Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » OpenClaw » AIO1772346229

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (AIO1772346229)

The details regarding individual company incidents & reports gives you full view from every side.

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-17
Company Score Before Incident765 / 1000
Company Score After Incident748 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERAIO1772346229
Type of Cyber IncidentVulnerability
ATTACK VECTORMalicious website visit
DATA EXPOSEDAPI keys, private messages, files,...
INCIDENT DATE28/02/2026
STATUSpublished

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of OpenClaw's Vulnerability and lateral movement inside company's environment.
  • Overview of affected data sets, including SSNs and PHI, and why they materially increase incident severity.
  • How Rankiteo’s incident engine converts technical details into a normalized incident score.
  • How this cyber incident impacts OpenClaw Rankiteo cyber scoring and cyber rating.
  • Rankiteo’s MITRE ATT&CK correlation analysis for this incident, with associated confidence level.

Full Incident Analysis Transcript

In this Rankiteo incident briefing, we review the OpenClaw breach identified under incident ID AIO1772346229.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of OpenClaw's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/aiopenclaw, the number of followers: 40959, the industry type: Technology, Information and Internet and the number of employees: 17 employees

After the initial compromise, the video explains how Rankiteo's incident engine converts technical details into a normalized incident score. The incident score before the incident was 765 and after the incident was 748 with a difference of -17 which is could be a good indicator of the severity and impact of the incident.

In the next step of the video, we will analyze in more details the incident and the impact it had on OpenClaw and their customers.

OpenClaw Users recently reported "OpenClaw Zero-Click Vulnerability Exposes Developer AI Agents to Remote Hijacking", a noteworthy cybersecurity incident.

A newly identified zero-click vulnerability in OpenClaw, a local WebSocket-based AI agent framework, allows attackers to compromise developer systems with minimal interaction.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Developer systems running OpenClaw, linked macOS/iOS devices, and exposing API keys, private messages, files, system commands, contact data.

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how teams are taking away lessons such as Highlights risks in AI agent frameworks where a single web visit can grant full control to threat actors.

Finally, we try to match the incident with the MITRE ATT&CK framework to see if there is any correlation between the incident and the MITRE ATT&CK framework.

The MITRE ATT&CK framework is a knowledge base of techniques and sub-techniques that are used to describe the tactics and procedures of cyber adversaries. It is a powerful tool for understanding the threat landscape and for developing effective defense strategies.

MITRE ATT&CK® Correlation Analysis

Rankiteo's analysis has identified several MITRE ATT&CK tactics and techniques associated with this incident, each with varying levels of confidence based on available evidence. Under the Initial Access tactic, the analysis identified Drive-by Compromise (T1189) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating exploits a malicious PowerShell script that executes when a developer visits a compromised or malicious website. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Command and Scripting Interpreter: PowerShell (T1059.001) with high confidence (95%), supported by evidence indicating malicious PowerShell script that executes when a developer visits a compromised or malicious website. Under the Persistence tactic, the analysis identified Create or Modify System Process: Windows Service (T1543.003) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating establishes a WebSocket gateway on localhost, acting as a command-and-control (C2) hub and Boot or Logon Autostart Execution: Registry Run Keys / Startup Folder (T1547.001) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating modifies files and establishes persistence. Under the Privilege Escalation tactic, the analysis identified Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism: Bypass User Account Control (T1548.002) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating bypasses User Account Control (UAC) via CoGetObjectContext and Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068) with moderate to high confidence (85%), supported by evidence indicating gains SYSTEM-level access by exploiting the Kernel Security Device Driver. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Indicator Removal: File Deletion (T1070.004) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating removes traces of compromise using commands like winget uninstall and Rootkit (T1014) with moderate to high confidence (85%), supported by evidence indicating deploys a rootkit to maintain persistence under \DosDevices\c such as. Under the Credential Access tactic, the analysis identified Input Capture: Keylogging (T1056.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating logs keystrokes and intercepts data and Unsecured Credentials: Credentials In Files (T1552.001) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating search Slack history for API keys. Under the Collection tactic, the analysis identified Data from Local System (T1005) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating exfiltrate files from linked devices, read private messages and Screen Capture (T1113) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating intercepts data, exposes system commands, file access, and contact data. Under the Command and Control tactic, the analysis identified Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (T1071.001) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating establishes a WebSocket gateway on localhost, acting as a command-and-control (C2) hub. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041) with high confidence (90%), supported by evidence indicating exfiltrate files from linked devices, data exfiltration confirmed. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Resource Hijacking (T1496) with moderate to high confidence (80%), supported by evidence indicating execute arbitrary shell commands, full system control. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Drive-by Compromise (90%)
Execution
Command and Scripting Interpreter: PowerShell (95%)
Persistence
Create or Modify System Process: Windows Service (80%)
Boot or Logon Autostart Execution: Registry Run Keys / Startup Folder (70%)
Privilege Escalation
Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism: Bypass User Account Control (90%)
Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (85%)
Defense Evasion
Indicator Removal: File Deletion (80%)
Rootkit (85%)
Credential Access
Input Capture: Keylogging (90%)
Unsecured Credentials: Credentials In Files (80%)
Collection
Data from Local System (90%)
Screen Capture (70%)
Command and Control
Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (90%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (90%)
Impact
Resource Hijacking (80%)

Sources & References