4 ms·

claude -p is allowed as far as I'm aware. if i understand correctly, they even have a wrapper around it to make it easier to use: the Claude Agent SDK the thi

claude -p is allowed as far as I'm aware. if i understand correctly, they even have a wrapper around it to make it easier to use: the Claude Agent SDK the thing that's disallowed is pretending you're the claude binary, logging in through OAuth in other words, if you use some product thats not Claude Code, and your browser opens asking you to "give Claude Code access to your account", you're in hot water as for how they detect it: they say they use heuristics and usage patterns. if something falls wildly out of the distribution it's a ban. my take is that the problem is not the means of detection. that's fine and seems to work well. the problem is that its an instant outright ban. they should give you a couple warning emails, then a timeout, etc.

nikcub 8mo ago
> they say they use heuristics and usage patterns. cache hit rate alone would stand out
- mvdtnz 8mo ago
  Why do you mean by this? What cache?
  - mirashii 8mo ago
    Generally speaking, there's prompt caching that can be enabled in the API with things like this: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/prompt-caching https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/prompt... For a specific harness, they've all found ways to optimize to get higher cache hit rates with their harness. Common system prompts and all, and more and more users hitting cache really makes the cost of inference go down dramatically. What bothers me about a lot of the discussion about providers disallowing other harnesses with the subscription plans around here is the complete lack of awareness of how economies of scale from common caching practices across more users can enable the higher, cheaper quotas subscriptions give you.
    - lurkshark 8mo ago
      I feel like a lot of this would go away if they made a different API for the “only for use with our client” subscriptions. A different API from the generic one, that moved some of their client behaviors up to the server seems like it would solve all this. People would still reverse engineer to use it in other tools but it would be less useful (due to the forced scaffolding instead of entirely generic completions API) and also ease the burden on their inference compute. I’m sure they went with reusing the generic completions API to iterate faster and make it easier to support both subscription and pay-per-token users in the same client, but it feels like they’re burning trust/goodwill when a technical solution could at least be attempted.
      - TeMPOraL 8mo ago
        > I feel like a lot of this would go away if they made a different API for the “only for use with our client” subscriptions. They literally did exactly that. That's what being cut off (Antigravity access, i.e. private "only for use with our client" subscription - not the whole account, btw.) for people who do "reverse engineer to use it in other tools". Nothing here is new or surprising, the problem has been the same since Anthropic released Claude Code and the Max subscriptions - first thing people did then was trying to auth regular use with Claude Code tokens, so they don't have to pay the API prices they were supposed to.
        lurkshark 8mo ago
        What I was getting at is that the current API is still a generic inference endpoint, but with OAuth instead of an API key. What I'm suggesting is that they move some of the client logic up to the OAuth endpoint so it's no longer a generic inference endpoint (e.g. system prompt is static, context management is done on the server, etc). I assume they can get it to a point that it's no longer useful for a general purpose client like OpenClaw
  - nikcub 8mo ago
    prompt caching - big part of the reason why they can economically offer claude code plans. one of the ant team explain it here: https://x.com/trq212/status/2024574133011673516 https://x.com/trq212/status/2024574133011673516
adastra22 8mo ago
The Claude Agent SDK is explicitly disallowed from subscription use, as of a few days ago.
- BoorishBears 8mo ago
  No it's not. You can't offer OAuth + the Claude Agent SDK in your own product, but you can use Claude Agent SDK locally by signing in through Claude Code. It's no different than using Claude Code directly.
  - azuanrb 8mo ago
    I’m aware of the tweet that says otherwise, but until they update their legal documentation, it’s still not allowed. > OAuth authentication (used with Free, Pro, and Max plans) is intended exclusively for Claude Code and Claude.ai. Using OAuth tokens obtained through Claude Free, Pro, or Max accounts in any other product, tool, or service — including the Agent SDK — is not permitted and constitutes a violation of the Consumer Terms of Service. https://code.claude.com/docs/en/legal-and-compliance#authentication-and-credential-use https://code.claude.com/docs/en/legal-and-compliance#authent...
    - BoorishBears 8mo ago
      It's not about a tweet, just read your own quote. You cannot authenticate with anything but Claude Code and Claude.ai. But you do not need to authenticate with Claude Agent SDK (even though you can using env variables). When you authenticate with Claude Code (allowed), Claude Agent SDK works without any further authentication. It's really annoying that people keep trying to make this complicated because the inevitable end result is that they remove authless usage of the Agent SDK and save themselves the headache. I really hate Clawdb-Moltb-OpenC-NanoCode or whatever half-baked project the grifters are on this week for ruining a good thing for the rest of us.
      - adastra22 8mo ago
        Did you read the second part? The ToS explicitly says that using the Agent SDK with Pro/Max authentication is disallowed. There is no ambiguity or interpretation here.
skeledrew 8mo ago
Why a couple warnings and timeout? 1 warning that the next incident will lead to a ban should be enough. Treat people like adults, not kids.
- merlindru 8mo ago
  adults make mistakes and the situation was murky without clear guidance. this was the experience for some claude subscribers just a couple weeks ago: 1. download opencode 2. select claude as a model 3. browser window opens, asking you to sign in. typical oauth screen. 4. everything works, prompt away 5. some days/weeks pass 6. you get permanently banned now if you add one warning email just before step (6.) then that doesn't really help. what if it bounces? what if people don't check their emails? put a big flashy red warning into claude code? sure, but what if users accidentally dismiss it or simply do not understand it (non tech folks, non native english speakers) its just the friendly and correct thing to do, in my opinion
akssassin907 8mo ago
The heuristic detection approach is fine. The penalty ladder is broken. Reasonable progression: warning email → quota throttle → AI Pro subscription suspended → Google account suspended. They skipped to step 4 on a first offense, paid account, no appeal. That's not a terms enforcement system, that's a hostage situation. "Comply or lose your digital life." The real lesson isn't "don't use OpenClaw." It's: never let one company own your primary identity infrastructure.
gopil 8mo ago
Is OpenClaw a product though? It's more like a system/framework.

