Security readout for executives and security teams
Plain-English summary
OpenClaw could show an approver one command while executing a different binary because approval identity and runtime argv handling differ. The issue affects OpenClaw versions before 2026.2.25. Exploitation needs prior access, approver interaction, and influence over command arguments, so urgency is moderate but relevant for automated approval workflows.
Executive priority
Treat this as a scheduled security update, not an emergency response, unless OpenClaw drives sensitive operational automation or delegated command approvals in your environment.
Technical view
The flaw is an approval-integrity bypass in system.run. Rendered command text is used for approval identity after trimming argv token whitespace, while execution uses raw argv. A trailing-space executable token can create a mismatch between what was approved and what runs under the OpenClaw runtime user.
Likely exposure
Exposure is limited to OpenClaw deployments running versions before 2026.2.25 where users or integrations can influence system.run argv and reuse an approval context.
Exploitation context
Sources do not report active exploitation, and the CVE is not marked KEV. The CVSS vector indicates network reachability, high attack complexity, low privileges, required approval interaction, and high integrity impact.
Researcher notes
Focus review on approval identity canonicalization versus execution argv semantics. Evidence supports integrity impact through command identity mismatch, but not public weaponization or broad unauthenticated exploitation.
Mitigation direction
- Upgrade OpenClaw to 2026.2.25 or later.
- Review the GitHub advisory and patch commit for vendor remediation details.
- Restrict who can influence system.run argv values.
- Reassess or expire reusable approvals for command execution workflows.
- If upgrade is delayed, follow vendor guidance; sources name no separate workaround.
Validation and detection
- Inventory OpenClaw deployments and record their exact versions.
- Confirm no production instance runs OpenClaw before 2026.2.25.
- Identify workflows or integrations that pass argv into system.run.
- Review system.run approvals for unexpected executable identity discrepancies.
- Check whether approval reuse is enabled around command execution paths.
Public sources used
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context
These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.
ATT&CK lookup starting points
Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.
CWE-436: Exact CWE lookup
Use the exact CWE identifier as the starting point before reviewing related ATT&CK behavior. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCredential and access behavior lookup
The CVE wording references authentication or credential exposure, so valid-account and credential-access review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.
Open ATT&CK lookupCVE-2026-32065 mapping review
Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.
Open ATT&CK lookup- Severity
- Medium
- CVSS
- 5.7 (4.0)
- Known Exploited
- No
- Published
Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:A/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5
These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.
SSVC decision data
CVSS vector scores
2 official scoresWe collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:A/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N——VulnCheckCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N1.23.6VulnCheckVulnerability scoring details
Base CVSS 4.0 score
5.7MediumVector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:A/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Base CVSS 3.1 score
4.8MediumVector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Vulnerability timeline
Timeline events are normalized from CVE metadata, CNA source timelines, ADP timelines, and KEV metadata when present.
- CVE reservedCVE Program
The CVE ID was reserved by the assigning CNA.
- CVE publishedCVE Program
The CVE record was published.
- CVE updatedCVE Program
The CVE record metadata indicates this as the latest update time.
ADP provider summaries
Source materials
- CVE List V5 sourceCVE List V5
- GitHub Security Advisory (GHSA-hwpq-rrpf-pgcq)CVE reference, VulnCheck · vendor-advisory
- Patch CommitCVE reference, VulnCheck · patch
- VulnCheck Advisory: OpenClaw < 2026.2.25 - Approval Identity Mismatch in system.run Command ExecutionCVE reference, VulnCheck · third-party-advisory
Products and packages named in the record
CWE details
CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.
Interpretation Conflict
Interpretation Conflict represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.