Discussion

NanoClaw Adopts OneCLI Agent Vault

_pdp_: From a security standpoint, I'm glad that people are starting to pay attention to basic security practices.That said, while I'm hardly a fan of MCP (judge for yourself by reviewing my previous comments on the matter), at least its security model was standardised around OAuth, which in my opinion is a good thing, albeit with a few small issues.I personally prefer CLIs, but their security is in fact worse. A lot worse! Sure, we can now store API keys in a vault, but it's not like you can rotate or expire them easily. Plus, the security model around APIs is based on path-based rules, which aren't very effective given that most services use REST-style APIs. This is even worse for GraphQL, JSON-RPC, and similar protocols.It is backwards. I bet we will move from CLIs to something else in about 3-6 months.

rvz: What this appears to be is that we are now reinventing proxies with policy control and the best part of this is the solution (OneCLI) has no security audit. This would give a complete dismissal from the infosec teams to even attempt integrating this vibe-coded slop.As long as the fake keys are known, they can be mapped directly to the real key with the endpoint in OneCLI to exfiltrate the data and you don't need to leak any keys anyway.The correct solution is that there should be no sort of keys in the VM / Container in the first place.> It is backwards. I bet we will move from CLIs to something else in about 3-6 months.The hype around CLIs is just as unfounded as was MCPs and made no-sense just like OpenClaw did. Other than hosting providers almost no-one is making money from OpenClaw and from its use-cases; which is just wasting tokens.We'll move on to the next shiny vibe-coded thing because someone else on X said so.