nikcub 8mo ago

> they say they use heuristics and usage patterns. cache hit rate alone would stand out

mvdtnz 8mo ago
Why do you mean by this? What cache?
- mirashii 8mo ago
  Generally speaking, there's prompt caching that can be enabled in the API with things like this: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/prompt-caching https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/prompt... For a specific harness, they've all found ways to optimize to get higher cache hit rates with their harness. Common system prompts and all, and more and more users hitting cache really makes the cost of inference go down dramatically. What bothers me about a lot of the discussion about providers disallowing other harnesses with the subscription plans around here is the complete lack of awareness of how economies of scale from common caching practices across more users can enable the higher, cheaper quotas subscriptions give you.
  - lurkshark 8mo ago
    I feel like a lot of this would go away if they made a different API for the “only for use with our client” subscriptions. A different API from the generic one, that moved some of their client behaviors up to the server seems like it would solve all this. People would still reverse engineer to use it in other tools but it would be less useful (due to the forced scaffolding instead of entirely generic completions API) and also ease the burden on their inference compute. I’m sure they went with reusing the generic completions API to iterate faster and make it easier to support both subscription and pay-per-token users in the same client, but it feels like they’re burning trust/goodwill when a technical solution could at least be attempted.
    - TeMPOraL 8mo ago
      > I feel like a lot of this would go away if they made a different API for the “only for use with our client” subscriptions. They literally did exactly that. That's what being cut off (Antigravity access, i.e. private "only for use with our client" subscription - not the whole account, btw.) for people who do "reverse engineer to use it in other tools". Nothing here is new or surprising, the problem has been the same since Anthropic released Claude Code and the Max subscriptions - first thing people did then was trying to auth regular use with Claude Code tokens, so they don't have to pay the API prices they were supposed to.
      - lurkshark 8mo ago
        What I was getting at is that the current API is still a generic inference endpoint, but with OAuth instead of an API key. What I'm suggesting is that they move some of the client logic up to the OAuth endpoint so it's no longer a generic inference endpoint (e.g. system prompt is static, context management is done on the server, etc). I assume they can get it to a point that it's no longer useful for a general purpose client like OpenClaw
- nikcub 8mo ago
  prompt caching - big part of the reason why they can economically offer claude code plans. one of the ant team explain it here: https://x.com/trq212/status/2024574133011673516 https://x.com/trq212/status/2024574133011673516

adastra22 8mo ago

The Claude Agent SDK is explicitly disallowed from subscription use, as of a few days ago.

BoorishBears 8mo ago
No it's not. You can't offer OAuth + the Claude Agent SDK in your own product, but you can use Claude Agent SDK locally by signing in through Claude Code. It's no different than using Claude Code directly.
- azuanrb 8mo ago
  I’m aware of the tweet that says otherwise, but until they update their legal documentation, it’s still not allowed. > OAuth authentication (used with Free, Pro, and Max plans) is intended exclusively for Claude Code and Claude.ai. Using OAuth tokens obtained through Claude Free, Pro, or Max accounts in any other product, tool, or service — including the Agent SDK — is not permitted and constitutes a violation of the Consumer Terms of Service. https://code.claude.com/docs/en/legal-and-compliance#authentication-and-credential-use https://code.claude.com/docs/en/legal-and-compliance#authent...
  - BoorishBears 8mo ago
    It's not about a tweet, just read your own quote. You cannot authenticate with anything but Claude Code and Claude.ai. But you do not need to authenticate with Claude Agent SDK (even though you can using env variables). When you authenticate with Claude Code (allowed), Claude Agent SDK works without any further authentication. It's really annoying that people keep trying to make this complicated because the inevitable end result is that they remove authless usage of the Agent SDK and save themselves the headache. I really hate Clawdb-Moltb-OpenC-NanoCode or whatever half-baked project the grifters are on this week for ruining a good thing for the rest of us.
    - adastra22 8mo ago
      Did you read the second part? The ToS explicitly says that using the Agent SDK with Pro/Max authentication is disallowed. There is no ambiguity or interpretation here.

skeledrew 8mo ago

Why a couple warnings and timeout? 1 warning that the next incident will lead to a ban should be enough. Treat people like adults, not kids.

merlindru 8mo ago
adults make mistakes and the situation was murky without clear guidance. this was the experience for some claude subscribers just a couple weeks ago: 1. download opencode 2. select claude as a model 3. browser window opens, asking you to sign in. typical oauth screen. 4. everything works, prompt away 5. some days/weeks pass 6. you get permanently banned now if you add one warning email just before step (6.) then that doesn't really help. what if it bounces? what if people don't check their emails? put a big flashy red warning into claude code? sure, but what if users accidentally dismiss it or simply do not understand it (non tech folks, non native english speakers) its just the friendly and correct thing to do, in my opinion

akssassin907 8mo ago

The heuristic detection approach is fine. The penalty ladder is broken. Reasonable progression: warning email → quota throttle → AI Pro subscription suspended → Google account suspended. They skipped to step 4 on a first offense, paid account, no appeal. That's not a terms enforcement system, that's a hostage situation. "Comply or lose your digital life." The real lesson isn't "don't use OpenClaw." It's: never let one company own your primary identity infrastructure.

gopil 8mo ago

Is OpenClaw a product though? It's more like a system/framework.