CVE-2026-28474
CRITICALOpenClaw's Nextcloud Talk plugin versions prior to 2026.2.6 accept equality matching on the mutable actor.name display name field for allowlist validation, allowing attackers to bypass DM and room allowlists. An attacker can change their Nextcloud display name to match an allowlisted user ID and...
Full CISO analysis pending enrichment.
What systems are affected?
| Package | Ecosystem | Vulnerable Range | Patched |
|---|---|---|---|
| OpenClaw | pip | — | No patch |
Do you use OpenClaw? You're affected.
How severe is it?
What is the attack surface?
What should I do?
No patch available
Monitor for updates. Consider compensating controls or temporary mitigations.
Which compliance frameworks are affected?
Compliance analysis pending. Sign in for full compliance mapping when available.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-28474?
OpenClaw's Nextcloud Talk plugin versions prior to 2026.2.6 accept equality matching on the mutable actor.name display name field for allowlist validation, allowing attackers to bypass DM and room allowlists. An attacker can change their Nextcloud display name to match an allowlisted user ID and gain unauthorized access to restricted conversations.
Is CVE-2026-28474 actively exploited?
No confirmed active exploitation of CVE-2026-28474 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.
How to fix CVE-2026-28474?
No patch is currently available. Monitor vendor advisories for updates.
What is the CVSS score for CVE-2026-28474?
CVE-2026-28474 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.8 (CRITICAL). The EPSS exploitation probability is 0.48%.
What are the technical details?
Original Advisory
OpenClaw's Nextcloud Talk plugin versions prior to 2026.2.6 accept equality matching on the mutable actor.name display name field for allowlist validation, allowing attackers to bypass DM and room allowlists. An attacker can change their Nextcloud display name to match an allowlisted user ID and gain unauthorized access to restricted conversations.
Weaknesses (CWE)
CWE-863 — Incorrect Authorization: The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
- [Architecture and Design] Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
- [Architecture and Design] Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor [REF-7].
Source: MITRE CWE corpus.
CVSS Vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H References
Timeline
Related Vulnerabilities
CVE-2026-33579 9.9 OpenClaw: scope bypass escalates low-priv to admin
Same package: openclaw CVE-2026-32922 9.9 OpenClaw: privilege escalation to RCE via token scope bypass
Same package: openclaw CVE-2026-30741 9.8 OpenClaw: RCE via request-side prompt injection
Same package: openclaw CVE-2026-53838 9.8 OpenClaw: approval scope bypass via reconnection state
Same package: openclaw CVE-2026-32038 9.8 OpenClaw: sandbox bypass enables container lateral movement
Same package: openclaw