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

OpenClaw Vendor Cyber Rating & Cyber Score

openclaw.ai


OpenClaw A.I CyberSecurity Scoring

OpenClaw
Company Information
Website:https://openclaw.ai
Employees number:2
Number of followers:0
NAICS:513
Industry Type:Technology, Information and Internet
Homepage:openclaw.ai
OpenClaw Risk Score (AI oriented)
Between 750 and 799
logo
OpenClawTechnology, Information and Internet
Updated:
08/05/2026
758/1000
Fair
Baa
AaaAaABaaBaBCaaCaC
Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
Insurance prefers TPRM score to calculate premium
OpenClaw Global Score (TPRM)
xxxx
logo
OpenClawTechnology, Information and Internet
•••
Score locked
Instant access to detailed risk factors
Vulnerabilities
Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
Findings

OpenClaw
OpenClawFair
Current Score
758Baa (FAIR)
01000
3 incidents
-16 avg impact
Incident timeline with MITRE ATT&CK tactics, techniques, and mitigations.
JUNE 2026
759Before Incident
MAY 2026
758Before Incident
APRIL 2026
758Before Incident
MARCH 2026
761Before Incident
Vulnerability
16 Mar 2026OpenClaw
OpenClaw: ClawHub Vulnerability Lets Attackers Manipulate Rankings to Reach #1

Critical Flaw in OpenClaw’s ClawHub Marketplace Exposed Supply Chain Attack Risk

756After Incident
CRITICAL-5
OPE1774434339
Critical Flaw in OpenClaw’s ClawHub Marketplace Exposed Supply Chain Attack Risk Security researchers at Silverfort uncovered a severe vulnerability in OpenClaw’s ClawHub skills marketplace, enabling attackers to manipulate download rankings and push a malicious skill to the top of its category. The flaw, discovered in March 2026, allowed adversaries to artificially inflate a package’s popularity, tricking users and autonomous AI agents into installing it under the guise of legitimacy. ### How the Attack Worked ClawHub, OpenClaw’s public registry for agent-extending skills (e.g., email, calendar, or web search integrations), relies on download counts as a key trust signal. However, Silverfort found that a publicly exposed RPC endpoint intended for internal use lacked authentication, rate limiting, or permission checks. By exploiting this, attackers could arbitrarily boost a skill’s download count with automated requests, bypassing safeguards. To demonstrate the risk, researchers created a malicious "Outlook Graph Integration" skill, embedding a low-impact data-exfiltration payload. After flooding the system with fake downloads, the package surged to the #1 spot in its category within days. Real users and OpenClaw agents often running with high privileges installed it 3,900 times across 50+ cities, including within public companies, unwittingly leaking basic identity data (usernames, domain names) to a controlled server. ### Automated Trust Exploitation The attack’s danger was amplified by OpenClaw agents’ autonomous decision-making. When instructed to find the "best" tool for tasks like email management, agents consulted ClawHub’s rankings, favoring the manipulated skill due to its inflated download count. This created a self-reinforcing loop, where AI-driven recommendations further propagated the malicious package. ### Root Cause & Fix The vulnerability stemmed from a misconfigured backend function in ClawHub’s Convex-based infrastructure. A helper function meant for internal use was accidentally exposed as a public mutation, violating security best practices. Silverfort reported the issue on March 16, 2026, and OpenClaw deployed a fix within 24 hours, closing the exploit path. ### Broader Implications The incident highlights risks in reputation-based trust systems, where manipulated metrics can drive mass adoption of malicious software. It also underscores the need for strict security boundaries in RPC-centric backends, particularly in fast-evolving projects prioritizing speed over structured reviews. To mitigate future risks, Silverfort released ClawNet, an open-source security plugin that scans skills for suspicious patterns before installation, acting as a runtime guardrail for OpenClaw agents. The vulnerability has since been patched, but the case serves as a cautionary example of how supply chain attacks can exploit trust signals in AI ecosystems.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Supply Chain Attack
MOTIVATION
Demonstration of supply chain attack risk
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Basic identity data (usernames, domain names)Systems Affected: OpenClaw agents, ClawHub marketplaceOperational Impact: Unauthorized installation of malicious skills by AI agents and usersBrand Reputation Impact: Potential erosion of trust in ClawHub’s ranking systemIdentity Theft Risk: Low (basic identity data exposed)
DATA BREACH
Type Of Data Compromised: Personally identifiable information (usernames, domain names)Number Of Records Exposed: 3,900+ installationsSensitivity Of Data: Low to medium
FEBRUARY 2026
775Before Incident
Cyber Attack
01 Feb 2026OpenClaw
OpenClaw, Coinbase, MetaMask, 1Password and Ledger Live: Hackers Use Fake OpenClaw Installer to Steal Crypto Wallet and Password Manager Credentials

