PR #67623: fix: Change the scope of the variable SANDBOX_BACKEND_FACTORIES from …

• Repository: openclaw/openclaw
• Author: earon-han
• State: open | merged: False
• Link: https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/pull/67623

Description (problem / solution / changelog)

…module-level to process-level global(#67610)

Summary

Describe the problem and fix in 2–5 bullets:

If this PR fixes a plugin beta-release blocker, title it fix(<plugin-id>): beta blocker - <summary> and link the matching Beta blocker: <plugin-name> - <summary> issue labeled beta-blocker. Contributors cannot label PRs, so the title is the PR-side signal for maintainers and automation.

• Problem:
• Why it matters:
• What changed:
• What did NOT change (scope boundary):

Change Type (select all)

• Bug fix
• Feature
• Refactor required for the fix
• Docs
• Security hardening
• Chore/infra

Scope (select all touched areas)

• Gateway / orchestration
• Skills / tool execution
• Auth / tokens
• Memory / storage
• Integrations
• API / contracts
• UI / DX
• CI/CD / infra

Linked Issue/PR

• Closes #
• Related #
• This PR fixes a bug or regression

Root Cause (if applicable)

For bug fixes or regressions, explain why this happened, not just what changed. Otherwise write N/A. If the cause is unclear, write Unknown.

• Root cause: the SANDBOX_BACKEND_FACTORIES is a module variable.
• Missing detection / guardrail:
• Contributing context (if known):

Regression Test Plan (if applicable)

For bug fixes or regressions, name the smallest reliable test coverage that should catch this. Otherwise write N/A.

• Coverage level that should have caught this:
  • Unit test
  • Seam / integration test
  • End-to-end test
  • Existing coverage already sufficient
• Target test or file:
• Scenario the test should lock in:
• Why this is the smallest reliable guardrail:
• Existing test that already covers this (if any):
• If no new test is added, why not:

User-visible / Behavior Changes

List user-visible changes (including defaults/config).
If none, write None.

Diagram (if applicable)

For UI changes or non-trivial logic flows, include a small ASCII diagram reviewers can scan quickly. Otherwise write N/A.

Before:N/A
[user action] -> [old state]

After:N/A
[user action] -> [new state] -> [result]

Security Impact (required)

• New permissions/capabilities? (Yes/No) No
• Secrets/tokens handling changed? (Yes/No) No
• New/changed network calls? (Yes/No) No
• Command/tool execution surface changed? (Yes/No) No
• Data access scope changed? (Yes/No) No
• If any Yes, explain risk + mitigation:

Repro + Verification

Environment

• OS: Ubuntu 22.04
• Runtime/container: N/A
• Model/provider: minimax
• Integration/channel (if any): N/A
• Relevant config (redacted): N/A

Steps

1. A new sandbox backend plugin, just named abc
2. openclaw plugins install abc
3. set the abc config in openclaw.json, include agents.defaults.sandbox, plugins.entries.abc, etc..
4. restart openclaw-gateway
5. the abc is registered successful in log
6. send message with TUI

Expected

-the exec command is executed in abc sandbox

Actual

-the exec command is executed in abc sandbox

Evidence

Attach at least one:

• Failing test/log before + passing after
• Trace/log snippets
• Screenshot/recording
• Perf numbers (if relevant)

Human Verification (required)

What you personally verified (not just CI), and how:

• Verified scenarios:
• Edge cases checked:
• What you did not verify:

Review Conversations

• I replied to or resolved every bot review conversation I addressed in this PR.
• I left unresolved only the conversations that still need reviewer or maintainer judgment.

If a bot review conversation is addressed by this PR, resolve that conversation yourself. Do not leave bot review conversation cleanup for maintainers.

Compatibility / Migration

• Backward compatible? (Yes/No) No
• Config/env changes? (Yes/No) No
• Migration needed? (Yes/No) No
• If yes, exact upgrade steps:

Risks and Mitigations

List only real risks for this PR. Add/remove entries as needed. If none, write None.

• Risk:
  • Mitigation:

Changed files

• src/agents/sandbox/backend.ts (modified, +9/-1)

PR #67628: fix(sandbox): use globalThis registry so plugin-registered backends survive across module instances

• Repository: openclaw/openclaw
• Author: kagura-agent
• State: closed | merged: False
• Link: https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/pull/67628

Description (problem / solution / changelog)

Problem

Fixes #67610.

requireSandboxBackendFactory() throws "not registered" even though the sandbox backend plugin registered successfully during startup. This happens because plugins loaded via Jiti create a separate module instance of backend.ts, which gets its own module-scoped Map. When core later calls requireSandboxBackendFactory(), it reads from a different Map instance that was never populated.

Solution

Replace the module-scoped Map with a globalThis-backed registry using Symbol.for('openclaw.sandboxBackendFactories'). This ensures all module instances (core and Jiti-loaded plugins) share the same registry map.

Changes

• src/agents/sandbox/backend.ts: Replace module-level SANDBOX_BACKEND_FACTORIES map with a globalThis + Symbol.for() backed getter function. All read/write operations go through the shared global map.
• src/agents/sandbox/backend.test.ts: Add tests for requireSandboxBackendFactory, cross-instance registration via globalThis, and case-insensitive ID normalization.

Changed files

• src/agents/sandbox/backend.test.ts (modified, +57/-1)
• src/agents/sandbox/backend.ts (modified, +24/-7)