Skip to content

OpenClaw's gateway config mutation guard allowed unsafe model-driven config writes

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Apr 24, 2026 in openclaw/openclaw • Updated May 29, 2026

Package

npm openclaw (npm)

Affected versions

< 2026.4.23

Patched versions

2026.4.23

Description

Summary

The agent-facing gateway tool protects config.apply and config.patch with a model-to-operator trust boundary. That guard used a hand-maintained denylist of protected config paths. The config schema outgrew that denylist, leaving sensitive subtrees writable through model-driven gateway config mutations.

Impact

A prompt-injected or otherwise compromised model running with access to the owner-only gateway tool could persist unsafe config changes that crossed security boundaries. Examples included config paths affecting command execution, network/proxy/TLS behavior, credential forwarding, telemetry or hook endpoints, memory/indexing surfaces, and operator policy controls. These changes could survive restart once written to config.

Affected Packages / Versions

  • Package: openclaw on npm
  • Affected: versions before 2026.4.23
  • Fixed: 2026.4.23
  • Latest stable verified fixed: openclaw@2026.4.23, tag v2026.4.23

Fix

OpenClaw replaced the denylist with a fail-closed allowlist. Agent-driven gateway config.apply and gateway config.patch now permit only narrow agent-tunable prompt/model settings and mention-gating paths. Other config changes are rejected before the gateway mutation RPC is invoked.

Fix Commit(s)

  • bceda6089aa7b3695cc7696b43c61ae3d01bb0ec (fix(gateway): fail closed on runtime config edits)

Severity

Severity remains high. The vulnerable entry point is owner-only, but the model/agent is not a trusted principal under OpenClaw's security model, and the guard is the explicit model-to-operator boundary for persisted config mutation.

References

@steipete steipete published to openclaw/openclaw Apr 24, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database May 5, 2026
Reviewed May 5, 2026
Last updated May 29, 2026

Severity

High

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 v3 base metrics

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

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Missing Authorization

The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

No known CVE

GHSA ID

GHSA-cwj3-vqpp-pmxr

Source code

Credits

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