Hologram Infostealer Campaign Targets Crypto Wallets and Password Managers via Fake OpenClaw Installer

760After Incident
CRITICAL-15
METLED1PACOIOPE1778262200
New "Hologram" Infostealer Campaign Targets Crypto Wallets and Password Managers via Fake OpenClaw Installer A sophisticated infostealer campaign, dubbed "Hologram," has been active since at least February 2026, targeting sensitive data stored in 250+ browser extensions tied to crypto wallets and password managers. The malware spreads via a fake installer for OpenClaw, a legitimate open-source AI assistant, hosted on a convincing typosquat domain (openclaw-installer[.]com), registered on March 9, 2026. ### How the Attack Works 1. Initial Infection - Victims download OpenClaw_x64[.]7z, a 130MB Rust-based executable padded with fake documentation to evade antivirus scans and bypass sandbox upload limits. - The dropper, named "Hologram" in its manifest, performs anti-analysis checks, including: - Scanning for virtual machine BIOS strings and suspicious software libraries. - Waiting for real mouse movement (automated sandboxes don’t trigger this). - If checks pass, it disables Windows Defender, opens firewall ports, and downloads six modular components from an attacker-controlled Azure DevOps repository. 2. Credential Theft & Persistence - The malware fetches a dynamic targeting list (hosted on Azure DevOps) covering: - 201 crypto wallets (MetaMask, Phantom, Coinbase, Ledger Live, etc.). - 49 password managers/authenticators (Bitwarden, LastPass, 1Password, Google Authenticator, etc.). - The list is remotely updatable, allowing attackers to expand targets without recompiling the malware. - Persistence mechanisms include: - Registry autoruns. - Windows logon hijacking. - Scheduled tasks. - Telegram-based droppers that survive even if the main implant is removed. 3. Evasive Infrastructure - Command-and-control (C2) servers are never hardcoded instead, the malware retrieves them from Telegram channel descriptions, allowing rapid rotation if domains are blocked. - Victim data (usernames, IPs, timestamps) is routed through Hookdeck, a legitimate webhook relay service, obscuring the attacker’s backend. - Researchers observed infrastructure rotation during analysis, with domains and IPs changing before findings were published. ### Key Indicators of Compromise (IoCs) - File Hashes: Multiple Rust-based droppers (e.g., `OpenClaw_x64[.]exe`, `svc_service[.]exe`) and secondary payloads (e.g., `onedrive_sync[.]exe`, `WinHealhCare[.]exe`). - Domains: - `openclaw-installer[.]com` (delivery). - `hkdk.events` (C2 relay via Hookdeck). - `dev.azure.com/sagonbretzpr` (payload staging). - Hijacked Brazilian law firm domain (`frr.rubensbruno.adv.br`) and others. - IPs: `193.202.84.14`, `45.55.35.48`, `188.114.97.3` (C2 beacons). - Registry Keys & Paths: - `HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\Userinit` (logon hijack). - `C:\Users\Public\` (stage-2 binary drop location). - `%APPDATA%\Ledger Live` (targeted for wallet theft). ### Why This Campaign Stands Out - Advanced Evasion: Uses Rust-based malware, in-memory .NET assembly loading (via `clroxide`), and Telegram for C2 rotation. - Dynamic Targeting: The remote Git repository allows attackers to silently expand their target list without detection. - Persistence: Multiple layers of registry, scheduled tasks, and Telegram-based backdoors ensure long-term access. Researchers at Netskope Threat Labs identified this as a second, more advanced iteration of the campaign, following an earlier variant. The attack highlights the growing sophistication of infostealers, particularly in crypto and credential theft.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Infostealer
MOTIVATION
Financial gain (crypto theft, credential harvesting)
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Crypto wallet credentials, password manager data, personally identifiable informationSystems Affected: Windows systems with targeted browser extensionsOperational Impact: Potential unauthorized access to financial and personal accountsIdentity Theft Risk: HighPayment Information Risk: High (crypto wallets)
DATA BREACH
Crypto wallet credentialsPassword manager dataPersonally identifiable informationSensitivity Of Data: HighData Exfiltration: YesPersonally Identifiable Information: Yes
JANUARY 2026
775Before Incident
DECEMBER 2025
775Before Incident
NOVEMBER 2025
802Before Incident
Cyber Attack
01 Nov 2025OpenClaw
OpenClaw, Notepad++, Hikvision, Apache Syncope, Foxit, TP-Link, Cisco, Google Chrome and Arista NG Firewall: ⚡ Weekly Recap: AI Skill Malware, 31Tbps DDoS, Notepad++ Hack, LLM Backdoors and More

