I love how NanoClaw looks, but I simply can't bring myself to give Israeli software like this access to any of my systems.
Run NanoClaw in Docker Sandboxes
21–30 of 64 posts
Re: Run NanoClaw in Docker Sandboxes
#22The main issue is not so much if it needs to run inside a container or not (and to be honest there are even better isolation models, why not firecracker vm). The main issue is what are you going to do with it. It does not really matter. IMHO, until you figure out useful ways to spend tokens to do useful tasks the runtime should be a second thought. As far as security goes, running LLM in a container in just simply no…
Docker sandboxes uses a MicroVM as an additional isolation layer - its not just containers (as also mentioned in the nanoclaw post)
Re: Run NanoClaw in Docker Sandboxes
#23Docker sandboxes are a neat way to contain AI agents. It spins a dedicated microVM and its Docker daemon for each agent container together with a flexible egress proxy to go with it. I've spent some time reverse engineering it and it's an interesting piece of implementation.
Re: Run NanoClaw in Docker Sandboxes
#24They may seem like small details, but I think a couple novel design decisions are going to prove to be widely adopted and revolutionary. The biggest one (as Karpathy notes) is having skills for how to write a (slack, discord, etc) integration, instead of shipping an implementation for each. Call it “Claude native development” if you will, but “fork and customize” instead of batteries-included platforms/frameworks is…
I have thought of this ship a spec concept. What is we are just trading markdown files instead of code files to implement some feature into our system?
Re: Run NanoClaw in Docker Sandboxes
#25They may seem like small details, but I think a couple novel design decisions are going to prove to be widely adopted and revolutionary. The biggest one (as Karpathy notes) is having skills for how to write a (slack, discord, etc) integration, instead of shipping an implementation for each. Call it “Claude native development” if you will, but “fork and customize” instead of batteries-included platforms/frameworks is…
I get the appeal but I disagree The strength of open source software is collaboration. That many people have tried it, read it, submitted fixes and had those fixes reviewed and accepted. We've all seen LLMs spit out garbage bugs on the first few tries. I've written garbage bugs on my first try too. We all benefit from the review process. I would rather have a battle tested base to start customizing from than having t…
Troubleshooting "works on my machine" issues most be fun when no two people have exactly the same implementation.
Also seems like this will further entrench the top 2 or 3 models. Use something else and your software stack looks different.
Re: Run NanoClaw in Docker Sandboxes
#26You must explicitly state what your threat model is when writing about security tooling, isolation, and sandboxing. This threat model is concerned with running arbitrary code generated by or fetched by an AI agent on host machines which contain secrets, sensitive files, and/or exfoliate data, apps, and systems which should not be lost. What about the threat model where an agent deletes your entire inbox? Or sends you…
You mean like the section which goes into the threat model? The Security Model: Design for Distrust I wrote about this in Don’t Trust AI Agents: when you’re building with AI agents, they should be treated as untrusted and potentially malicious. Prompt injection, model misbehavior, things nobody’s thought of yet. The right approach is architecture that assumes agents will misbehave and contains the damage when they do…
Don‘t you see the contradiction?
I don’t trust the agent so I sandbox it before I gave it the access data to my mail and bank accounts
Re: Run NanoClaw in Docker Sandboxes
#27I've been working on a similar idea to the "claws" but rather than integrating with messaging apps, just make the TUI available e2e encrypted where-ever you are. https://wingthing.ai/ / https://github.com/ehrlich-b/wingthing
I've been thinking about how docker support would work, so I'll check this out!
Re: Run NanoClaw in Docker Sandboxes
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean like the section which goes into the threat model? The Security Model: Design for Distrust I wrote about this in Don’t Trust AI Agents: when you’re building with AI agents, they should be treated as untrusted and potentially malicious. Prompt injection, model misbehavior, things nobody’s thought of yet. The right approach is architecture that assumes agents will misbehave and contains the damage when they do…
Don‘t you see the contradiction? I don’t trust the agent so I sandbox it before I gave it the access data to my mail and bank accounts
Correct
Re: Run NanoClaw in Docker Sandboxes
#29What are the most obvious use cases for Nano/Open-Claw. I can't imagine anything obvious that I'd want to use it for. Is it supposed to run your digital life for you?
Hooking it up to your todo app and texting your bot to manage things. Assuming you’re a heavy todo app person that could benefit from such things.
What do you mean by "manage things"? If you mean adding/updating/completing tasks, why not just do that directly in the app? Or do you mean that it will take your tasks and perform them for you?
Re: Run NanoClaw in Docker Sandboxes
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
what workflows do you implement in Nanoclaw that wouldn't be straightforward to build in Claude?
Straightforward is ambiguous. To replicate NanoClaw would probably only take about a day of work and testing and refining in Claude Code, but that's a day I didn't have to spend to get NanoClaw.
yes but then what do you use nanoclaw for, that's its a better fit for than claude code.