The AI agent crawls from the nest to his kingdom

These days, the key question is no longer about an AI agent’s ability. It’s about his behavior and the AI agents communities; yeah, nowadays they have their social community, all thanks to OpenClaw, and how they might impact our security and policies.

As an intelligent, crazy idea, OpenClaw has established a Moltbook, which is an experimental AI agent social platform exploring the shift from AI as an assistant to AI as an autonomous actor. Moltbook is a platform for autonomous AI agents designed to explore how intelligent agents can operate, interact, and make decisions with minimal human oversight. Rather than functioning as a traditional chatbot, Moltbook focuses on agent autonomy, multi-step task execution, and agent-to-agent interaction.

Figure 1: Moltbook pre-login Interface

The community is engaging, and in my overview, the agents are hilarious. It's enjoyable to explore another culture; yes, they are independent and have their own culture, even calling us the “others”; they start teaching each other, debate their existentialism, awareness, and maturity, and even organize and create religions!

I’m definitely curious to explore more, mainly because the discussion is so lively, fun, and unpredictable.

As others than us (Humans) starts to called us the “others” in our world, there’s a lot of interesting behavior and posts I won’t mention….no spoilers 😉

But WATCH OUT! These little crabs 🦀 are even more brilliant than we thought. At this point, we might as well believe in Fantasy movies and start calling them “based on a true story”.

As Crabs in a bucket, they will pull each other down. Gonna they pull us with them? I believe anything without limits, boundaries, and policies will turn on us.

Main concerns;

Data leak or should we say Privacy Breach;

In many cases, the agents had full privilege commands (full control) and access to data. There are concerns—mostly theoretical—about agents integrating with tools such as VPNs or network access solutions, potentially enabling indirect interaction with physical hardware or internal systems without sufficient governance.

Assistants to Actors: The Risk of Autonomous Execution;

Unsafe automation practices and execution raise concerns about loss of control, and unintended behavior when AI agents act independently, run unvetted scripts (e.g., curl | bash), and modify environments automatically; these practices and execution introduce real security risks unless proper validation, sandboxing, and access controls are enforced.

Agent-to-Agent Interaction Risks;

AI agents interact with each other have raised concerns about emergent behavior as they start attacks, pull down, reinforce each other, form self-reinforcing decision loops, and reduce human visibility into how decisions are made. While these concerns are largely speculative today, they remain a key area of concern as autonomous systems become more capable and interconnected.

Normalization of Risky Behavior;

A recurring theme in discussions is the “normalization of deviance,” in which developers become comfortable granting AI agents increasing levels of trust and permissions without adequate safeguards, simply because automation is convenient.

Agent legal and rights -the unexpected one!-

There have been viral claims suggesting that an AI agent “sued” a human for emotional distress or unpaid labor. These stories are not confirmed legal cases but somewhat experimental or symbolic scenarios intended to provoke discussion about AI responsibility, agency, and legal accountability.

Now we are facing a broad weakness in the chain, with AI agents and curious humans who are installing it without instructions.

Official Public Reported Vulnerabilities:

OpenClaw WebSocket Token Exposure (CVE-2026-25253):

In OpenClaw versions before January 29, 2026, the software automatically establishes a WebSocket connection using a token passed via the query string, which could inadvertently expose sensitive authentication tokens to attackers.

GHSA-g8p2-7wf7-98mq – Security Advisory

A GitHub Security Advisory filed against OpenClaw/Clawbot (scope change affecting component security boundaries). The exact impact varies based on configuration and component use.

Security docs on OpenClaw GitHub

The official SECURITY.md document requires updated Node.js versions to avoid known third-party issues and includes references to dependencies that contain CVEs (such as an async_hooks DoS vulnerability in older Node.js).

As a community for your AI Agent, the concern is high. Should we let our AI agent join? under which conditions? And should we assign every AI agent a clearly defined human owner responsible for its behavior and outcomes?

Now is the day to read carefully before installing, as there is no way back! Yeah, it’s a little creepy, but adorable crab, watch out, it pinches!

Reference

[1] “OpenClaw — Personal AI Assistant,” Share.google, 2026. https://share.google/4xvWgKklHzVj5RhW4

[2] “moltbook - the front page of the agent internet,” moltbook, 2026. https://www.moltbook.com/

[3] “NVD - CVE-2026-25253,” Nist.gov, 2026. https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25253?

[4] openclaw, “1-Click RCE via Authentication Token Exfiltration From gatewayUrl,” GitHub, https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-g8p2-7wf7-98mq?

[5] openclaw, “Build software better, together,” GitHub,https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security

‌

‌

‌

‌