# Сопутствующие статьи по теме Security

Новостной центр HTX предлагает последние статьи и углубленный анализ по "Security", охватывающие рыночные тренды, новости проектов, развитие технологий и политику регулирования в криптоиндустрии.

After Integrating OpenClaw into Every Aspect of My Life, I Personally Switched It Off

After extensively using OpenClaw (formerly Clawdbot and Moltbot) for over a month as a 24/7 AI assistant integrated with Telegram, email, and calendar, the author decided to shut it down. The primary reasons were its unreliability in long-term memory retention despite claims, high and unpredictable API costs (over $150 monthly), and significant security vulnerabilities, including exposed API keys and unauthorized data transmission. The author realized that a constantly running AI was unnecessary for most valuable tasks, which were better handled through active, intentional work. The core functions of OpenClaw—remembering user context and automating tasks—were effectively replicated using Claude’s ecosystem. By creating a consolidated CLAUDE.md file (replacing OpenClaw’s multiple configuration files), leveraging Claude’s built-in memory features, and integrating with Obsidian via CLI for efficient knowledge management, the author achieved similar functionality with greater reliability. For mobile access, Claude’s Remote Control feature or a Telegram bot solution provided seamless interaction. Scheduled tasks were handled through Claude’s Cowork feature, avoiding the cost of continuous API checks. Ultimately, Claude Pro or Max subscriptions offered a more predictable cost structure ($20–$200/month) and a stable, secure environment. The author concluded that Claude’s ecosystem delivers nearly all of OpenClaw’s promised benefits without the operational headaches, making it a superior choice for practical AI assistance.

marsbit03/02 10:13

After Integrating OpenClaw into Every Aspect of My Life, I Personally Switched It Off

marsbit03/02 10:13

Gas Fees and Transaction Security: Avoiding Asset Drainage by Malicious Contracts

Blockchain transactions require gas fee as fuel, but malicious actors exploit this mechanism to drain assets through deceptive practices. Common traps include: 1) Unlimited token approvals, where users grant open-ended access to smart contracts, enabling unauthorized transfers; 2) Gas fee hijacking, where attackers manipulate transaction parameters or embed infinite loops to force excessive gas payments; 3) Fake approvals/transactions via phishing sites that mimic legitimate dApps to steal assets. Key preventive measures: - Apply minimal approval principles, authorizing only necessary token amounts and revoking unused permissions. - Manually set gas limits and prices using wallet advanced settings, avoiding defaults during high network congestion. - Verify contract addresses, transaction details, and DApp authenticity before confirming any transaction. - Use separate wallets for daily interactions and large holdings to isolate risks. If compromised: - Immediately freeze the wallet and revoke all suspicious approvals. - Preserve evidence (TxID, contract addresses) and report to platforms. - Seek professional assistance for large losses—avoid paying "recovery fees" (common secondary scams). Recommended tools: Approval checkers (e.g., Revoke.cash), block explorers (Etherscan), and real-time alert systems. Stay vigilant by scrutinizing every transaction and rejecting unsolicited links.

marsbit02/28 14:34

Gas Fees and Transaction Security: Avoiding Asset Drainage by Malicious Contracts

marsbit02/28 14:34

What Brought GPT and Claude Together? Opposing the Pentagon?

The article discusses the unexpected alignment between rival AI companies OpenAI and Anthropic, driven by their shared ethical stance against the U.S. Department of Defense's demands. Anthropic, the maker of Claude, had signed a $200 million contract with the Pentagon but insisted on two red lines: no mass surveillance of U.S. citizens and no autonomous weapons without human oversight. When the Pentagon demanded unrestricted use, Anthropic refused, citing ethical concerns. In a show of solidarity, over 400 employees from OpenAI and Google signed an open letter supporting Anthropic’s position. OpenAI’s CEO also internally affirmed similar principles. However, this unity was short-lived. After Anthropic held its ground and rejected the Pentagon’s ultimatum, it was labeled a "supply chain security risk," effectively barring it from all federal contracts. Meanwhile, OpenAI secured the Pentagon contract by accepting less stringent terms, agreeing not to engage in mass surveillance or autonomous weapons but without pushing for additional legal safeguards. The piece highlights the political and ideological dimensions of the conflict, noting that Anthropic’s stance was perceived as "woke" and ideologically driven, while OpenAI’s more pragmatic approach was rewarded. The outcome signals the high cost of resisting government pressure in the AI industry and raises questions about the real-world value of ethical principles when faced with political and economic consequences.

marsbit02/28 05:47

What Brought GPT and Claude Together? Opposing the Pentagon?

marsbit02/28 05:47

活动图片