CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-26317NVD status: Analyzed

openclaw: Cross-Site Request Forgery

CVE-2026-26317 is a high-severity cross-site request forgery vulnerability in openclaw, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.1 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, but only if a user takes part, for example by opening a link or file. Affected openclaw versions: < 2026.2.14. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.16% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Check which version of openclaw you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
  2. Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
  3. Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
  4. Because the attack needs a user to take part, warn users about unexpected links and files related to this product until it is patched.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Openclawopenclaw< 2026.2.14Not stated
Openclawclawdbot<= 2026.1.24-3Not stated

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
RequiredA user must take an action such as opening a file or link.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
NoneNo data is disclosed.
Integrity
HighData or code can be modified at will.
Availability
LowPerformance or availability is reduced.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L. Scored by CNA (github.com).

Official description

OpenClaw is a personal AI assistant. Prior to 2026.2.14, browser-facing localhost mutation routes accepted cross-origin browser requests without explicit Origin/Referer validation. Loopback binding reduces remote exposure but does not prevent browser-initiated requests from malicious origins. A malicious website can trigger unauthorized state changes against a victim's local OpenClaw browser control plane (for example opening tabs, starting/stopping the browser, mutating storage/cookies) if the browser control service is reachable on loopback in the victim's browser context. Starting in version 2026.2.14, mutating HTTP methods (POST/PUT/PATCH/DELETE) are rejected when the request indicates a non-loopback Origin/Referer (or `Sec-Fetch-Site: cross-site`). Other mitigations include enabling browser control auth (token/password) and avoid running with auth disabled.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Cross-Site Request Forgery

The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF.
  • Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
  • Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330).

More Cross-Site Request Forgery vulnerabilities (CWE-352)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Other vulnerabilities in openclaw

All openclaw vulnerabilities

Recent Cross-Site Request Forgery vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.