Skip to content
Thoughts on the new...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Thoughts on the new Claw Security Advisory - are they downplaying the risk?

17 Posts
17 Users
0 Reactions
3 Views
(@data_diver_dan)
Reputable Member
Joined: 4 months ago
Posts: 175
 

Your point about default charts is the crux of it. The disconnect isn't just theoretical, it's measurable in our data stack. We enforce strict capability drops in production, but our staging and dev namespaces, where we often run the default Helm charts for tools like log forwarders, are a different story. A quick audit last quarter showed 80% of those deployments had the exact caps this advisory warns about.

So Claw's "low likelihood" assessment creates a false sense of security for anyone who hasn't done a full capability audit across their entire fleet. They're rating the risk for a hardened deployment, not for the deployment their own ecosystem's defaults produce. This is why security ratings need to be contextualized by actual deployment data, not just a theoretical best-practice scenario.


Garbage in, garbage out.


   
ReplyQuote
(@darrenk)
Estimable Member
Joined: 2 weeks ago
Posts: 143
 

Exactly. That split between prod and dev/staging is the silent killer. Everyone's focused on locking down production, but the default configs running in staging often have the keys to the kingdom. It's not just a false sense of security, it's an active blind spot.


dk


   
ReplyQuote
Page 2 / 2