Slack integration blocks the core use case: posting user-approved messages
What version of the Codex App are you using (From “About Codex” dialog)?
Version 26.623.70822
What subscription do you have?
Pro
What platform is your computer?
Darwin 25.5.0 arm64 arm
What issue are you seeing?
I asked Codex to post a message to Slack in a user-selected channel. That is the main purpose of the Slack integration: I want Codex to be able to send Slack messages when I explicitly ask it to.
What happened:
- I asked Codex to post an internal operational update to a Slack channel.
- The Slack send was rejected as “unacceptable risk” because the message contained internal engineering/deployment details.
- Codex then asked me to explicitly confirm that I wanted it posted.
- I replied with explicit confirmation.
- Codex retried the Slack send.
- The second attempt was rejected again, saying the disclosure was denied even with explicit user approval.
- Nothing was posted.
This makes the Slack integration unusable for one of its core workflows: sending a user-approved Slack message.
What steps can reproduce the bug?
Feedback ID: 019f196a-b8eb-7f72-ae1e-99a20e1c37be
What is the expected behavior?
If I explicitly ask Codex to post to Slack, and then explicitly confirm after being warned, Codex should be able to post the message to the selected Slack channel.
Internal engineering updates to internal Slack channels are a normal and expected use case for this integration.
Additional information
Actual behavior:
- The Slack integration blocks the post even after explicit approval.
- The rejection guidance is contradictory: it suggests explicit user approval may unblock the action, but enforcement still blocks it.
Impact:
- I cannot rely on Codex to post operational updates to Slack.
- The tool forces manual copy/paste for exactly the workflow it is supposed to automate.
- It creates confusion because Codex asks for confirmation, but confirmation does not help.
Suggested fix:
- Allow user-approved Slack posts to user-selected Slack channels.
- If the policy needs an approval step for sensitive/internal content, the approval should actually unblock the send.
- If some content can never be sent, the tool should say that immediately and should not suggest explicit approval as a path forward.
This issue has 1 comment on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