GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2: OpenClaw — MEDIUM

Q: Is GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2 actively exploited?

No confirmed active exploitation of GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.

Q: How to fix GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2?

Update to patched version: OpenClaw 2026.5.6.

Q: What is the CVSS score for GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2?

GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.3 (MEDIUM).

### Summary Skill Workshop apply flow could override pending approval. In affected versions, an agent tool call reaching the affected Skill Workshop apply path could set `apply: true` despite `approvalPolicy: pending`. This advisory is scoped to the named feature and configuration. It does not...

Full CISO analysis pending enrichment.

What systems are affected?

Package	Ecosystem	Vulnerable Range	Patched
OpenClaw	npm	<= 2026.5.5	`2026.5.6`
4 dependents 41% patched ~3d to patch Full package profile →

Do you use OpenClaw? You're affected.

How severe is it?

CVSS 3.1

5.3 / 10

EPSS

N/A

Exploitation Status

No known exploitation

Sophistication

N/A

What is the attack surface?

AV Network

AC High

PR None

UI Required

S Unchanged

C None

I High

A None

What should I do?

Patch available

Update OpenClaw to version 2026.5.6

Which compliance frameworks are affected?

Compliance analysis pending. Sign in for full compliance mapping when available.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2?

### Summary Skill Workshop apply flow could override pending approval. In affected versions, an agent tool call reaching the affected Skill Workshop apply path could set `apply: true` despite `approvalPolicy: pending`. This advisory is scoped to the named feature and configuration. It does not change OpenClaw's trusted-operator model: authenticated Gateway operators, installed plugins, and intentional local execution surfaces remain trusted unless a separate policy, approval, allowlist, sandbox, or auth boundary is crossed. ### Impact When the affected feature is enabled and reachable, this could apply a workshop change before the expected approval step. Practical impact depends on the operator's configuration and whether lower-trust input can reach that path. ### Patched Versions The first stable patched version is `2026.5.6`. ### Mitigations review Skill Workshop changes manually and keep the tool restricted until patched. As general hardening, keep channel and tool allowlists narrow, avoid sharing one Gateway between mutually untrusted users, and disable the affected feature when it is not needed.

Is GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2 actively exploited?

No confirmed active exploitation of GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.

How to fix GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2?

Update to patched version: OpenClaw 2026.5.6.

What is the CVSS score for GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2?

GHSA-cqwv-9qjx-vxw2 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.3 (MEDIUM).

What are the technical details?

Original Advisory

### Summary Skill Workshop apply flow could override pending approval. In affected versions, an agent tool call reaching the affected Skill Workshop apply path could set `apply: true` despite `approvalPolicy: pending`. This advisory is scoped to the named feature and configuration. It does not change OpenClaw's trusted-operator model: authenticated Gateway operators, installed plugins, and intentional local execution surfaces remain trusted unless a separate policy, approval, allowlist, sandbox, or auth boundary is crossed. ### Impact When the affected feature is enabled and reachable, this could apply a workshop change before the expected approval step. Practical impact depends on the operator's configuration and whether lower-trust input can reach that path. ### Patched Versions The first stable patched version is `2026.5.6`. ### Mitigations review Skill Workshop changes manually and keep the tool restricted until patched. As general hardening, keep channel and tool allowlists narrow, avoid sharing one Gateway between mutually untrusted users, and disable the affected feature when it is not needed.

Weaknesses (CWE)

CWE-807 Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision Primary

CWE-807 — Reliance on Untrusted Inputs in a Security Decision: The product uses a protection mechanism that relies on the existence or values of an input, but the input can be modified by an untrusted actor in a way that bypasses the protection mechanism.

[Architecture and Design] Store state information and sensitive data on the server side only. Ensure that the system definitively and unambiguously keeps track of its own state and user state and has rules defined for legitimate state transitions. Do not allow any application user to affect state directly in any way other than through legitimate actions leading to state transitions. If information must be stored on the client, do not do so without encryption and integrity checking, or otherwise having a mechanism on the server side to catch tampering. Use a message authentication code (MAC) algorithm, such as Hash Message Authentication Code (HMAC) [REF-529]. Apply this against the state or sensitive data that has to be exposed, which can guarantee the integrity of the data - i.e., that the data has not been modified. Ensure that a strong hash function is used (CWE-328).
[Architecture and Design] Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. With a stateless protocol such as HTTP, use a framework that maintains the state for you. Examples include ASP.NET View State [REF-756] and the OWASP ESAPI Session Management feature [REF-45]. Be careful of language features that provide state support, since these might be provided as a convenience to the programmer and may not be considering security.

Source: MITRE CWE corpus.