CVE-2026-35619

Fixed in OpenClaw 2026.3.24, the current shipping release.

The OpenAI-compatible HTTP endpoint /v1/models accepts bearer auth but does not enforce operator method scopes.

In contrast, the WebSocket RPC path enforces operator.read for models.list.

A caller connected with operator.approvals (no read scope) is rejected for models.list (missing scope: operator.read) but can still enumerate model metadata through HTTP /v1/models.

Confirmed on current main at commit 06de515b6c42816b62ec752e1c221cab67b38501.

Details

The WS control-plane path enforces role/scope checks centrally before dispatching methods. For non-admin operators, this includes required method scopes such as operator.read for models.list.

The HTTP compatibility path for /v1/models performs bearer authorization and then returns model metadata; it does not apply an equivalent scope check.

As reproduced, a caller with only operator.approvals can:

1. connect successfully,
2. fail models.list over WS with missing scope: operator.read,
3. fetch /v1/models over HTTP with status 200 and model data.

This is a cross-surface authorization inconsistency where the stricter WS policy can be bypassed via HTTP.

Patch Suggestion

1) Enforce read scope on /v1/models routes

Apply a scope gate equivalent to models.list before serving /v1/models or /v1/models/:id.

2) Reuse centralized scope-authorization helper for HTTP compatibility endpoints

Use the same operator scope logic used by WS dispatch (authorizeOperatorScopesForMethod(...)) to prevent policy drift.

3) Add regression tests

Keep this PoC and add explicit negative/positive controls:

• operator.approvals without read is rejected on HTTP /v1/models.
• operator.read is accepted on both WS models.list and HTTP /v1/models.

Credit

Reported by @zpbrent.

• Callers lacking operator.read can still enumerate gateway model metadata through HTTP compatibility routes.
• Breaks scope model consistency between WS RPC and HTTP surfaces.
• Weakens least-privilege expectations for operators granted non-read scopes.

The application does not correctly enforce access controls, allowing a principal to access resources or operations beyond their granted permissions. Typical impact: unauthorized data access or execution of privileged operations.

CVE-2026-35619 has a CVSS score of 4.3 (Medium). The vector is network-reachable, low privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (2026.3.24); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Kodem intelligence

1. What is CVE-2026-35619? CVE-2026-35619 is a medium-severity incorrect authorization vulnerability in openclaw (npm), affecting versions <= 2026.3.23. It is fixed in 2026.3.24. The application does not correctly enforce access controls, allowing a principal to access resources or operations beyond their granted permissions.
2. How severe is CVE-2026-35619? CVE-2026-35619 has a CVSS score of 4.3 (Medium). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
3. Which versions of openclaw are affected by CVE-2026-35619? openclaw (npm) versions <= 2026.3.23 is affected.
4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-35619? Yes. CVE-2026-35619 is fixed in 2026.3.24. Upgrade to this version or later.
5. Is CVE-2026-35619 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-35619 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-35619 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
7. How do I fix CVE-2026-35619? Upgrade openclaw to 2026.3.24 or later.