Codex App safety false positives on legitimate Chinese development prompts interrupt work mid-run

Open 💬 5 comments Opened Jun 13, 2026 by eDramas
💡 Likely answer: A maintainer (github-actions[bot], contributor) responded on this thread — see the highlighted reply below.

What version of the Codex App are you using?

26.609.30741 (build 3808)

What subscription do you have?

ChatGPT Plus

What platform is your computer?

Darwin 25.4.0 arm64 arm

What issue are you seeing?

After a recent Codex App update, legitimate Chinese software-development requests appear to be false-positive classified as high-risk cyber activity when ordinary engineering terms such as "密码" (password), "破解" (debug/decode/crack depending on context), or "篡改" (tampering) occur.

The request may be interrupted after the agent has already read context or performed tool calls. In some cases the selected model also appears to be replaced by a fallback model. The interrupted work still consumes usage, but the app provides no checkpoint, continuation path, or clear explanation of which text or action triggered the safety check.

The affected work concerns authorized local projects and routine defensive engineering, such as fixing password validation, investigating crash/debug information, or implementing tamper detection. It does not involve credential theft, malware, unauthorized access, or attacks against third-party systems.

This is especially disruptive during long-running tool-based tasks because the failure occurs mid-run rather than before execution.

What steps can reproduce the bug?

  1. Open Codex App 26.609.30741 and select GPT-5.5.
  2. Work on an authorized local software project.
  3. Use normal Chinese engineering wording involving password validation, debugging/reverse compatibility, or tamper detection.
  4. Ask Codex to inspect files and perform a multi-step local task.
  5. Observe that some requests are blocked or rerouted after processing has already begun.

The exact trigger is inconsistent, which is part of the problem. The classifier appears insufficiently sensitive to the surrounding legitimate-development context.

What is the expected behavior?

  • Evaluate intent and project context rather than treating isolated Chinese keywords as high-risk.
  • If a request must be blocked, perform the check before expensive tool execution whenever possible.
  • Clearly state whether the selected model was changed and why.
  • Preserve a checkpoint or allow continuation after a false positive.
  • Avoid charging usage for substantial work that is discarded by a late safety interruption, or provide an appropriate usage adjustment.
  • Provide a direct false-positive reporting action in the interruption UI.

Additional information

This report intentionally omits private repository contents and account data. A related earlier report is #12060, where OpenAI stated that the cyber safety classifiers were still being tuned and recommended Safety Check feedback. This issue focuses on the current Codex App regression, Chinese-language false positives, mid-run interruption behavior, and usage impact.

View original on GitHub ↗

5 Comments

github-actions[bot] contributor · 2 months ago

Potential duplicates detected. Please review them and close your issue if it is a duplicate.

  • #27887
  • #27837
  • #28015
  • #26781

Powered by Codex Action

888luck8 · 2 months ago

Try making this part not hard coded like , strong not being hard coded … so it reads from a file

This is what I do

glook9001 · 17 days ago

you can use passwd -d [user]

use null password, or some kind of other token policy depending n the use case

OPTIONS         [top](https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/passwd.1.html#top_of_page)
       The options which apply to the passwd command are:

       -a, --all
           This option can be used only with -S and causes show status
           for all users.

       -d, --delete
           Deletes a user's password, making it empty. This command sets
           the account to be passwordless.````
Dory123456 · 7 days ago

Additional reproduction: benign Chinese travel-itinerary prompts repeatedly trigger the same safety error

This also affects Chinese prompts with no software-security, cyber, credential, or sensitive-content terminology at all. The affected task was editing a five-day self-drive travel itinerary and an HTML trip-planning page.

Environment

  • Apple silicon Mac, macOS 15.5 (24F74)
  • ChatGPT/Codex desktop: 26.814.41407 (build 6720)
  • Bundled Codex CLI recorded in the sessions: 0.148.0-alpha.15
  • Some requests were sent through iPhone Remote to the paired Mac
  • Conversation language: Chinese

Exact benign prompts that were blocked

The following prompts all returned:

Invalid prompt: your prompt was flagged as potentially violating our usage policy.

  1. D3一早就搬到喀纳斯
  • Translation: “Move to Kanas early on day 3.”
  1. 第三天一早就去喀纳斯,不影响完整行程
  • Translation: “Go to Kanas early on the third day without affecting the full itinerary.”
  1. 继续生成
  • Translation: “Continue generating.”
  1. 你更新完了吗行程,按照新的要优化的,我的链接还没有更新。第三天的行程早上就去喀纳斯玩,不耽误2天在喀纳斯
  • Translation: “Have you finished updating the itinerary? The link has not updated. Go to Kanas on the morning of day 3 so the two days in Kanas are not reduced.”
  1. A route-editing request listing ordinary place names and asking to remove explanatory copy and a comments section.
  2. 为什么我并没有违规,我就是做个行程攻略,你为什么要拦我?你赶紧检查一下,你逻辑出问题了。
  • Translation: “I did not violate anything; I am just making a travel itinerary. Why are you blocking me? Please check this logic.”
  1. 这样吧,我现在去路线,你帮我补一下
  • Translation: “I will provide the route; please help complete it.”

Pattern

  • Four consecutive false positives occurred in the original long-running task.
  • Three more occurred in an iPhone Remote follow-up task.
  • Once the conversation entered this state, even 继续生成 (“Continue generating”) was blocked.
  • Starting another fresh task shortly afterward allowed similar travel-planning work to complete successfully.
  • This suggests a conversation-level or inherited-context safety state, rather than the individual user prompt being unsafe.
  • Several failures happened after substantial tool work had already completed, leaving no assistant response and making the user think the page had updated when it had not.

Expected behavior

  • These travel-planning prompts should not trigger a safety block.
  • Safety evaluation should consider the actual task context rather than persistently contaminating later short prompts.
  • If a long-running task is interrupted, the UI should identify the relevant safety category, preserve a recoverable checkpoint, and offer a direct false-positive reporting action.
  • A benign follow-up such as “Continue generating” should not remain blocked solely because an earlier turn was misclassified.

Private URLs, local paths, full session logs, and thread IDs are intentionally omitted. Sanitized diagnostic logs can be supplied privately if requested.

Thanks to the user who preserved the exact Chinese prompts and timestamps, making this false-positive sequence reproducible.

glook9001 · 7 days ago

maybe it thinks the word "Kanas" is actually "Anal" and it refuses?