GHSA-v3j7-34xh-6g3w CVE-2026-22174
OpenClaw Loopback CDP probe can leak Gateway token to local listener
- Severity
- 5.9 / 10
- Medium · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.13%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 2.70% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-290 Authentication Bypass by Spoofing
- CWE-306 Missing Authentication for Critical Function
- Fix
2026.2.22- Upgrade openclaw to this version or later
Description
Summary
A local process can capture the OpenClaw Gateway auth token from Chrome CDP probe traffic on loopback.
Details
Affected versions inject x-openclaw-relay-token for loopback CDP URLs, and CDP reachability probes send that header to /json/version.
If an attacker controls the probed loopback port, they can read that token and reuse it as Gateway bearer auth.
Relevant code paths (pre-fix):
src/browser/extension-relay.ts(getChromeExtensionRelayAuthHeaders)src/browser/cdp.helpers.ts(getHeadersWithAuth)src/browser/chrome.ts(fetchChromeVersion)
Affected Packages / Versions
- Package:
openclaw(npm) - Latest published (at triage):
2026.2.21-2 - Vulnerable:
<= 2026.2.21-2 - Patched: >= 2026.2.22
Deployment Model Applicability
This does not change OpenClaw’s documented security model for standard single-owner installs (you own the machine/VPS and trust local processes under that OS account boundary). Risk is for non-standard shared-user/shared-host installs where an untrusted local user/process can race/bind the loopback relay port.
Impact
- Local credential disclosure.
- Follow-on impact depends on local deployment and enabled Gateway capabilities.
Fix Commit(s)
afa22acc4a09fdf32be8a167ae216bee85c30dad
Release Process Note
Patched version is set to >= 2026.2.22 for the published release.
OpenClaw thanks @tdjackey for reporting.
Affected versions
npm
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| openclaw | < 2026.2.22 |
2026.2.22 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
openclaw npm → 2026.2.22
- npm
npm install openclaw@2026.2.22- yarn
yarn add openclaw@2026.2.22- pnpm
pnpm add openclaw@2026.2.22
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 5.9
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
- Attack vector
- Local
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- High
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- Low
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
- Exploit maturity
- Not defined
- Scope
- X
CVSS 3.1 5.7
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
- Attack vector
- Local
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
Weakness
CWE-290: Authentication Bypass by Spoofing
This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks.
CWE-306: Missing Authentication for Critical Function
The product does not perform any authentication for functionality that requires a provable user identity or consumes a significant amount of resources.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Identify which of these areas require a proven user identity, and use a centralized authentication capability. Identify all potential communication channels, or other means of interaction with the software, to ensure that all channels are appropriately protected, including those channels that are assumed to be accessible only by authorized parties. Developers sometimes perform authentication at the primary channel, but open up a secondary channel that is assumed to be private. For example, a login mechanism may be listening on one network port, but after successful authentication, it may open up a second port where it waits for the connection, but avoids authentication because it assumes that only the authenticated party will connect to the port. In general, if the software or protocol allows a single session or user state to persist across multiple connections or channels, authentication and appropriate credential management need to be used throughout.
- Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
- Architecture and Design: Where possible, avoid implementing custom, "grow-your-own" authentication routines and consider using authentication capabilities as provided by the surrounding framework, operating system, or environment. These capabilities may avoid common weaknesses that are unique to authentication; support automatic auditing and tracking; and make it easier to provide a clear separation between authentication tasks and authorization tasks. In environments such as the World Wide Web, the line between authentication and authorization is sometimes blurred. If custom authentication routines are required instead of those provided by the server, then these routines must be applied to every single page, since these pages could be requested directly.
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using libraries with authentication capabilities such as OpenSSL or the ESAPI Authenticator [REF-45].
- Implementation, System Configuration, Operation: When storing data in the cloud (e.g., S3 buckets, Azure blobs, Google Cloud Storage, etc.), use the provider's controls to require strong authentication for users who should be allowed to access the data [REF-1297] [REF-1298] [REF-1302].
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-3x84-qq85-fj65 OpenClaw: Browser CDP discovery could accept blocked WebSocket URLs | High | Also affects openclaw |
| GHSA-9c3v-684m-579c OpenClaw MCP SSE redirects could forward Authorization headers | Medium | Also affects openclaw |
| GHSA-f397-5vjw-v2c2 OpenClaw: Shell inline-command parsing could miss an allowlist check | High | Also affects openclaw |
| GHSA-rx78-29qr-5hq8 OpenClaw: Workspace-derived service PATH could influence trash command selection | High | Also affects openclaw |
| GHSA-ccwh-wwpp-6wg5 OpenClaw: Host environment sanitizer missed two Node.js control variables | High | Also affects openclaw |
| GHSA-985f-72mj-8gf7 OpenClaw: Tool group policy callers could accept unvalidated group IDs | Medium | Also affects openclaw |
| GHSA-9v8j-9c9g-w66c OpenClaw: Bootstrap token replay could widen pending pairing scopes | Medium | Also affects openclaw |
| GHSA-c226-q6fx-6j6c OpenClaw: macOS Swift exec allowlist missed combined POSIX inline flags | Medium | Also affects openclaw |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor