Vulnerability Database

328,409

Total vulnerabilities in the database

OpenClaw inter-session prompts could be treated as direct user instructions

Summary

Inter-session messages sent via sessions_send could be interpreted as direct end-user instructions because they were persisted as role: "user" without provenance metadata.

Affected Packages / Versions

  • Package: openclaw (npm)
  • Affected versions: <= 2026.2.12 (i.e. < 2026.2.13)
  • Fixed in: 2026.2.13 (patched versions >= 2026.2.13)

Impact

A delegated or internal session could inject instructions into another session that appeared equivalent to externally-originated user input.

This is an instruction-provenance confusion issue (confused-deputy style), which can lead to unintended privileged behavior in workflows that trust role: "user" as a sole authority signal.

Technical details

Before the fix, routed inter-session prompts were stored as regular user turns without a verifiable source marker.

As a result, downstream workers and transcript readers could not distinguish:

  • External user input
  • Internal inter-session routed input

Fix

OpenClaw now carries explicit input provenance end-to-end for routed prompts.

Key changes:

  • Added structured provenance model (inputProvenance) with kind values including inter_session.
  • sessions_send and agent-to-agent steps now set inter-session provenance when invoking target runs.
  • Provenance is persisted on user messages as message.provenance.kind = "inter_session" (role remains user for provider compatibility).
  • Transcript readers and memory helpers were updated to respect provenance and avoid treating inter-session prompts as external user-originated input.
  • Runtime context rebuilding now annotates inter-session turns with an explicit in-memory marker ([Inter-session message]) for clearer model-side disambiguation.
  • Regression tests were added for transcript parsing, session tools flow, runner sanitization, and memory hook behavior.

Fix Commit(s)

  • 85409e401b6586f83954cb53552395d7aab04797

Workarounds

If immediate upgrade is not possible:

  • Disable or restrict sessions_send in affected environments.
  • Do not use role alone as an authority boundary; require provenance-aware checks in orchestration logic.

Credit

Reported by @anbecker.

Thanks @anbecker for reporting.

No technical information available.

CWEs:

Frequently Asked Questions

A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.

CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.

A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.

Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.

Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.

SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.