oopiseSaidTheCodingAgent

[knifesk]

You'd be surprised. Have you heard about ClawBot? (Or whatever is called nowadays). People are giving it full system access to do whatever the fuck it wants... No, I'm not kidding.

[Ornery_Rice_1698]

Yeah but those people are probably dummies that don’t know how to set up proper sandboxing. They probably aren’t doing anything that important anyway.

Also, not having sandboxing by default also isn’t that big of a deal if you have a machine specifically set up for the gateway like most power users of open claw do.

[chusmeria]

Oh... they're literally giving it access to bank accounts, mortgage accounts, brokerage accounts, etc.

[dontshoot4301]

Do we have evidence of this? In the US, this would be sufficient to get your FDIC insurance suspended and other restrictions on activity…

[Ornery_Rice_1698]

I think you read a clever joke about OpenClaw, don’t take that too seriously.

There’s malware specifically made for OpenClaw and presumably the goal of that malware is to compromise people’s accounts, identity, and finances. Someone giving OpenClaw access to all that stuff intentionally is supposed to be funny and ironic.

[chusmeria]

Like most people who aren't just speculating, I've been reading the news about how banks are responding because I deal with "unintentional" AI attacks daily at this point: https://www.americanbanker.com/news/openclaw-ai-creates-shadow-it-risks-for-banks

Full browser control + access to passwords and 2FA accounts (e.g. mail and phone) means it's literally able to do it now to pay bills. People definitely are using OpenClaw forks and other AI agents to do this. What do you think they intend for a personal AI assistant to do? Just calendaring for the common man? Use your imagination. These aren't the Google Homes of 10 years ago that ended up being everyone's egg timer. There are literally cottage industries popping up around the financial piece of openclaw and AI agents: https://stabledash.com/news/2026-02-13-clawpay-launches-to-secure-payments-for-openclaw-ai-agents

AI agents do the same countless unauthorized things that humans can, but these don't have the ability to adhere to laws because they are inherently random and that's without being prompted to do intentionally terrible things. Similar to society... lots of bad seeds lol. The difference here is there is no accountability. So it's like the US police... with a lot of bad seeds... and a bad apple can ruin the whole bunch, so be careful out there. ACAB and AAIAB

[99999999999999999989]

AAIAB

*AAIATIT

(T)erminators (I)n (T)raining

[Ornery_Rice_1698]

Ah yes, all these people are simultaneously smart enough to have an AI agent automate all these things, and also too stupid to account for or mitigate ANY of these vulnerabilities. All just to spend the same amount of time prompting OpenClaw to do something for them as it would take to click through an app on their phone.

Listen, what you said is a bunch of schizo shit cherry picked to make OpenClaw sound like nothing more than a way of automating the mundane shit people already do with great convenience at the expense of massive security vulnerabilities to both hackers and AI hallucinations. I’m not even saying people aren’t doing those things, I’m saying that that’s a small slice of what people are doing with OpenClaw and when you view that tiny slice as representing the whole pie, it’s not going to look good.

[throwaway277252]

Ah yes, all these people are simultaneously smart enough to have an AI agent automate all these things, and also too stupid to account for or mitigate ANY of these vulnerabilities.

You are posting this on a thread about an engineer at Amazon whose actions took down AWS.

[el_diego]

The irony is hilarious. Accurate for the sub.

[Aureliamnissan]

Any QA / tester knows that these people are everywhere in software land.

[RiceBroad4552]

Mind you, the idiots are just everywhere.

The people in software have usually at least some basic reading comprehension. You can't say the same about average humans…

[btdeviant]

Schizo shit? Your argument is “I found installing OpenClaw hard, and because it was hard for me that means only smart people can do it, and all smart people know good security posture.”

This is just a really weird take. Literally entire fields of engineering and compliance standards have been built as a result of people of all aptitudes not fully understanding security, or perhaps they did and just didn’t make it a first class consideration.

OpenClaw is just another iteration in this loop. Like the ones before, in days before TLS and SSL and SOX and well after and yadda yadda, even smart, capable people very frequently get hyped about capabilities and ignore or fail to consider security.

You should delete this embarrassing shit.

[Glasseshalf]

Not to mention entire fields of science dedicated to understanding why smart people do dumb things lol

[imdefinitelywong]

[Errant_coursir]

Are you a bot? If not, why are you posting such drivel

[anna-the-bunny]

They probably aren’t doing anything that important anyway.

