Skip to content

OpenClaw affected by SSRF via attachment/media URL hydration

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Feb 14, 2026 in openclaw/openclaw • Updated Mar 6, 2026

Package

npm openclaw (npm)

Affected versions

< 2026.2.2

Patched versions

2026.2.2

Description

Summary

Versions of the openclaw npm package prior to 2026.2.2 could be coerced into fetching arbitrary http(s) URLs during attachment/media hydration. An attacker who can influence the media URL (for example via model-controlled sendAttachment or auto-reply media URLs) could trigger SSRF to internal resources and exfiltrate the fetched bytes as an outbound attachment.

Plain-English Explanation

OpenClaw can send files by downloading them first.

On vulnerable versions (< 2026.2.2), if an attacker could get OpenClaw to treat a URL as the “file to attach”, OpenClaw would download that URL from the gateway machine and then send the downloaded bytes back out as an attachment.

That matters because the gateway can often reach internal-only endpoints that an attacker cannot (for example 127.0.0.1 services, private RFC1918 addresses, or cloud metadata endpoints). This is a data-leak risk.

This does not directly grant code execution or shell access; it is about making the gateway perform HTTP requests and returning the response bytes.

Affected Packages / Versions

  • Package: openclaw (npm)
  • Affected: < 2026.2.2
  • Fixed: >= 2026.2.2

Release timeline (npm):

  • 2026.2.1 published 2026-02-02T11:45:27Z
  • 2026.2.2 published 2026-02-04T00:56:41Z
  • This advisory was created 2026-02-05T10:42:26Z

Details

In affected versions, remote media fetching performed a raw fetch(url) without SSRF protections.

Starting in 2026.2.2, remote media fetching is guarded by SSRF checks (private/loopback/link-local blocking, DNS pinning, and redirect handling), so attempts to fetch 127.0.0.1, private RFC1918 space, or cloud metadata hostnames are rejected.

Proof of Concept

From any context where an attacker can influence an attachment/media URL, provide a media URL targeting an internal endpoint (example: http://127.0.0.1:9999/secret.txt).

On vulnerable versions (< 2026.2.2), the gateway fetches the URL and uses the response bytes as the attachment payload.

Fix

Fix commits:

  • 81c68f582d4a9a20d9cca9f367d2da9edc5a65ae
  • 9bd64c8a1f91dda602afc1d5246a2ff2be164647

Mitigation

Upgrade to openclaw >= 2026.2.2.

Thanks @simecek for reporting.

References

@steipete steipete published to openclaw/openclaw Feb 14, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Feb 17, 2026
Reviewed Feb 17, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Mar 5, 2026
Last updated Mar 6, 2026

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity Low
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality Low
Integrity Low
Availability Low

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:L

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(31st percentile)

Weaknesses

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-28467

GHSA ID

GHSA-wfp2-v9c7-fh79

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.