T08 · Insecure Dependencies
Warning
- Location
- SKILL.md:42
- Finding
- Unverifiable External Plugin Dependency Installed from a Third-Party Registry## Vulnerability Details **File Location**: `SKILL.md`, lines 42-49 **Vulnerability Type**: Supply-chain risk from an externally retrieved executable dependency **Risk Level**: Medium ### Vulnerable Code Snippet ```markdown 1. Install the plugin — **pin the version** so you get exactly the release you reviewed (this skill and the plugin share the same publisher, and the package is source-linked on ClawHub, so every version maps to a verifiable GitHub commit): ```bash openclaw plugins install clawhub:@othreecodes/openclaw-intercom@1.0.12 ``` Check ClawHub for the latest version and its changelog before upgrading; treat plugin ``` ### Technical Analysis The Skill directs users to install and execute `@othreecodes/openclaw-intercom` from the external ClawHub registry. The audited project contains only `SKILL.md`; it does not contain the plugin source code, an expected cryptographic digest, a trusted signature, or other material that independently verifies the downloaded artifact. Pinning the dependency to version `1.0.12` limits unintentional version drift, but a version pin alone does not guarantee artifact integrity. The effective executable behavior remains dependent on the security of the publisher account, package registry, package-to-source mapping, and distribution infrastructure. The documentation's assertion that releases map to GitHub commits cannot be independently validated from the supplied artifact. This is classified as `T08: Insecure Dependencies` rather than remote payload retrieval because the external component is installed through a package registry as a declared third-party dependency. No evidence in the audited file establishes that the package is malicious; the finding concerns the absence of locally verifiable integrity controls and the fact that the executable implementation was outside the audit scope. ### Attack Path 1. An attacker compromises the package publisher account, registry entry, release process, or a ...[truncated 1517 chars]
- Remediation
- ## Remediation Suggestions 1. Include or vendor the exact reviewed plugin source in the audited release so its executable behavior can be assessed together with the Skill. 2. Publish and verify a cryptographic digest for the `1.0.12` package artifact before installation. 3. Require signed releases and verify the package signature against a trusted, independently distributed publisher key. 4. Document the exact immutable source commit corresponding to version `1.0.12`, and verify that the distributed package is reproducibly built from that commit. 5. Lock package resolution to the intended registry and publisher namespace to reduce dependency-confusion and registry-substitution risks. 6. Review the plugin source and transitive dependencies independently before production deployment. 7. Continue using a dedicated Intercom application with the minimum required permissions, restricted channels, and a readily revocable token. 8. Test the plugin in an isolated staging environment before connecting it to a production inbox. 9. Monitor package ownership, release-signing status, unexpected artifact changes, credential use, and customer-facing actions. 10. Rotate Intercom credentials immediately if package integrity or publisher security becomes uncertain.