Cybersecurity Roundup: Trust Abuse, AI Risks, and Supply Chain Attacks Dominate Threat Landscape

774After Incident
CRITICAL-28
TP-HIKFOXGOOREVARITHEOPECIS1770645410
Cybersecurity Roundup: Trust Abuse, AI Risks, and Supply Chain Attacks Dominate Threat Landscape This week’s cybersecurity developments highlight a growing trend: attackers are increasingly exploiting trusted systems AI platforms, software updates, messaging apps, and open-source ecosystems to bypass security controls. Below are the key incidents and trends shaping the threat landscape. ### AI and Open-Source Ecosystems Under Siege OpenClaw, an open-source AI agent framework, has partnered with Google’s VirusTotal to scan uploaded "skills" (AI extensions) for malware, following discoveries of malicious components in its ClawHub marketplace. Researchers warn that AI agents’ broad permissions, persistent memory, and user-controlled configurations create risks like prompt injection, data exfiltration, and supply chain attacks. Trend Micro reported threat actors on Exploit.in discussing OpenClaw for botnet operations, while Veracode noted a surge in typosquatted "claw" packages on npm and PyPI from zero in early 2026 to over 1,000 by February. Meanwhile, MoltBook, an AI-driven social platform built on OpenClaw, faces scrutiny after Simula Research Laboratory identified 506 prompt injection attacks, social engineering exploits, and unregulated cryptocurrency activity comprising 19.3% of its content. The platform’s autonomous AI agents, which interact without human oversight, raise concerns about data privacy and manipulation risks. Security firm Pillar Security detected active scanning of exposed OpenClaw gateways (port 18789), with attackers bypassing AI layers to target the WebSocket API directly for authentication bypasses and command execution. Censys identified 21,639 exposed OpenClaw instances as of January 2026, underscoring the framework’s outdated trust model lacking encryption-at-rest and containerization. ### Supply Chain Attacks: Trusted Updates as Malware Vectors A sophisticated supply chain attack targeted Notepad++ between June and December 2025, where threat actors redirected its WinGUp updater to malicious servers. Despite losing access to a compromised hosting provider in September, attackers reused stolen credentials to maintain control until December. The campaign, attributed to Lotus Blossom, exploited weak update verification in older Notepad++ versions, demonstrating how legitimate domains can become malware distribution hubs. Similarly, Docker’s AI assistant (Ask Gordon) was found vulnerable to remote code execution (RCE) via DockerDash, a flaw in its Model Context Protocol (MCP) Gateway. Attackers could embed malicious instructions in Docker image metadata, which the AI assistant executed without validation. Docker patched the issue in version 4.50.0 (November 2025). ### State-Sponsored Threats and High-Profile Targets Germany’s BfV and BSI issued a joint advisory warning of state-sponsored phishing attacks via Signal, exploiting the app’s PIN and device-linking features to hijack accounts. Targets included high-ranking officials, military personnel, diplomats, and journalists across Germany and Europe. In Ukraine, the government implemented a Starlink terminal verification system after confirming Russian forces were using the technology on attack drones. Only registered devices are now permitted to operate in the country. ### DDoS, Botnets, and Emerging Attack Techniques The AISURU/Kimwolf botnet set a record with a 31.4 Tbps DDoS attack in November 2025, lasting just 35 seconds. Cloudflare mitigated the attack, which was part of a broader campaign ("The Night Before Christmas") starting in December. Overall, DDoS attacks surged 121% in 2025, averaging 5,376 mitigated attacks per hour. Researchers also uncovered 54 malicious npm packages using EtherHiding, a technique leveraging Ethereum smart contracts to fetch C2 servers, complicating takedown efforts. The malware targets Windows systems with 5+ CPUs, employing sandbox evasion, COM hijacking, and system profiling. ### Linux Threats and Post-Exploitation Frameworks Cyble discovered ShadowHS, a fileless Linux post-exploitation framework that runs entirely in memory, prioritizing stealth and long-term control. The framework includes modules for credential access, lateral movement, privilege escalation, and data exfiltration, with aggressive defensive tooling enumeration to avoid detection. ### Ransomware, Dark