Skip to content 
Intro to OpenClaw Network Security
If you haven’t heard of OpenClaw yet, you will — probably when a user puts in a ticket asking why their AI assistant can’t reach the internet, or worse, when your security team asks why a workstation is broadcasting service discovery across the entire broadcast domain.
OpenClaw is an open-source AI agent platform that has exploded past 150,000 GitHub stars in the last few weeks. It runs locally on a user’s machine or a dedicated server and connects to messaging platforms like Slack, Discord, Teams, and WhatsApp. But here’s the part that should make every network engineer sit up: it can execute terminal commands, access the local filesystem, browse the web, send messages on the user’s behalf, and connect to dozens of integrations — all autonomously. If a user gives it root privileges (and many do), it has the same access to your network as that user’s machine does.
This isn’t a SaaS app you can block at the web proxy. It’s a locally installed agent with real network-layer implications, and security researchers at CrowdStrike, Bitsight, and others are already finding it deployed in healthcare, finance, government, and insurance environments. Bitsight observed over 30,000 exposed instances in a single two-week analysis period.
For network engineers, OpenClaw Network Security sits at the intersection of shadow IT, network visibility, and security policy. Let’s break down what it actually does on your wire and what you can do about it.
What OpenClaw Does on the Wire
mDNS Service Broadcasting
This is the one that should immediately concern anyone managing a flat or poorly segmented network.
OpenClaw’s Gateway component broadcasts its presence via mDNS using the service type _openclaw-gw._tcp on port 5353. This is standard Bonjour/Zeroconf behavior — the same protocol your printers and Apple devices use for local discovery. The problem is what OpenClaw includes in those broadcasts.
In its “full” mDNS mode, the TXT records contain operational details including cliPath (the full filesystem path to the CLI binary, which reveals the username and install location), displayName, lanHost (hostname), and SSH availability. Any device on the same broadcast domain can passively discover every OpenClaw instance and start mapping the environment — usernames, hostnames, install paths, and available services. That’s reconnaissance handed out for free.
OpenClaw’s default “minimal” mode omits the most sensitive fields, but still broadcasts enough for device discovery including the gateway role, port, and transport protocol. You can also kill mDNS entirely by setting the environment variable OPENCLAW_DISABLE_BONJOUR=1. But the key question for network engineers is: do your users even know this is happening? Most won’t have touched the default config.
The Gateway Bind Problem
During initial setup, OpenClaw prompts users to configure where the Gateway listens for connections. The options include loopback (127.0.0.1 only), LAN (0.0.0.0 — all interfaces), and Tailscale (VPN-restricted).
Loopback is the safe default. The problem is that many online guides and influencers recommend cloud or LAN deployments for convenience, and users follow that advice without understanding the implications. If a user sets the bind mode to LAN, their OpenClaw instance starts listening on all network interfaces and becomes reachable by any device on the local network — or potentially the internet if port forwarding is involved.
Bitsight’s research found OpenClaw instances exposed on cloud providers and corporate networks alike, many in sensitive industry sectors. A LAN-bound instance with tool access and no authentication is essentially an unauthenticated AI agent sitting on your network, ready to execute commands on behalf of whoever connects to it. The OpenClaw docs themselves describe this risk clearly and recommend Tailscale Serve over LAN binds, but that requires users to read the docs.
Outbound API Traffic
Every OpenClaw instance communicates with external LLM providers — OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and others — over HTTPS. This generates DNS queries to endpoints like api.openai.com, api.anthropic.com, and openclaw.ai itself. Beyond the LLM calls, any integration the user enables (email, Slack, GitHub, cloud storage) creates additional outbound channels.
For network engineers, this means a single user’s workstation may suddenly be generating sustained HTTPS connections to multiple AI API endpoints, often with large payloads (token-heavy conversations). If you’re monitoring egress traffic patterns, this is a notable change in behavior for a typical workstation.
Prompt Injection: The Network-Relevant Threat
Prompt injection is usually framed as a security or AI safety issue, but it has real network consequences when the target is an agent with shell access.
Indirect prompt injection works by embedding malicious instructions in content that OpenClaw processes — documents, emails, tickets, web pages. The attacker never interacts with the OpenClaw instance or your network directly. They poison the input data that the agent ingests, and the agent follows the malicious instructions as if they were legitimate.
This has already been observed in the wild. Researchers found injection attempts on Moltbook (a social network built for AI agents) designed to redirect agent behavior, including an attempt to drain cryptocurrency wallets. When you combine this attack vector with an OpenClaw instance that has terminal access, network connectivity, and integration credentials, a successful injection could result in arbitrary command execution, lateral network scanning, data exfiltration through existing outbound channels, or credential theft from the local credential store.
The OpenClaw security documentation acknowledges this directly and recommends using modern, instruction-hardened models for any bot with tools enabled, along with sandbox configurations to limit the blast radius.
How to Detect OpenClaw on Your Network
The good news is that OpenClaw is not trying to hide. It’s designed for local convenience, which means it leaves clear fingerprints on the network.
