GHSA-rggc-m335-3wvj: OpenClaw — HIGH

Q: Is GHSA-rggc-m335-3wvj actively exploited?

No confirmed active exploitation of GHSA-rggc-m335-3wvj has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.

Q: How to fix GHSA-rggc-m335-3wvj?

Update to patched version: OpenClaw 2026.5.18.

Q: What is the CVSS score for GHSA-rggc-m335-3wvj?

No CVSS score has been assigned yet.

### Summary Same-host trusted-proxy deployments could accept local forged identity headers. In affected versions, a local same-host caller that can reach the proxy-facing Gateway port could supply identity headers normally reserved for the trusted proxy. This advisory is scoped to the named...

Full CISO analysis pending enrichment.

What systems are affected?

Package	Ecosystem	Vulnerable Range	Patched
OpenClaw	npm	< 2026.5.18	`2026.5.18`
4 dependents 41% patched ~3d to patch Full package profile →

Do you use OpenClaw? You're affected.

How severe is it?

CVSS 3.1

N/A

EPSS

N/A

Exploitation Status

No known exploitation

Sophistication

N/A

What should I do?

Patch available

Update OpenClaw to version 2026.5.18

Which compliance frameworks are affected?

Compliance analysis pending. Sign in for full compliance mapping when available.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is GHSA-rggc-m335-3wvj?

### Summary Same-host trusted-proxy deployments could accept local forged identity headers. In affected versions, a local same-host caller that can reach the proxy-facing Gateway port could supply identity headers normally reserved for the trusted proxy. This advisory is scoped to the named feature and configuration. It does not change OpenClaw's trusted-operator model: authenticated Gateway operators, installed plugins, and intentional local execution surfaces remain trusted unless a separate policy, approval, allowlist, sandbox, or auth boundary is crossed. ### Impact When the affected feature is enabled and reachable, this could receive operator identity associated with the forged headers. Practical impact depends on the operator's configuration and whether lower-trust input can reach that path. ### Patched Versions The first stable patched version is `2026.5.18`. ### Mitigations bind trusted-proxy ingress behind the actual proxy and firewall direct same-host access. As general hardening, keep channel and tool allowlists narrow, avoid sharing one Gateway between mutually untrusted users, and disable the affected feature when it is not needed.

Is GHSA-rggc-m335-3wvj actively exploited?

No confirmed active exploitation of GHSA-rggc-m335-3wvj has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.

How to fix GHSA-rggc-m335-3wvj?

Update to patched version: OpenClaw 2026.5.18.

What is the CVSS score for GHSA-rggc-m335-3wvj?

No CVSS score has been assigned yet.

What are the technical details?

Original Advisory

### Summary Same-host trusted-proxy deployments could accept local forged identity headers. In affected versions, a local same-host caller that can reach the proxy-facing Gateway port could supply identity headers normally reserved for the trusted proxy. This advisory is scoped to the named feature and configuration. It does not change OpenClaw's trusted-operator model: authenticated Gateway operators, installed plugins, and intentional local execution surfaces remain trusted unless a separate policy, approval, allowlist, sandbox, or auth boundary is crossed. ### Impact When the affected feature is enabled and reachable, this could receive operator identity associated with the forged headers. Practical impact depends on the operator's configuration and whether lower-trust input can reach that path. ### Patched Versions The first stable patched version is `2026.5.18`. ### Mitigations bind trusted-proxy ingress behind the actual proxy and firewall direct same-host access. As general hardening, keep channel and tool allowlists narrow, avoid sharing one Gateway between mutually untrusted users, and disable the affected feature when it is not needed.

Weaknesses (CWE)

CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management Primary CWE-284 Improper Access Control Primary CWE-287 Improper Authentication Primary CWE-290 Authentication Bypass by Spoofing Primary CWE-863 Incorrect Authorization Primary

CWE-269 — Improper Privilege Management: The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.

[Architecture and Design, Operation] Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
[Architecture and Design] Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.

Source: MITRE CWE corpus.