CVE-2026-16195Public exploitNetwork attack vector

Authenticated prompt injection via omitted mention gate

Published Jul 18, 2026 · Updated Jul 18, 2026

Incorrect authorization in PicoClaw 0.2.0 through 0.2.9 allows remote authenticated users to submit unmentioned WeCom group messages. The WeCom dispatchIncoming function forwards group callbacks to HandleInboundContext without invoking the shared ShouldRespondInGroup mention-only gate. An admitted group participant can inject agent-visible input when mention_only is enabled; downstream effects depend on configured providers and tools.

CVSS severity6.3
Medium
EPSS probability0.37%
Next 30 days · Sep 16, 2026
Known exploitationUnconfirmed
Based on sourced intelligence
Hinoki checkNot available
Coverage for this vulnerability

See if you're affected

Explore vulnerability checks for your environment with Hinoki.

Book a demo

Summary

What happened

Incorrect authorization in PicoClaw 0.2.0 through 0.2.9 allows remote authenticated users to submit unmentioned WeCom group messages. The WeCom dispatchIncoming function forwards group callbacks to HandleInboundContext without invoking the shared ShouldRespondInGroup mention-only gate. An admitted group participant can inject agent-visible input when mention_only is enabled; downstream effects depend on configured providers and tools.

The record

CVE
CVE-2026-16195
Published
Jul 18, 2026
Updated
Jul 18, 2026
Vendor
Sipeed
Product
PicoClaw
Classifications
CWE-863
Attack vector
network
Privileges
authenticated

Timeline

How it unfolded

  1. Jul 18, 2026CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
  2. Jul 18, 2026Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.

Exploitability

Present is not the same as exploitable

Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.

Is a vulnerable build present?

Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.

  1. Affected versionversion=0.2.0
  2. Affected versionversion=0.2.1
  3. Affected versionversion=0.2.2
  4. Affected versionversion=0.2.3
  5. Affected versionversion=0.2.4
  6. Affected versionversion=0.2.5
  7. Affected versionversion=0.2.6
  8. Affected versionversion=0.2.7
  9. Affected versionversion=0.2.8
  10. Affected versionversion=0.2.9

What conditions does exploitation require?

Attack vectornetwork
Required privilegesauthenticated

What is affected?

Sipeed · PicoClawversion=0.2.0; version=0.2.1; version=0.2.2; version=0.2.3; version=0.2.4; version=0.2.5; version=0.2.6; version=0.2.7; version=0.2.8; version=0.2.9

Published CVSS scores

6.3Upstream GitHub security reportCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

CVSS describes severity. EPSS estimates exploitation probability.

Attacks

What attackers are doing with it

Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.

Daily unique IPsNo honeypot observations are available for this CVE in the selected window.

No observations available

Sep 10, 2026Sep 16, 2026
Latest reporting daySep 16, 2026
Latest daily unique IPsUnavailable
Prior 30-day averageUnavailable
SourceShadowserver honeypots (KEV)
Vectornetwork
Privilegesauthenticated
Known exploitationUnconfirmed
Public exploitPublished

Weakness, pattern, technique

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization

Public exploit references

Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.

Technologies

Your stack

See the directory against your own environment.

Your stack

Check the software in your environment

Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.

Book a demo