[frenchtoast8]

The security team at my company announced recently that OpenClaw was banned on any company device and could not be used with any company login. Later in an unrelated meeting a non technical executive said they were excited about their new Mac Mini they just bought for OpenClaw. When they were told it was banned they sort of laughed and said that obviously doesn't apply to them. No one said anything back. Why would they? This is an executive team that literally instructed the security team to weaken policies so it could be more accommodating of "this new world we live in."

[ropetin]

Similar thing at my company. Someone /very/ high up in the org chart recently said to the entire company that OpenClaw is the future of computing, and specifically called out Moltbook as something amazing and ground breaking. There is literally no way security would ever let OpenClaw in the same room as company systems, never mind actually be installed anywhere with access to our data.

It should be noted that this exec also mentioned we should try "all the AIs", without offering up their credit card to cover the costs. I guess when your base salary is more than most people make in a life time, a few hundred bucks a month to test something doesn't even register.

[xmcp123]

  MoltBook is vibe coded. It passed its own API key via client side JS, and in doing so exposed full read/write access to it’s supabase db, complete with over a million API keys. 

That is groundbreaking for a product held in such high esteem, just not in a good way.

I lack the words to explain my frustration at this timeline.

[ben_w]

I miss the old days of 5.5 years ago when people were skill sceptical of Yudkowsky's AI Box experiment:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24402893

[thegrim33]

Am I missing something or are both of the "we convinced someone to let the AI out" claims missing any logs of what was actually said? Why wouldn't that be shared? You can't just claim something is true because you have proof, but not share the proof.

[ben_w]

You're not missing anything; I can't remember what his reasoning was, just that he gave one, therefore his say-so was only worth as much as your trust that he was honest.

Today though, with headlines like this one in response to events such as it quotes from people in positions such as they are?

That is why I miss the old days, when not believing Yudkowsky's statements about the AI Box experiment only meant your views were compatible with the norms of corporate IT security rules.

[DANmode]

> exposed full read/write access to it’s supabase db, complete with over a million API keys.

When was this lol; I knew it didn’t drop out of the news that fast by inertia alone.

[sheept]

It was revealed by this post by Wiz from the beginning of this month: https://www.wiz.io/blog/exposed-moltbook-database-reveals-mi...

[lioeters]

> 35,000 emails. 1.5M API keys. And 17,000 humans behind the not-so-autonomous AI network

Wow, this is sure a brave new world. I'd just recently heard about the project and they've already been pwned so massively. We're accelerating into a future beyond our control.

[NexRebular]

> vibe coded

s/vibe/slop/;

[xmcp123]

Honestly “vibe coded” is already so derogatory in my eyes that I didn’t even consider another term

[techpression]

Sounds like you work at a music streaming company, but then again, this behavior is probably very wide spread.

[kermatt]

In 3 decades of IT I have never seen such executive excitement combined with recklessness, and it is appalling.

Testing new and cutting edge tech has always been a good idea, but this rampant application of it is the ultimate Running-With-Scissors meme. Risks are not being evaluated, and everything is bleeding edge.

My disgust probably comes from the instinct that the excitement is based on the allure of doing more with less, and layoffs are the only idea so many business have left.

The other camp is excited about selling more stuff because AI has been slapped onto it.

[lokar]

They think they can taste a great divide about to be torn in human society, and they expect to be on the top half.

[jcgrillo]

These execs are the people who previously cared about literally nothing except not looking bad to their bosses. Now they're getting all fired up about something and taking a stand and... it's this? Lol. Lmao. Etc.

[mrguyorama]

Their excitement is that they have hope they can finally get rid of all those stupid humans doing the actual work. American MBA culture has spent decades hammering home an ideology of a worker as a necessary evil to make money, and that those workers are utter scum that deserve no empathy or thought, because greed is "right" and specifically that a hyper greedy system will of course produce the right outcomes naturally.

They take it as a given that they end up on top in such a system, because they've always believed themselves the most important.

They desperately want to encourage this small chance of a future finally free of the gross masses and their horrific desires like "Vacation time" and "Sick time" and "salaries". How dare those lowly trash deign to deserve any of My rightful profit.

The american system has spent about 50 years now self selecting sociopaths at every level, rewarding people who sacrifice themselves for a company to make tiny bits more profit, ensuring that every manager at a high level eats sleeps and dreams the dumb "We are a family" line whether they actually believe it or not. It should not be surprising that the thing they get hyped about is so damn stupid. They don't want what you and I want.

This is the dream of the people who responded to the establishment of basic Labor rights and Social Security with McCarthyism. These people believe, very very genuinely, that you and I are wasting Their resources.

[qmr]

Basil Fawlty vibes.

He could run such an upscale hotel if it weren't for all the pesky guests getting in the way and dragging it down.

[jcgrillo]

Very well said.

[danielmarkbruce]

The mac mini they bought with their own money to run their own stuff? Company policy doesn't apply to their personal computing.

[ncallaway]

I'm sure company policy would technically prohibit them from accessing company resources from their personal computer; or if it does allow access to company resources from their personal computer then their corporate tech policy very likely does apply to their personal computing.

If the executive bought it for a personal mac mini for personal use only, with no interaction with company resources, then the person probably wouldn't have told the story.

[danielmarkbruce]

You might be right. But this (and a few other) weird comments in this thread suggest some folks aren't thinking very clearly on this topic.

[derivagral]

> Company policy doesn't apply to their personal computing.

Sure, it'll come over as "oh I'm just running an experiment" after your infra/security teams notice. Seen @ public company before current ai hype.

[trehalose]

I hope the security team talked to the legal team about that. There is potential for OpenClaw to commit crimes on behalf of the company.

[zx8080]

"Move fast and break things" (c) Zuck

[huey77]

Great time to be a pen tester! Or a black hat hacker for that matter. The branches are drooping further every day

[StopDisinfo910]

I mean innovation going faster than security department is not a new thing.

You have to understand that the security department operates with a fundamentaly different mindset and reality than a business executive. One is responsible for compliance and avoiding adverse events and the other for ensuring the ongoing survival and relevance of the organisation.

Specific waivers for high level members are fully expected. They also have waivers for procurements. It makes sense because they can engage their personnal responsibility for this level of decisions. They don't need the security department to act as their shield.

It's clear that something like Open Claw has the potential to be deeply disruptive so seeing leaders exploring makes sense.