Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
19/07/2026 11:05 am
I've been trying to understand how different vulnerability scanners work for a university project. I keep seeing references to OpenClaw's "semantic" approach versus traditional pattern matching.
From my basic tests on a few old CVE PoCs (like CVE-2014-0160 - Heartbleed), a plain grep for "memcpy(bp, payload, payload_length)" finds the bug instantly. OpenClaw's abstract interpretation took much longer and seemed to overcomplicate it.
Is the advantage only for more complex logic flaws? Or am I missing the point? I'd love to hear from anyone who has benchmarked these tools on real codebases.