Skip to content

OpenClaw's web tools strict URL guard could lose DNS pinning when env proxy is configured

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Mar 3, 2026 in openclaw/openclaw • Updated Mar 19, 2026

Package

npm openclaw (npm)

Affected versions

<= 2026.3.1

Patched versions

2026.3.2

Description

Summary

openclaw web tools strict URL fetch paths could lose DNS pinning when environment proxy variables are configured (HTTP_PROXY/HTTPS_PROXY/ALL_PROXY, including lowercase variants).

In affected builds, strict URL checks (for example web_fetch and citation redirect resolution) validated one destination during SSRF guard checks, but runtime connection routing could proceed through an env-proxy dispatcher.

Affected Packages / Versions

  • Package: openclaw (npm)
  • Vulnerable version range: <= 2026.3.1
  • Latest published npm version at triage time (2026-03-02): 2026.3.1
  • Patched versions: >= 2026.3.2 (released)

Technical Details

The SSRF guard performed hostname resolution and policy checks, then selected a request dispatcher.

When env proxy settings were present, strict web-tool flows could use EnvHttpProxyAgent instead of the DNS-pinned dispatcher. This created a destination-binding gap between check-time resolution and connect-time routing.

The fix keeps DNS pinning on strict/untrusted web-tool URL paths and limits env-proxy bypass behavior to trusted/operator-controlled endpoints via an explicit dangerous opt-in.

Impact

In deployments with env proxy variables configured, attacker-influenced URLs from web tools could be routed through proxy behavior instead of strict pinned-destination routing, which could allow access to internal/private targets reachable from that proxy environment.

Mitigations

Before upgrading, operators can reduce exposure by clearing proxy env vars for OpenClaw runtime processes or disabling web_fetch / web_search where untrusted URL input is possible.

Fix Commit(s)

  • 345abf0b2e0f43b0f229e96f252ebf56f1e5549e

References

@steipete steipete published to openclaw/openclaw Mar 3, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Mar 3, 2026
Reviewed Mar 3, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Mar 18, 2026
Last updated Mar 19, 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 Present
Privileges Required Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity Low
Availability Low
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

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:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

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.
(18th percentile)

Weaknesses

Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) Race Condition

The product checks the state of a resource before using that resource, but the resource's state can change between the check and the use in a way that invalidates the results of the check. Learn more on MITRE.

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-2026-22181

GHSA ID

GHSA-8mvx-p2r9-r375

Source code

Credits

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