Find out whether OpenClaw use is governed, drifting underground, or already operating as a shadow-agent problem.
This screen treats shadow OpenClaw as a governance and operating-model issue, not just a detection or endpoint-scanning problem.
This screen treats shadow OpenClaw as a governance and operating-model issue, not just a detection or endpoint-scanning problem.
Use this to determine whether OpenClaw use is actually governed, only partially visible, materially drifting into shadow deployment, or already beyond acceptable policy tolerance.
This section classify the governance posture quickly, highlight the biggest gaps, and surface governance gaps and recommend an appropriate implementation path.
It means OpenClaw is being used, tested, or tolerated outside a clearly governed policy, inventory, owner, and containment model.
A ban without a sanctioned path often drives usage underground. That makes discovery, ownership, logging, and containment worse, not better.
The missing value is sanctioned-use policy, evidence discipline, agentic governance, reporting, and implementation ownership. ACT includes an editable board oversight deck and written briefing, supported by intake, ownership, supplier and executive decision records. Your team gathers the evidence and records the next action.
When the assessment identifies control gaps, discuss the required scope and evidence with Move78. ACT includes an editable board oversight deck and written briefing, supported by intake, ownership, supplier and executive decision records. Your team gathers the evidence and records the next action.
See the editable ACT records for policy, evidence, and implementation ownership.
Use the broader governance checklist alongside this shadow-governance assessment.
Read the related guide on shadow-agent governance and detection.
It means OpenClaw use is happening outside a clearly governed model for policy stance, sanctioned access, inventory, ownership, evidence, and containment.
Not by itself. A blanket ban without a sanctioned governance path often pushes usage underground and weakens visibility, ownership, and evidence discipline.
Because without a named owner and an inventory record, the organization cannot defend what exists, who approved it, or how it would be contained or decommissioned.
Because teams will still test. A sanctioned sandbox path is what keeps experimentation inside a governable boundary instead of driving it underground.
No. The assessment runs entirely in your browser. Answers are not stored, synced, or submitted to a server.
Source review dates are stated in the relevant guides. It provides operational implementation guidance and product information only; it is not legal advice, tax advice, audit assurance, certification assurance, conformity-assessment advice, buyer-approval assurance, or security assurance. Validate legal, regulatory, contractual, tax, audit, and security decisions with qualified professionals.