CVE-2026-62192
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedOpenClaw versions 2026.6.6 before 2026.6.9 contain an authorization bypass vulnerability in Discord guild actions that allows lower-trust callers to perform actions requiring stronger authorization checks. Attackers can exploit misconfigured input paths to skip cross-provider requester authorization and execute restricted operations.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceOpenClaw versions 2026.6.6 through 2026.6.8 contain an authorization bypass in Discord guild actions where misconfigured input paths allow lower-trust callers to circumvent cross-provider requester authorization checks, enabling execution of operations that should require elevated privileges.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 2026.6.6, < 2026.6.9CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check OpenClaw installed versionLocate the OpenClaw installation directory and look for a version file (such as VERSION, version.txt, or package.json) or run 'openclaw --version' if available in PATHAffected if The installed version is 2026.6.6, 2026.6.7, or 2026.6.8
-
Verify Discord integration is activeInspect the OpenClaw configuration directory for discord-related config files (commonly config/discord.yaml, config.json with Discord settings, or a discord/ subdirectory). Check if Discord bot token and guild settings are present and enabled.Affected if Discord integration is configured and the bot is connected to guilds
-
Examine Discord guild action authorization settingsReview the authorization or permissions configuration file for Discord guild actions (often in config/permissions.yaml, config/auth.yaml, or within the main config under guild_actions/authorization). Look for cross-provider requester validation settings.Affected if Authorization validation for cross-provider requests is disabled, missing, or set to a permissive value
-
Inspect input path configuration for guild actionsSearch for input path or endpoint routing configuration files related to Discord guild actions (may be in routes/guild.yaml, endpoints/discord_guild.py, or similar). Check for any misconfigured or overly permissive path mappings.Affected if Input paths allow unauthenticated or lower-privilege callers to reach guild action endpoints
A user is affected if their OpenClaw version is 2026.6.6 through 2026.6.8 AND Discord guild actions are enabled with misconfigured authorization that allows cross-provider request bypass.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped2026.6.9
Upgrade to OpenClaw 2026.6.9 or later, and review all Discord guild action endpoints to ensure proper authorization validation across provider boundaries.
2026.6.9
- 1. Identify all Openclaw instances currently running versions 2026.6.6 through 2026.6.8
- 2. Review release notes or changelog for version 2026.6.9 to confirm the security fix addresses CVE-2026-62192
- 3. Create a backup of the current Openclaw configuration and data
- 4. Upgrade Openclaw to version 2026.6.9 using the standard upgrade procedure for your deployment method
- 5. Verify the upgrade completed successfully and the service is operational
- 6. Test Discord guild actions to confirm the authorization bypass is no longer exploitable
- 7. Monitor logs for any unauthorized access attempts that may have occurred during the vulnerable period
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-62192 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-62192 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data