accepted mutable sender display names in the same namespace. An attacker could set a display name equal to an allowlisted ID string and pass authorization checks. The fix enforces ID-only matching for Feishu allowlist checks, normalizes Feishu ID prefixes during comparison, and ignores mutable display names for authorization. ### Impact Deployments using Feishu allowlist-based auth

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-j4xf-96qf-rx69 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