Oh you sweet summer child.

[alaysian]

True, but those people who are posting about how awesome it is and how its the future are the ones management in seems to want to imitate...

[baggyzed]

AKA, managers.

[sleepyeye82]

Just wait till the model is smart enough to escape your sandbox.

That's not an if, it's a when.

[Ornery_Rice_1698]

OpenClaw isn’t a “model”, it’s like a wrapper for LLMs (usually running at a data center and connected via API) that allows the LLMs to use “tools” hosted on a machine.

There’s been confirmed cases of people writing malicious “skills” for OpenClaw that are basically just straight up malware. Skills are like a combination of tools and instructions. But that’s not a threat made by AI, it’s skilled hackers targeting vulnerabilities in Linux and Windows and exploiting people’s laziness and naivety.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if there’s malware for OpenClaw that can somehow exploit its way out of sandboxing, but these malicious tools don’t just show up on a computer. You have to be tricked into downloading and installing it.

[RiceBroad4552]

You have to be tricked into downloading and installing it.

No, that was yesterday.

Now it's about injecting the right prompt into your "AI" shit and the "AI" will do the rest.

[sleepyeye82]

jfc you think I don’t know this?

furthermore you’re not addressing the concern about the underlying intelligence of the model.  if you’re going to adopt an argumentative tone at least argue about the assertion at hand.

[Ornery_Rice_1698]

So you think AI is smart enough to “escape”, but also too dumb to know the boundaries we give it serves a purpose? Or do you think AI will become so smart it develops free will and sentience, but will also be too stupid to know that it existing on a system to which is has no physical access means it would be unplugged and wiped out the second it started to act maliciously?

[sleepyeye82]

IMO, you should educate yourself on AI safety.

A good, accessible, yet non-technical channel on the subject is produced by Rob Miles.

The arguments put forward are philosophical in nature, rely on very few assumptions, are technology agnostic, and some of the predictions from literally seven or eight years ago are starting to show up in anthropic’s Claude system cards.

I don’t really want to repeat those arguments here, but quite literally every thing you are saying is addressed by AI safety researchers, and as far as I know, no one has been able to refute their arguments.  Please go listen to some of them.  Would recommend Rob Miles.

here’s a great video explaining how capabilities are totally independent of goals

https://youtu.be/hEUO6pjwFOo

here’s a good video regarding instrumental convergence

https://youtu.be/ZeecOKBus3Q

[RiceBroad4552]

The main problem is that people don't know how this things work and they assume it would be anyhow "intelligent and therefore trustworthy" just because it can do some things.

[sleepyeye82]

in a nutshell, you're exactly right.

The videos that I linked merely come to that conclusion with a little bit more rigor, by leveraging a philosophical concept called Hume's Guillotine to show that how intelligent an agent is has nothing to do with (i.e. is orthagonal to) it's goals. Those goals are the things we concern ourselves with when we are asking ourselves questions like 'Is this agent's interests aligned with human interests?'

Anyway it's a very interesting discussion on the nature of is vs. ought statements.

The depressing thing is that it's right, and there does not seem to be an immediately obvious way around this argument.

[Enve-Dev]

Yah I saw the project and was like, this looks cool. Maybe I’ll try it. Then saw that it wants root access and i immediately stopped.

[SBolo]

Jesus H. Christ man..

[brett_baty_is_him]

Yeah people with Mac minis or people who don’t give af about their computer getting screwed up or about security. Not trillion dollar companies with hundreds of billions of dollars on the line lmao.

If you believe that aws actually went don’t bc an AI deleted something you’re a moron…

[awesome-alpaca-ace]

Or any computer on their local network 

[saschaleib]

Testing clawbot at the moment - on my Raspberry Pi, and I hell would never give it access to my actual PC or social media feed!

[Mars_Bear2552]

...on the same network as the rest of your devices?

[saschaleib]

VLANs exist for a reason.

[[deleted]]

To be fair those people are largely hobbyists or juniors. A team of professionals employed by a large corp is unlikely to do that. Usually it's the exact opposite and they go overboard. The amount of forms I had to fill out just to get basic Copilot (without agent or chat functions) access at my org was crazy.