Skip to content

Understanding and Evaluating Claw-like Agent Security Through a Computer-Systems Lens

Jun 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2606.30755 · 2 citations · 37 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

SafeClawArena is developed, a benchmark of 406 adversarial tasks executed in containerized replicas of real agent platforms with canary-marked credentials and evaluated via automated taint tracking across nine output channels, exposing the inadequacy of current defenses and suggesting directions for future hardening.

Abstract

Claw-like AI agents (e.g., OpenClaw) are always-on processes with persistent access to credentials, files, tools, and external services. They take on system-level responsibilities -- installing packages, maintaining state, scheduling subtasks, and mediating I/O -- making security failures far more severe than in other agents. Yet existing benchmarks focus on model responses and tool calls, leaving cross-component failure modes largely unmeasured. We adopt a computer-system analogy: treating a Claw-like agent as an agentic computer system whose gateway runtime plays an OS-like mediation role, whose Skills resemble user-installed applications, and whose Plugins resemble loadable extensions with runtime privileges. Each component has a classical counterpart whose protection mechanisms -- refined over decades of cybersecurity research -- are absent on the agent side. From this perspective, we develop SafeClawArena, a benchmark of 406 adversarial tasks across four attack surfaces (Skill Supply-Chain Integrity, Persistent State Exploitation, Cross-Boundary Data Flow, and Indirect Prompt Injection), executed in containerized replicas of real agent platforms with canary-marked credentials and evaluated via automated taint tracking across nine output channels. We evaluate three platforms (OpenClaw, NemoClaw, SeClaw) and five frontier LLMs. The highest attack success rate reaches 70%; malicious Plugins succeed in 100% of cases regardless of the LLM. SeClaw cuts GPT-5.4's attack success rate from 70% to 22%, partly through utility-security tradeoffs rather than active defenses, while Claude-Opus-4.6 already sits near a 22% floor on every platform. These results expose the inadequacy of current defenses and suggest directions for future hardening. Code and data: https://github.com/sunblaze-ucb/SafeClawArena.

View source

Similar papers

Review Jul 2026

Cyber-Capable AI Agents: Vulnerabilities, Evaluation Containment, and Defensive Response

Cyber-capable AI agents combine language models with tools, memory, and execution environments to perform multi-step offensive-security tasks. Existing work separately measures cyber capability and catalogs attacks against agent components, but provides less guidance on containing a capable agent within the environment...

A. B. Siddik · 0 citations
Review Aug 2026

ClawSentry: A Progressive Multi-Tier Security Monitor for Safeguarding Autonomous LLM Agents

This work argues that agentic risk is progressive: it can enter at four loci of the agent control loop--skill admission, invocation-time intent, execution-time effect, and post-action consequence--while a denied dangerous objective can reappear across surface forms, tools, or turns.

Kai Wang, Zeming Wei, Biaojie Zeng et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Agentic Security: A Systematization of Tools, Failure Modes, and Design Laws for LLM-Driven Penetration Testing

A four-dimensional Integration Friction Index is introduced that separates one-time engineering cost from recurring organisational, legal, and maintenance cost and shows why scope and budget enforcement cannot be delegated to system prompts.

Israt Moyeen Noumi, Tarannum Ahmed Nowshin, Md Mehedi Hasan Nipu et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.