<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2026 04:43:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>BREW-openclaw-cli-CVE-2026-32006 — OpenClaw has a BlueBubbles group allowlist mismatch via DM pairing-store fallback</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/brew-openclaw-cli-cve-2026-32006</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Homebrew: openclaw-cli&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Summary
In `openclaw@2026.2.25`, BlueBubbles group authorization could incorrectly treat DM pairing-store identities as group allowlist identities when `dmPolicy=pairing` and `groupPolicy=allowlist`.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A sender that was only DM-paired (not explicitly present in `groupAllowFrom`) could pass group sender checks for message and reaction ingress.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Per OpenClaw&amp;#39;s `SECURITY.md` trust model, this is a constrained authorization-consistency issue, not a multi-tenant boundary bypass or host-privilege escalation.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Affected Packages / Versions
- Package: `openclaw` (npm)
- Latest published npm version at triage time: `2026.2.25`
- Affected versions: `&amp;lt;= 2026.2.25`
- Patched versions: `&amp;gt;= 2026.2.26` (planned next release)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Technical Details
Root cause was DM/group allowlist composition where DM pairing-store identities could flow into group authorization decisions.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix approach:
- centralize DM/group authorization composition via shared resolvers
- remove local DM/group list recomposition at channel callsites
- add cross-channel regression coverage for message + reaction ingress
- add CI guard to block future pairing-store leakage into group auth composition&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Impact
- Affects deployments using BlueBubbles with `groupPolicy=allowlist` and `dmPolicy=pairing` when pairing-store entries are present.
- Could allow DM-authorized identities to be treated as group-authorized without explicit `groupAllowFrom` membership.
- Does **not** bypass gateway auth, sandbox boundaries, or c…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Homebrew: openclaw-cli&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Summary
In `openclaw@2026.2.25`, BlueBubbles group authorization could incorrectly treat DM pairing-store identities as group allowlist identities when `dmPolicy=pairing` and `groupPolicy=allowlist`.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A sender that was only DM-paired (not explicitly present in `groupAllowFrom`) could pass group sender checks for message and reaction ingress.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Per OpenClaw&amp;#39;s `SECURITY.md` trust model, this is a constrained authorization-consistency issue, not a multi-tenant boundary bypass or host-privilege escalation.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Affected Packages / Versions
- Package: `openclaw` (npm)
- Latest published npm version at triage time: `2026.2.25`
- Affected versions: `&amp;lt;= 2026.2.25`
- Patched versions: `&amp;gt;= 2026.2.26` (planned next release)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Technical Details
Root cause was DM/group allowlist composition where DM pairing-store identities could flow into group authorization decisions.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix approach:
- centralize DM/group authorization composition via shared resolvers
- remove local DM/group list recomposition at channel callsites
- add cross-channel regression coverage for message + reaction ingress
- add CI guard to block future pairing-store leakage into group auth composition&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Impact
- Affects deployments using BlueBubbles with `groupPolicy=allowlist` and `dmPolicy=pairing` when pairing-store entries are present.
- Could allow DM-authorized identities to be treated as group-authorized without explicit `groupAllowFrom` membership.
