GHSA-hv93-r4j3-q65f json
OpenClaw Hook Session Key Override Enables Targeted Cross-Session Routing
published 8mo ago modified 8mo ago
- cvss
- 7.1
- version 3.1, GitHub
- cisa kev
- Not listed
- not in CISA's catalog
- epss
- —
- no score, EPSS covers CVEs only
- public exploits
- 0
- none known
Summary
## Summary The issue is not deterministic session keys by itself. The exploitable path was accepting externally supplied `sessionKey` values on authenticated hook ingress, allowing a hook token holder to route messages into chosen sessions.
## Affected Behavior - `POST /hooks/agent` accepted payload `sessionKey` and used it directly for session routing. - Common session-key shapes (for example `agent:main:dm:<peerId>`) were often derivable from known metadata, making targeted routing practical when request-level override was enabled.
## Attack Preconditions - Attacker can call hook endpoints with a valid hook token. - Hook ingress allows request-selected `sessionKey` values. - Target session keys can be derived or guessed.
Without those preconditions, deterministic key formats alone do not provide access.
## Impact - Integrity: targeted message/prompt injection into chosen sessions. - Persistence: poisoned context can affect subsequent turns when the same session key is reused. - Confidentiality impact is secondary and depends on additional weaknesses.
## Affected Versions - `openclaw` `>= 2.0.0-beta3` and `< 2026.2.12`
## Patched Versions - `openclaw` `>= 2026.2.12`
## Fix OpenClaw now uses secure defaults for hook session routing: - `POST /hooks/agent` rejects payload `sessionKey` unless `hooks.allowRequestSessionKey=true`. - Added `hooks.defaultSessionKey` for fixed ingress routing. - Added `hooks.allowedSessionKeyPrefixes` to constrain explicit routing keys. - Security audit warns on unsafe hook session-routing settings.
## Recommended Configuration ```json { "hooks": { "enabled": true, "token": "${OPENCLAW_HOOKS_TOKEN}", "defaultSessionKey": "hook:ingress", "allowRequestSessionKey": false, "allowedSessionKeyPrefixes": ["hook:"] } } ```
## Credit Thanks @alpernae for responsible reporting.
Patch / fix
- npm openclaw 2026.2.12
Is GHSA-hv93-r4j3-q65f in your dependencies? Fencer shows which of your repositories are affected as soon as an advisory lands, and opens the fix as a pull request.
Check with FencerCVSS scores
| assigned by | version | score | vector |
|---|---|---|---|
| GitHub | 3.1 | 7.1 | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N |
Affected packages
| ecosystem | package | affected | fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | openclaw | >=2.0.0-beta3, <2026.2.12 |
2026.2.12 |
Classification
References
Sources
- GitHub Advisory GHSA-hv93-r4j3-q65f
- Maintainer advisory GHSA-hv93-r4j3-q65f
Fencer Intel keeps one entry per vulnerability: the CVE id wins, then GHSA, and records that alias each other are merged, except that two CVEs always keep separate entries. The same data is available as JSON.
The maintainers of openclaw/openclaw published their own advisory on GitHub. Reviewed sources take precedence over it.