SKILLEMALL.ai

AC openclaw-security-check

Security self-check for OpenClaw deployments. Audits openclaw.json config and host security in one pass: gateway exposure, auth mode, token strength, channel DM/group policies, file permissions, plaintext secrets, host firewall, SSH hardening, and exposed ports. Outputs a 10-item PASS/WARN/FAIL report with optional auto-fix. Use when: user asks "run a security check", "am I secure?", "audit my config", "check security settings", or on periodic heartbeat/cron. Complements the built-in healthcheck skill (OS-level hardening workflow) with a fast, focused config-and-host audit.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Madoka v1.0.0 3 files · 1 script body ≈ 1 074 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 4 d ago

As a process C 57/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

AnalyzerInfrastructureData and analyticstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
96/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
92
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
57/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 1

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 1
    • low Dangerous commands cmd-privilege SKILL.md:89
      Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions (documentation of a security skill)
      sudo cp /etc/ssh/sshd_config /etc/ssh/sshd_config.bak
      security skill

    Files scanned: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 57/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Failures and branches. 2 branches
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 6 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1074 tokens
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 4 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 580: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 10 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 6 items
    • +4Has examples (7 code blocks)
    • +3All 1 scripts are documented

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 92.

    External checks

    ClawHub: suspicious
    This looks like a legitimate OpenClaw security checker, but it needs review because the bundled script has an unsafe config-parsing bug and can request elevated host inspection during a default audit.
    LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 29 May 2026