Skip to content
Log inStart free trial

GHSA-xc7w-v5x6-cc87 CVE-2026-29613

OpenClaw has a webhook auth bypass when gateway is behind a reverse proxy (loopback remoteAddress trust)

Medium npm
Severity
0.0 / 10
Medium · CVSS 4.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.46%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 40.19% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-306 Missing Authentication for Critical Function
Fix
2026.2.12
Upgrade openclaw to this version or later

Description

Summary

The BlueBubbles webhook handler previously treated any request whose socket remoteAddress was loopback (127.0.0.1, ::1, ::ffff:127.0.0.1) as authenticated. When OpenClaw Gateway is behind a reverse proxy (Tailscale Serve/Funnel, nginx, Cloudflare Tunnel, ngrok), the proxy typically connects to the gateway over loopback, allowing unauthenticated remote requests to bypass the configured webhook password.

This could allow an attacker who can reach the proxy endpoint to inject arbitrary inbound BlueBubbles message/reaction events.

Affected Packages / Versions

  • Package: openclaw (npm)
  • Affected versions: < 2026.2.12
  • Patched versions: >= 2026.2.12

Exposure / Configuration

  • BlueBubbles is an optional channel plugin (intended to eventually replace the legacy iMessage plugin, which is also optional). It is not enabled by default and is not part of a standard OpenClaw configuration.
  • Only deployments with the BlueBubbles webhook endpoint exposed through a reverse proxy are impacted.

Details

The BlueBubbles webhook handler accepts inbound events via an HTTP POST endpoint under the configured BlueBubbles webhook path.

In vulnerable versions, the handler would accept requests as authenticated if req.socket.remoteAddress is loopback, without validating forwarding headers. With common reverse-proxy setups, the gateway sees the proxy as the direct client (loopback), even when the original request is remote.

Fix

  • Primary fix (released in 2026.2.12): remove loopback-based authentication bypass and require the configured webhook secret.
  • Defense-in-depth follow-up (next release after commit below): treat requests with forwarding headers as proxied and never accept passwordless webhooks through a proxy.

Fix Commit(s)

Mitigations

  • Ensure a BlueBubbles webhook password is configured.
  • Do not expose the gateway webhook endpoint publicly without authentication.

Thanks @simecek for reporting.

Affected versions

npm

PackageVulnerableFixed in
openclaw
< 2026.2.12
2026.2.12

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 → 2026.2.12

npm
npm install openclaw@2026.2.12
yarn
yarn add openclaw@2026.2.12
pnpm
pnpm add openclaw@2026.2.12

Severity breakdown

CVSS 4.0 0.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Attack requirements
Present
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
None
Integrity (vulnerable system)
High
Availability (vulnerable system)
None
Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
None
Integrity (subsequent systems)
None
Availability (subsequent systems)
None

CVSS 3.1 5.9

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Weakness

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

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy 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
Is this in your code?

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