CVE-2026-100577 in OpenClaw
Summary
by MITRE • 09/26/2026
OpenClaw versions before 2026.8.1 fail to validate video asset URLs returned by providers, allowing server-side requests to private destinations. A malicious or compromised provider can return private or loopback URLs to cause the CLI to make requests to internal services accessible from the OpenClaw host.
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 09/26/2026
The vulnerability identified in OpenClaw versions prior to 2026.8.1 represents a critical server-side request forgery flaw rooted in insufficient input validation of external data sources. Specifically, the application fails to rigorously validate Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) returned by third-party video asset providers before processing them for subsequent network operations. This architectural oversight allows an attacker who controls or compromises one of these trusted provider services to manipulate the flow of execution by injecting maliciously crafted URLs into the response stream. The core technical failure lies in the absence of strict allow-listing or protocol validation mechanisms that would restrict accepted URLs to public, internet-routable addresses only. Instead, the software blindly trusts the integrity and safety of the endpoint data provided by external partners, assuming that such providers will always return legitimate, publicly accessible media assets.
From a technical perspective, this flaw enables an attacker to direct the OpenClaw Command Line Interface (CLI) to initiate HTTP or HTTPS requests toward internal network destinations that are not intended for public access. By returning URLs pointing to loopback addresses such as 127.0.0.1 or localhost, or targeting private IP ranges like those defined in RFC 1918, the attacker can force the host machine to communicate with services running on its own local network stack or within a protected corporate intranet. This capability effectively bypasses perimeter security controls because the traffic originates from an authorized internal process rather than an external threat actor directly attacking the firewall. The CLI acts as a proxy for these requests, leveraging the host's existing credentials and network permissions to interact with sensitive backend services such as database management interfaces, administrative dashboards, or other microservices that may be exposed on localhost but are not accessible from outside the machine.
The operational impact of this vulnerability is severe, particularly in enterprise environments where OpenClaw is integrated into broader automation pipelines or development workflows. An attacker could exploit this flaw to perform reconnaissance against internal services, potentially identifying running versions of software and their associated vulnerabilities. More critically, if those internal services lack proper authentication mechanisms for local connections—a common misconfiguration—the attacker may achieve unauthorized access to sensitive data or administrative functions. This can lead to full system compromise, data exfiltration, or the use of the compromised host as a pivot point for further lateral movement within the network. The trust relationship with video providers is thus weaponized against the organization's own infrastructure, turning a benign feature into a potent attack vector that undermines the principle of least privilege and network segmentation.
This vulnerability aligns closely with Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) categories such as CWE-918 Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF), which describes flaws where an application retrieves data from a remote server without validating user-supplied input, and CWE-20 Improper Input Validation, specifically regarding the failure to verify that external resources are safe. In terms of offensive security frameworks, this exploit maps to MITRE ATT&CK technique T1598 Phishing for Information or more accurately T1647 Potential Privilege Escalation via Trust Abuse if used in conjunction with other techniques, but primarily it is a classic SSRF scenario often categorized under initial access or lateral movement depending on the target. The exploitation relies heavily on the attacker's ability to compromise or influence an upstream provider, highlighting the risks inherent in complex supply chains and third-party integrations where trust boundaries are not clearly defined or enforced at runtime.
To mitigate this vulnerability, organizations must immediately upgrade OpenClaw to version 2026.8.1 or later, which implements proper validation logic for video asset URLs. In environments where upgrading is not immediately feasible, defensive measures should include implementing network-level controls such as egress filtering on the host running OpenClaw to block outbound connections to private IP ranges and loopback addresses from non-privileged processes. Additionally, deploying a web application firewall or reverse proxy with strict URL validation rules can help intercept and sanitize requests before they reach the vulnerable component. It is also crucial for development teams to adopt secure coding practices that enforce allow-listing of permitted protocols (e.g., https only) and domains when handling external inputs, ensuring that no internal resources are inadvertently exposed through application logic flaws. Regular security audits of third-party integrations and continuous monitoring of outbound network traffic can further reduce the risk of exploitation in production environments.