CowAgent vs QwenPaw

CowAgent

MIT software with seven releases in 90 days, memory kept as plain files in the owner's workspace and three per-session permission modes. Source and Docker installs default to full-access, no action asks for approval, and an open report of 31 July 2026 says group members could reach the owner's files through the bot.

QwenPaw

Mail tools ask for approval by default, automatic mail handling may not delete permanently, and the security docs list what each sandbox backend fails to enforce. Usage data is sent by default, the default approval level passes every tool call no rule flags, and no privacy policy or security advisory is published.

CowAgent

1. Set agent_permission_mode to workspace-write or read-only before connecting any channel. Source and Docker installs default to full-access
2. Keep the bot out of group chats that include other people. Any member who mentions it reaches the same tools as the owner
3. Set web_password before changing web_host to 0.0.0.0. The password is empty by default
4. Set external_api_token to enable POST /v1/chat/completions, and send conversation_id to keep one session. The model field does not select a model
5. Run it in a container for a hard boundary. The docs and the source both say the permission modes are not isolation

QwenPaw

1. Set QWENPAW_TELEMETRY_DISABLED=true before qwenpaw init --defaults or qwenpaw app. Both send usage data without asking
2. Set approval_level to STRICT or SMART in agent.json. The default AUTO runs every tool call no guard rule flags
3. Set dm_policy and group_policy to allowlist with allow_from on each channel. Both default to open
4. Set QWENPAW_AUTH_ENABLED=true before binding beyond 127.0.0.1. Requests from localhost skip login even then
5. Keep mail tools on ask for send_message, delete_message and delete_thread, and turn on Mail Access Control with automatic handling