CVE-2026-57495

AgenticMail: Unauthenticated inbound mail triggers bypassPermissions resume of the operator's Claude Code session (bridge-wake)

HIGH
8.2
CVSS Score
Published: July 20, 2026 at 10:09 PM UTC
Updated: July 23, 2026 at 09:12 PM UTC
4 products affected across 1 vendorCoreOpenclawClaudecode

Using @agenticmail/core by agenticmail?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect @agenticmail/core - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
HIGH8.2
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.4%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

AgenticMail gives AI agents real email addresses and phone numbers. In @agenticmail/claudecode prior to version 0.2.39, @agenticmail/codex prior to version 0.1.33, @agenticmail/core prior to version 0.9.43, and @agenticmail/openclaw prior to version 0.5.71, two inbound-mail handlers act on a privileged effect without verifying that the sender is the operator, while a sibling handler in the same repo does. The higher-impact one: any external email routed to the bridge inbox causes the dispatcher to resume the operator's Claude Code session with `permissionMode: 'bypassPermissions'`, embedding the attacker-controlled `from`/`subject`/`preview` verbatim into the prompt the resumed agent reads — an indirect prompt injection into a fully-privileged agent (Bash/Write/Edit/WebFetch + the agenticmail MCP toolbelt) running as the operator's OAuth identity. The sibling operator-query email-reply hook gates the same untrusted-From provenance with `isOperatorReplySender(replyFrom, config.operatorEmail)` (fail-closed); the bridge-wake path — a strictly higher-privilege effect — has no equivalent. @agenticmail/claudecode 0.2.39, @agenticmail/codex 0.1.33, @agenticmail/core 0.9.43, and @agenticmail/openclaw 0.5.71 contain a fix.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

v < 0.2.39
Affected range stops below 0.2.39, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
v < 0.1.33
Affected range stops below 0.1.33, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
v < 0.9.43
Affected range stops below 0.9.43, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
v < 0.5.71
Affected range stops below 0.5.71, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet, and no fixed version or vendor advisory is recorded against it.

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitAutomatableTotal impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

8.2HIGHGitHub_M
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusDEFERRED
CWE
CWE-306

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card