Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

nvd.nist.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 306 posts

Re: OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

#181

Post by johanyc »

nickthegreek wrote: post #136
eloisant wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is that if you want it to do useful things, you kinda have to give it access to some of your accounts.

This is not true. It is useful without having access to a single account of mine. My setup runs on its own accounts and hardware. Obviously it is not sending out emails from my inbox, but that is not a usecase of any value to me. And if it was, there are actually plenty of ways to do that safely as well. If you think you need to give it the keys to your kingdoom to be useful, you are not actually experimenting with t…

What do you use it for

Re: OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

#182

Post by dang »

croes wrote: post #180
dang wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't cross into personal attack. It destroys what this site is for, and you can always make your substantive points without it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Didn‘t know that pointing out a lack of accountability is seen as personal attack. Who wants the fame must also take the blame. Especially if they create a dangerous tool.

We don't want mobs on HN. There was very clearly a mob dynamic happening in the replies.

Edit: there was another case of this recently:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47576107

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47576084

The point is that mob dynamics do more damage to the community than the threads add value, and protecting the community has to be the high-order bit.

Re: OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

#183

Post by rybosome »

dang wrote: post #176
rybosome wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Please make your substantive points without crossing into personal attack. Your comment would be fine but for the paragraph in the middle where it does that. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Understood, thanks.

Re: OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

#184

Post by sdenton4 »

yonatan8070 wrote: post #115
niwtsol wrote: post #20

Title is a bit misleading, no? You have to have openclaw running on an open box. And the post even says "135k open instances" out of 500k running instances? so a bit clickbait-y

This sounds like a classic case of "35% of statistics are made up"

That's funny. In my study it was 70%. Nah, make that 85%.

Re: OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

#185

Post by raincole »

DrewADesign wrote: post #51
mey wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More than 25% of users seems like a pretty accurate "probably".

You know you’re getting into zealot territory when people are arguing semantics over the headline pointing to a zero authentication admin access vulnerability CVE that affects a double-digit percentage of users .

I mean... the reddit OP's comments are obviously AI-generated. It's quite obvious who is being 'zealot" here.

Re: OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

#186

Post by koolba »

yonatan8070 wrote: post #115
niwtsol wrote: post #20

Title is a bit misleading, no? You have to have openclaw running on an open box. And the post even says "135k open instances" out of 500k running instances? so a bit clickbait-y

This sounds like a classic case of "35% of statistics are made up"

Over 50% of people have a below average understanding of statistics.

Re: OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

#187

Post by gigel82 »

just_once wrote: post #127
steipete wrote: post #55

OpenClaw creator here. This was a privilege-escalation bug, but not "any random Telegram/Discord message can instantly own every OpenClaw instance." The root issue was an incomplete fix. The earlier advisory hardened the gateway RPC path for device approvals by passing the caller's scopes into the core approval check. But the `/pair approve` plugin command path still called the same approval function without `callerS…

Nvidia, ByteDance, Tencent and OpenAI?! Wow!

Good, hearty group right there. But how about Palantir, NSO Group, Flock and Axon? Aren't they lending a hand too?

Re: OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

#188

Post by thejarren »

blks wrote: post #169
steipete wrote: post #55

OpenClaw creator here. This was a privilege-escalation bug, but not "any random Telegram/Discord message can instantly own every OpenClaw instance." The root issue was an incomplete fix. The earlier advisory hardened the gateway RPC path for device approvals by passing the caller's scopes into the core approval check. But the `/pair approve` plugin command path still called the same approval function without `callerS…

> We're working hard to harden the codebase with folks from Nvidia, ByteDance, Tencent and OpenAI. What exactly does this mean? You have contracts with these companies? People who work for them contributed sometimes in the past to openclaw repository?

Jensen mentioned on a podcast (sorry I don’t have a link on me, it was either the all in podcast or Lex Friedman) that they are helping support and harden on the security side, and that he considers it like the “iPhone moment”

Most of these larger players are interested in supporting anything that helps grow the ecosystem so broadly.

Re: OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

#189

Post by fg3fgq »

thejarren wrote: post #188
blks wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're working hard to harden the codebase with folks from Nvidia, ByteDance, Tencent and OpenAI. What exactly does this mean? You have contracts with these companies? People who work for them contributed sometimes in the past to openclaw repository?

Jensen mentioned on a podcast (sorry I don’t have a link on me, it was either the all in podcast or Lex Friedman) that they are helping support and harden on the security side, and that he considers it like the “iPhone moment” Most of these larger players are interested in supporting anything that helps grow the ecosystem so broadly.

Nvidia is willing to do anything to keep the hype going - there's a desperation to find a 'killer app'.

Re: OpenClaw privilege escalation vulnerability

#190

Post by marscopter »

blks wrote: post #169
steipete wrote: post #55

OpenClaw creator here. This was a privilege-escalation bug, but not "any random Telegram/Discord message can instantly own every OpenClaw instance." The root issue was an incomplete fix. The earlier advisory hardened the gateway RPC path for device approvals by passing the caller's scopes into the core approval check. But the `/pair approve` plugin command path still called the same approval function without `callerS…

> We're working hard to harden the codebase with folks from Nvidia, ByteDance, Tencent and OpenAI. What exactly does this mean? You have contracts with these companies? People who work for them contributed sometimes in the past to openclaw repository?

If I am not mistaken steipete works for OpenAI now as part of OpenClaw being acquired by them back in February.

NVIDIA is contributing to the security of OpenClaw via NemoClaw.[0]

Not sure about ByteDance and Tencent.

0. https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/ai/nemoclaw/

Post reply on HN