Live data from Hacker News

Sandboxes won't save you from OpenClaw

tachyon.so

1–10 of 108 posts

Re: Sandboxes won't save you from OpenClaw

#2
Yes we need capability based auth on the systems we use.

I'm sure we will get them but only for use with in-house agents, i.e. GMail and Google Pay will get agentic capabilities but they'll only work with Gemini, and only Siri will be able to access your Apple cloud stuff without handing over access to everything, and if you want your grocery shopping handled for you, Rufus is there.

Maybe you will be able to link Copilot to Gemini for an extra $2.99 a month.

Re: Sandboxes won't save you from OpenClaw

#3
Agree, that’s why we’re building grith.ai

Sandboxing alone isn’t the right approach… a multi-faceted approach is what works.

What we’ve found that does work is automation on the approval process but only with very strong guards in place… approval fatigue is another growing problem - users simply clicking approve on all requests.

Re: Sandboxes won't save you from OpenClaw

#4
Security models from SaaS companies based on having a bunch of random bytes/numbers with coarse-grained permissions, and valid for a very long time are already a bad idea. With agents, secrets/tokens really need to be minted with time-limited, scope-limited, OpenID/smart-contract based trust relationships so they will fare much better in this new world. Unfortunately, this is a struggle still for most major vendors (e.g., Github gh CLI still doesn't let you use Github Apps out-of-the box)

Re: Sandboxes won't save you from OpenClaw

#6
Call me overly cautious, but as someone using OpenClaw I never for a moment considered hooking it up to real external services as me. Instead I put it on one server and created a second server with shared services like Gitea and other self-hosted tools that are only accessible over a tailnet and openclaw is able to use those services. When I needed it to use a real external service I have created a limited separate account for it. But not a chance in the world am I going to just let it have full access to my own accounts on everything.

Re: Sandboxes won't save you from OpenClaw

#7
One promising direction is building abstraction layers to sandbox individual tools, even those that don't have an API already. For example, you could build/vibe code a daemon that takes RPC calls to open Amazon in a browser, search for an item, and add it to your cart. You could even let that be partially "agentic" (e.g. an LLM takes in a list of search results, and selects the one to add to cart).

If you let OpenClaw access the daemon, sure it could still get prompt injected to add a bunch of things to your cart, but if the daemon is properly segmented from the OpenClaw user, you should be pretty safe from getting prompt injected to purchase something.

Re: Sandboxes won't save you from OpenClaw

#8

Call me overly cautious, but as someone using OpenClaw I never for a moment considered hooking it up to real external services as me . Instead I put it on one server and created a second server with shared services like Gitea and other self-hosted tools that are only accessible over a tailnet and openclaw is able to use those services. When I needed it to use a real external service I have created a limited separate…

That's not overly cautious, that's smart. I do not think most OpenClaw users are taking the same sensible measures as you are.

Re: Sandboxes won't save you from OpenClaw

#9
This is a general thing with agent orchestration. A good sandbox does something for your local environment, but nothing for remote machines/APIs.

I can't say this loudly enough, "an LLM with untrusted input produces untrusted output (especially tool calls)." Tracking sources of untrusted input with LLMs will be much harder than traditional [SQL] injection. Read the logs of something exposed to a malicious user and you're toast.

Re: Sandboxes won't save you from OpenClaw

#10
post #3

Agree, that’s why we’re building grith.ai Sandboxing alone isn’t the right approach… a multi-faceted approach is what works. What we’ve found that does work is automation on the approval process but only with very strong guards in place… approval fatigue is another growing problem - users simply clicking approve on all requests.

Interesting. How are the security filters implemented?
Post reply on HN