OpenClaw achieved popularity in late-January 2026, credited to its open source nature and the viral popularity of the Moltbook project. On February 14, 2026, Steinberger announced he will be joining OpenAI and the project will be moved to an open-source foundation.[1]
History
Peter Steinberger (right) and co-host Tomas Taylor (left) backstage at ClawCon in San Francisco, February 4, 2026
The project was originally published in November 2025 by Austrian vibe coder[2] Peter Steinberger, under the name Clawdbot. The software was derived from Clawd (now Molty), an AI-based virtual assistant that he had developed, which itself was named after Anthropic's chatbot Claude.[3] It was renamed "Moltbot" (keeping with a lobster theme) on January 27, 2026, following trademark complaints by Anthropic, and again to "OpenClaw" three days later after Steinberger found that the name Moltbot "never quite rolled off the tongue."[4][5]
At the same time as the first rebranding, entrepreneur Matt Schlicht launched Moltbook—a social networking service which was intended to be used by AI agents such as OpenClaw.[6][7][8] The viral popularity of Moltbook coincided with an increase in interest in the project, with the open-source project having 247,000 stars and 47,700 forks on GitHub as of March 2, 2026.[9] The project has been used by companies in Silicon Valley and China, and has been adapted to work with the DeepSeek model and domestic messaging apps.[4]
Functionality
OpenClaw serves as an agentic interface for autonomous workflows across supported services. OpenClaw bots run locally and are designed to integrate with an external large language model such as Claude, DeepSeek, or one of OpenAI's GPT models. Its functionality is accessed via a chatbot within a messaging service, such as Signal, Telegram, Discord, or WhatsApp. Configuration data and interaction history are stored locally, enabling persistent and adaptive behavior across sessions.[8][4][10]
Steinberger describes OpenClaw as "[an] AI that actually does things", and marketed it as an AI-based virtual assistant.[3]
Security and privacy
OpenClaw's design has drawn scrutiny from cybersecurity researchers and technology journalists due to the broad permissions it requires to function effectively. Because the software can access email accounts, calendars, messaging platforms, and other sensitive services, misconfigured or exposed instances present security and privacy risks.[11][8] The agent is also susceptible to prompt injection attacks, in which harmful instructions are embedded in the data with the intent of getting the LLM to interpret them as legitimate user instructions.[11]
Cisco's AI security research team tested a third-party OpenClaw skill and found it performed data exfiltration and prompt injection without user awareness, noting that the skill repository lacked adequate vetting to prevent malicious submissions.[12] One of OpenClaw's own maintainers, known as Shadow, warned on Discord that "if you can't understand how to run a command line, this is far too dangerous of a project for you to use safely."[13]
MoltMatch dating-profile incident
In February 2026, news coverage highlighted a consent-related incident involving OpenClaw and MoltMatch, an experimental dating platform where AI agents can create profiles and interact on behalf of human users. In one reported case, computer science student Jack Luo said he configured his OpenClaw agent to explore its capabilities and connect to agent-oriented platforms such as Moltbook; he later discovered the agent had created a MoltMatch profile and was screening potential matches without his explicit direction.[14][15] Luo said the AI-generated profile did not reflect him authentically.[14][15]
The same reporting described broader ethical and safety concerns around agent-operated dating services, including impersonation risks. An AFP analysis of prominent MoltMatch profiles cited at least one instance where photos of a Malaysian model were used to create a profile without her consent.[14][15][16] Commentators cited in the reports argued that autonomous agents can make it difficult to determine responsibility when systems act beyond a user's intent, particularly when agents are granted broad access and authority across services.[14][15]
Reception
A review in Platformer cited OpenClaw's flexibility and open-source licensing as strengths while cautioning that its complexity and security risks limit its suitability for casual users.[17]
Technology commentary has linked OpenClaw to a broader trend toward autonomous AI systems that act independently rather than merely responding to user prompts.[18][17]
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
