OpenAI DayBreak – GPT-5.5-Cyber

Ok so why I don’t have access to this if I already pay for the max plan? Should I pay a security researcher to run codex on my code? Is this how it is supposed to work? Let’s hope we get some real cyber models that people can actually use from the Chinese without the stupid application forms.

I don't know what the solution to this is, but I find it somewhat unfair that I pay money to Anthropic, and I pay money to OpenAI, and neither of them will let me use their best models for securing the software I work on.

Admittedly Opus 4.8 xhigh does a good job, but are my customers not entitled to have more security from a Fable/Mythos or GPT-5.5-Cyber audit over the codebase? Or I guess the inverse question: why aren't they allowed that audit?

(Fable/Mythos being unavailable notwithstanding.)

It seems OpenAI will at least let me do this narrowly, at greater cost, by using one of their partners. But I already pay them money!

No one commenting on the fact that oAI is releasing a Claude Mythos-class model - with apparent 0 restrictions or concerns by the US government, while Anthropic's (their competitor) model has been pulled weeks prior by the administration for 'security' reasons.

It certainly has nothing to do with openAI's co-founders donating to the current administrations election fund, are actively supporting the DoW war efforts of autonomous weapons and also otherwise being ideology tightly coupled with the current US government.

Would love to see the benchmark comparison between Mythos / Fable and GPT-5.5-Cyber

Can someone on HN with access to it fix the Fable / Mythos so it's secure to use again and therefore available ?

This is how you do it when you're not AS childish. You go "here's a model for cybersecurity" and put a price on it. I know they're releasing it to some vendors first, etc. but the lack of a clown spectacle is nice.

The whole "it's too dangerous to release!" is complete hogwash.

A person can take a hammer, walk out in the street, and we can count how many people he can kill with the hammer before he is stopped. My local hardware store still sells hammers, and I haven't seen the CEO of it claim that their hammers are much more dangerous and it's totally going to end the world if you allow any random person to have one!

It's a pretty interesting opportunity. I wonder if they will reach to companies and tell them how many things they could fix and how many are critical, before selling them the solution.

whats the point of a benchmark if its not deployable? another glasswing pr stunt to me

I guess eventually the whole process can be completely autonomous, what could possibly go wrong :-)

I think if nothing happens from the government, then this would be a very good example of the benefit of keeping your mouse shut especially if you are lying to get some hype like Anthropic did for months.

It's good looking forward to wrapping it around Reasonix

AI companies yearn for otgs built on AI tools

Does the EU CRA now mean that every European company that either sells software or sells anything that has a software component is now forced to pay for this by September and update their software?

Gamechanger