- Does **not** bypass gateway auth, sandbox boundaries, or c…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/brew-openclaw-cli-cve-2026-32006</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>cnvd-2026-14837</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cnvd-2026-14837</link>
      <description>cnvd-2026-14837</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cnvd-2026-14837</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EUVD-2026-329403</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-329403</link>
      <description>EUVD-2026-329403</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-329403</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>fkie_cve-2026-32006</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-32006</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;OpenClaw versions prior to 2026.2.26 contain an authorization bypass vulnerability where DM pairing-store identities are incorrectly treated as group allowlist identities when dmPolicy=pairing and groupPolicy=allowlist. Remote attackers can send messages and reactions as DM-paired identities without explicit groupAllowFrom membership to bypass group sender authorization checks.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;OpenClaw versions prior to 2026.2.26 contain an authorization bypass vulnerability where DM pairing-store identities are incorrectly treated as group allowlist identities when dmPolicy=pairing and groupPolicy=allowlist. Remote attackers can send messages and reactions as DM-paired identities without explicit groupAllowFrom membership to bypass group sender authorization checks.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-32006</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GHSA-25pw-4h6w-qwvm — OpenClaw has a BlueBubbles group allowlist mismatch via DM pairing-store fallback</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-25pw-4h6w-qwvm</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; npm: openclaw&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Summary
In `openclaw@2026.2.25`, BlueBubbles group authorization could incorrectly treat DM pairing-store identities as group allowlist identities when `dmPolicy=pairing` and `groupPolicy=allowlist`.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A sender that was only DM-paired (not explicitly present in `groupAllowFrom`) could pass group sender checks for message and reaction ingress.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Per OpenClaw&amp;#39;s `SECURITY.md` trust model, this is a constrained authorization-consistency issue, not a multi-tenant boundary bypass or host-privilege escalation.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Affected Packages / Versions
- Package: `openclaw` (npm)
- Latest published npm version at triage time: `2026.2.25`
- Affected versions: `&amp;lt;= 2026.2.25`
- Patched versions: `&amp;gt;= 2026.2.26` (planned next release)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Technical Details
Root cause was DM/group allowlist composition where DM pairing-store identities could flow into group authorization decisions.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix approach:
- centralize DM/group authorization composition via shared resolvers
- remove local DM/group list recomposition at channel callsites
- add cross-channel regression coverage for message + reaction ingress
- add CI guard to block future pairing-store leakage into group auth composition&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Impact
- Affects deployments using BlueBubbles with `groupPolicy=allowlist` and `dmPolicy=pairing` when pairing-store entries are present.
- Could allow DM-authorized identities to be treated as group-authorized without explicit `groupAllowFrom` membership.
- Does **not** bypass gateway auth, sandbox boundaries, or c…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; npm: openclaw&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Summary
In `openclaw@2026.2.25`, BlueBubbles group authorization could incorrectly treat DM pairing-store identities as group allowlist identities when `dmPolicy=pairing` and `groupPolicy=allowlist`.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A sender that was only DM-paired (not explicitly present in `groupAllowFrom`) could pass group sender checks for message and reaction ingress.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Per OpenClaw&amp;#39;s `SECURITY.md` trust model, this is a constrained authorization-consistency issue, not a multi-tenant boundary bypass or host-privilege escalation.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Affected Packages / Versions
- Package: `openclaw` (npm)
- Latest published npm version at triage time: `2026.2.25`
- Affected versions: `&amp;lt;= 2026.2.25`
- Patched versions: `&amp;gt;= 2026.2.26` (planned next release)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Technical Details
Root cause was DM/group allowlist composition where DM pairing-store identities could flow into group authorization decisions.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix approach:
- centralize DM/group authorization composition via shared resolvers
- remove local DM/group list recomposition at channel callsites
- add cross-channel regression coverage for message + reaction ingress
- add CI guard to block future pairing-store leakage into group auth composition&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;### Impact
- Affects deployments using BlueBubbles with `groupPolicy=allowlist` and `dmPolicy=pairing` when pairing-store entries are present.
- Could allow DM-authorized identities to be treated as group-authorized without explicit `groupAllowFrom` membership.
- Does **not** bypass gateway auth, sandbox boundaries, or c…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-25pw-4h6w-qwvm</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WID-SEC-W-2026-0586 — OpenClaw: Mehrere Schwachstellen</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-0586</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in OpenClaw ausnutzen, um beliebigen Code auszuführen, sich erhöhte Berechtigungen zu verschaffen, Daten zu manipulieren, einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand herbeizuführen, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, vertrauliche Informationen offenzulegen oder andere nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in OpenClaw ausnutzen, um beliebigen Code auszuführen, sich erhöhte Berechtigungen zu verschaffen, Daten zu manipulieren, einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand herbeizuführen, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, vertrauliche Informationen offenzulegen oder andere nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-0586</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
