Are prompt injections solved? If OpenClaw is only useful when it has access to your digital life, then why does it matter where it runs? You might as well be asking me to keep my dead man's switch safely on the moon. If you find this software useful, you are sharing a count down to a no good very bad day with everyone else who finds it useful. One zero day prompt injection technique, your e-mail on a distribution list, and that's all she wrote.
brotchie|2 days ago
I essentially have a separate process that syncs my gmail, with gmail body contents encrypted using a key my openclaw doesn't have trivial access to. I then have another process that reads each email from sqlite db, and runs gemini 2 flash lite against it, with some anti-prompt injection prompt + structured data extraction (JSON in a specific format).
My claw can only read the sanitized structured data extraction (which is pretty verbose and can contain passages from the original email).
The primary attack vector is an attacker crafting an "inception" prompt injection. Where they're able to get a prompt injection through the flash lite sanitization and JSON output in such a way that it also prompt injects my claw.
Still a non-zero risk, but mostly mitigates naive prompt injection attacks.
jakeydus|2 days ago
I recognize I’m being pedantic but two layers of the same kind of security (an LLM recognizing a prompt injection attempt) are not the same as solving a security vulnerability.
unknown|2 days ago
[deleted]
Veen|2 days ago
It's annoying, because I love OpenClaw as an idea, but I don't trust it enough to give it what it needs to be useful.
MetaWhirledPeas|2 days ago
teh_infallible|2 days ago
plagiarist|2 days ago
I personally don't see how the daily briefings or whatever are worth the risk.
quietbritishjim|2 days ago
https://xkcd.com/1200/