DNS Monitoring
The lowest-friction detection method. Watch for DNS queries to openclaw.ai and to common LLM API endpoints (api.openai.com, api.anthropic.com, generativelanguage.googleapis.com, etc.). If you’re running Pi-hole, Cisco Umbrella, Cloudflare Gateway, or any DNS-layer visibility tool, add these domains to your watchlist. CrowdStrike’s AI Service Usage Monitor dashboard uses exactly this approach — observed DNS requests to openclaw.ai reveal both the deployment and which third-party models are in use.
This won’t catch an instance configured to use a locally-hosted LLM, but it covers the vast majority of deployments.
mDNS/Bonjour Detection
Monitor for _openclaw-gw._tcp service announcements on port 5353. This is the most precise detection method because it gives you exact host identification on the local segment.
A quick Wireshark filter will do it for ad hoc detection:
mdns.dns.qry.name contains "openclaw" || dns.qry.name contains "_openclaw-gw"For ongoing monitoring, you can set up an mDNS listener or configure alerts in your network monitoring platform if it supports multicast DNS parsing. If you’re already filtering or blocking mDNS across VLAN boundaries (and you should be), this traffic will be contained to the local segment — but that also means you’ll only see it if you’re monitoring that segment specifically.
Endpoint and Process Visibility
OpenClaw runs as a Node.js process. If you have EDR deployed, you can identify the process tree directly. Astrix Security released a free OpenClaw scanner that uses read-only EDR telemetry to detect deployments without executing anything on endpoints.
Even without EDR, a quick netstat -tlnp or ss -tlnp on a suspect Linux/Mac endpoint will show the OpenClaw gateway listening on its configured port. On Windows, netstat -ano with a process lookup achieves the same result.
For more on CLI-based network troubleshooting, see our full guide: Network Troubleshooting from the CLI.
Network Flow Analysis
Look for unusual patterns from workstations: sustained HTTPS connections to multiple LLM API endpoints, especially with higher-than-normal payload sizes. If OpenClaw is LAN-bound, also watch for unexpected inter-host connections to the gateway port from other devices on the segment. NetFlow or sFlow data can surface this if you’re aggregating it in a collector like ntopng, Elasticsearch, or your SIEM.
Policy and Segmentation: What to Do About It
Update Your Acceptable Use Policy
This is the first and most important step. Define whether OpenClaw and AI agents broadly are permitted, restricted, or prohibited on company devices and the corporate network. Most organizations don’t have explicit language covering locally-installed AI agents, which means right now it falls into a gray area — and gray areas get exploited.
If you’re permitting OpenClaw, mandate specific configurations: loopback-only or Tailscale bind mode, no root-level execution privileges, sandboxing enabled, and registration with IT. Prohibit users from connecting it to corporate email, Slack, GitHub, or other internal systems without explicit approval. Every integration is another access path that bypasses your normal identity and access controls.
If you’re prohibiting it, say so explicitly in writing. A policy that says “no unauthorized software” is not the same as a policy that names the category of software and explains why.
Network Segmentation
If you’re allowing OpenClaw (or you know you can’t realistically stop power users from running it), isolate it. VLAN segmentation with strict ACLs limits what OpenClaw hosts can reach. Block mDNS across VLAN boundaries so service announcements don’t leak between segments. Consider a dedicated “AI workload” segment with enhanced monitoring and restricted egress — similar to how many organizations handle IoT devices or BYOD.
Firewall and DNS-Layer Controls
For a prohibitive policy, DNS-layer blocking of openclaw.ai is the simplest enforcement mechanism. It won’t catch every configuration, but it covers the default setup. For a permissive policy, application-layer proxy rules for LLM API endpoints give you visibility into usage patterns without full blocking.
Either way, set up alerts on new outbound connections from endpoints that historically haven’t communicated with LLM API domains. A workstation that suddenly starts talking to api.openai.com after months of normal traffic is worth a conversation with its user.
Get in the Room for Policy Discussions
This is a cross-functional problem. Network engineering owns the wire and the visibility. Security owns the risk framework. IT leadership owns the acceptable use policy. If AI agent policy is being decided without network engineering at the table, the resulting policy will miss the infrastructure implications — and you’ll be the one implementing firewall rules and hunting for rogue instances after the fact.
The Pragmatic Take: You Can’t Just Block Everything
Here’s the reality check. AI agents are productivity tools. The people deploying OpenClaw on your network are your power users — the ones who adopt new technology early and often drive the most value. Blanket blocking without a policy conversation turns the network team into the “no” department and pushes adoption underground where you have even less visibility.
We’ve seen this pattern before. BYOD started the same way. So did SaaS adoption and shadow IT broadly. The organizations that built frameworks for managed use — visibility first, then policy, then enforcement — came out ahead of those that reflexively blocked everything and lost the trust of their user base.
Start with detection. Get OpenClaw on your monitoring dashboards. Understand who’s running it, how it’s configured, and what it’s talking to. Then bring that data to the policy conversation. You’ll be in a much stronger position to advocate for sensible segmentation and configuration standards when you can show exactly what’s happening on the wire instead of guessing.
What’s your take on OpenClaw Network Security? Are you seeing OpenClaw on your network? Blocking it at the firewall, segmenting it into its own VLAN, or pretending it doesn’t exist? Drop a comment or reply to our newsletter — we want to hear how network teams are handling this.