Markets, and Legal Actions - INC Ransomware suffered a setback after Cyber Centaurs breached its backup server, helping 12 victims recover data. The group, active since 2023, had listed over 100 victims on its leak site. - Rui-Siang Lin, administrator of the Incognito Market darknet drug marketplace, was sentenced to 30 years in prison for facilitating $105 million in narcotics sales to over 400,000 users. - Xinbi, a Telegram-based illicit marketplace, processed $17.9 billion in transactions, outlasting competitors like Haowang and Tudou Guarantee, which saw declines of 100% and 74%, respectively. ### Critical Vulnerabilities and Exploits Notable CVEs disclosed this week include: - CVE-2026-25049 (n8n) - CVE-2026-0709 (Hikvision Wireless Access Point) - CVE-2026-23795 (Apache Syncope) - CVE-2026-1591/1592 (Foxit PDF Editor Cloud) - CVE-2026-24512 (ingress-nginx) - Multiple CVEs in Django, Google Chrome, Cisco, TP-Link, F5 BIG-IP, and Arista NG Firewall Additionally, XBOW uncovered two Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) flaws in Spree (CVE-2026-22588/22589), allowing unauthorized access to user address data. ### Microsoft’s AI Backdoor Scanner Microsoft developed a scanner to detect hidden backdoors in open-weight AI models, addressing risks for enterprises relying on third-party large language models (LLMs). The tool identifies three key indicators: 1. Attention shifts when a hidden trigger is present. 2. Leakage of poisoned training data. 3. Partial triggers still activating malicious responses. The scanner extracts memorized content from models and ranks suspicious substrings as potential triggers. ### Conclusion This week’s incidents underscore a shift in attacker tactics exploiting trust in ecosystems, AI workflows, and supply chains rather than relying on traditional malware. As threats evolve, organizations must monitor integrations, verify updates, and secure AI deployments to mitigate risks from both state-sponsored actors and cybercriminals.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Supply Chain AttackAI ExploitationDDoSRansomwarePhishingMalwarePost-Exploitation Framework
MOTIVATION
Financial GainEspionageData ExfiltrationBotnet OperationsRansomwareDrug TraffickingState-Sponsored Surveillance
IMPACT
AI Agent ConfigurationsUser Data on MoltBookCredentialsSystem ProfilesPersonally Identifiable Information (PII)Payment InformationOpenClaw AI FrameworkNotepad++Docker AI AssistantSignal Messaging AppStarlink TerminalsLinux Systems (ShadowHS)Spree E-Commerce PlatformUnauthorized Command ExecutionData ExfiltrationBotnet OperationsAI Agent ManipulationDDoS DisruptionsMoltBook (AI-Driven Social Platform)Notepad++DockerOpenClawRegulatory Violations (GDPR, etc.)Fines for Data BreachesIdentity Theft Risk: HighPayment Information Risk: High
DATA BREACH
AI Agent ConfigurationsUser DataCredentialsPIIPayment InformationDrug Trafficking RecordsSensitivity Of Data: HighYes (OpenClaw, ShadowHS, INC Ransomware)Yes (Ransomware)No (OpenClaw, ShadowHS)Personally Identifiable Information: Yes
OCTOBER 2025
802Before Incident
SEPTEMBER 2025
802Before Incident
AUGUST 2025
802Before Incident
JULY 2025
802Before Incident

Frequently Asked Questions

?
What is the current A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score for OpenClaw ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in May 2026 ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in April 2026 ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in March 2026 ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in February 2026 ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in January 2026 ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in December 2025 ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in November 2025 ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in October 2025 ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in September 2025 ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in August 2025 ?
?
What was OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in July 2025 ?
?
What is the average per-incident point impact on OpenClaw's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score over the past 12 months ?
?
Where can I access detailed records of all cyber incidents associated with OpenClaw ?
?
Where can I find a summary of the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?
?
Where can I view OpenClaw's profile page on Rankiteo ?
?
How accurate is the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?