> Have experience shipping production full-stack products across modern web frontends and backend services.

I'm amazed that the requirements are so low (or at least this vague) for jobs at companies like these.

Has anyone else had the experience of going to an interview and feeling like you were never asked any qualifying questions?

All the questions were easy, your answers were straightforward, you "got them right", but then were not chosen?

I find on the other side, they're also left with dozens of people who "passed" and then it comes down to a pretty arbitrary decision on who gets hired (if we are talking external, no referral, etc.)

I wonder if they can make job descriptions highly specific to filter the shortlist faster and more effectively (to actually get a shortlist).

Anyway end rant. Cool job, hope you fill it.

This looks great, thanks for open-sourcing it!

How does it deal with the current guardrails 5.6 Sol has on finding vulnerabilities? When I use it in the Codex app it would sometimes say it found a vulnerability, but it cannot tell me what it is.

I tried it, it started a scan but stopped after hitting the rate-limit of my account. It gave up after just a minute of retrying (rate limits are tokens per minute, so... :P).

It said "Partial output was kept at <...>", but I dont see a obvious way of picking it up in a new scan? (The failed run cost me ~$13)

When would I use this over the plugin in codex? Which I think can be invoked from cli as well

Does it require hitting OpenAI's APIs or can one also stand up a local OpenAI compatible LLM endpoint?

Been watching your progress for a while, glad OpenAI have looked after you and the team and you still get to ship!

How does it fare against its own codebase?

Why does this need an entirely separate repo instead of being a feature in the existing Codex project?

> co-founder of Promptfoo and one of the people working on the Codex Security CLI at OpenAI.

> Thanks for checking this out and for flagging the auth issues.

Offtopic, but this right here is why I don't believe any marketing around "great amazing models that one-shot everything and programmers are no longer needed".

You just have to look at what these labs routinely produce, and their own products.

Edit to respond to @simonw whose comment I saw before he retracted it ;)

This comment is tied directly to consistent continuous claims by the LLM labs. Their own products disprove their own claims, and it would indeed be nice if fewer people believed them :)

I think it's because python is far more approachable/ubiquitous than go/rust. It's the entry level language for many people from all disciplines of life. Scientific community uses it, data science uses it.

Golang/rust however are very convenient to distribute. Small, portable, fast exe's are very nice. With agentic coding golang/rust are now accessible to a lot more people.

Yes, now that humans write less than 99% of code, the most important criteria for a language isn't readability, which I'd argue was always Python's main selling point, but the underlying runtime. There are practical limits to how fast a Python program can run either under I/O or CPU bound compared to other popular and mature languages with extensive libraries, like Elixir, Go or C++, depending on your use case.

Working as intended

Pro is 10$ a month. You get what you pay for lol.

Classic.

I plan to hack it to use openrouter and Kimi K3 or GLM 5.2 to keep expenses reasonable.

For context can you share the line count?

Oof, that's a bad outcome. Half your weekly usage and a 50-minute scan just to get a HEAD error at the end is not acceptable. --max-cost can help limit estimated spend, but that doesn't fix the underlying problem or give you your quota back. We need to handle a changing checkout and partial results much better. Sorry you ran into this. Please send me an email.

comment feels like someone complaining about being offered a fireproofing solution in the age of flamethrowers.

They're only discovering the security flaws that exist. Would you rather them not be exposed and corrected? To "Slow the testing down"?

How do we fix scaling issues? More volume of course.

Apropos of nothing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Licinius_Crassus

If you’re the one vibe coding you’re the arsonist.

Yes, I think this is an under-appreciated part of the release. I hope people can adapt them to their own workflows. We run A LOT of evals as the Promptfoo team and we've spent billions of tokens fine-tuning them. You can expect more skills as we branch out to other security workflows and further improvements to the codex security prompts.

They are entirely different products

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49090181

Fair question, and I agree the refusals are frustrating.

The CLI doesn't do a repository-ownership check. Public projects are supported, and reviewing your own Linux kernel patches is the kind of defensive work we want to support.

The refusals come from model guardrails, which can be overly cautious. Trusted Access for Cyber (TAC1/Daybreak) is a separate, approved access path that can reduce those refusals.

If you're an open-source maintainer, you can apply for conditional Codex Security access here: https://openai.com/form/codex-for-oss/

For enterprise teams, the Daybreak onboarding process is explained here: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/20001261-enterprise-dayb...

If you have a specific repro, I'd be happy to look into it.

Yes this is my pet peeve with a lot of the more involved agent skills/processes

Agreed! This is near the top of our priority list and we will make it a lot better soon.

Anything you ever do with any non-locally-hosted model always "uploads code" to the inference provider because that's how it works: the model uses tools to inspect the code, the result of the tool use is sent in an API call to provide context (and a prompt for the next turn), and then the response continues the process.

This is true and has to be true for any hosted model that works with existing code: it's not specific to this application.

In short, this isn't an offline scanner. The CLI runs locally but the code and context needed for analysis are sent to the hosted model (OpenAI).

For API, Business, and Enterprise accounts, business data isn't used to train models by default. Retention and other data controls depend on the product and account configuration.

If your company doesn't allow source code to leave its environment, you shouldn't run this against that codebase. Local and third-party endpoints aren't officially supported yet, but you can read through the code and your favorite coding agent will allow you to use it with any model of your choice in 30 seconds.

More on OpenAI's enterprise data handling: https://openai.com/enterprise-privacy/

Yes, I suspect companies that don’t allow ChatGPT will not be able to use the ChatGPT security analysis tool.

Amazon bedrock is an option for gpt models that does not send your data to openai.

I like to think it just upped the bar, but good durable expertise will need to rise with it.

Why would a few code snippets put Snyk out of business?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49090181

yeah same here

Sorry about that. We hit an authentication issue at launch and have now merged and deployed a fix in 0.1.1:

https://github.com/openai/codex-security/pull/22

One thing worth checking in the meantime: OPENAI_API_KEY or CODEX_API_KEY can override an existing ChatGPT/Codex login. If you're trying to use your ChatGPT login, run this in bash or zsh:

  unset OPENAI_API_KEY CODEX_API_KEY

If it still fails, could you share the exact error and whether you're using ChatGPT login or an API key? Happy to help debug. You can also file an issue in the repo and we'll take a look!

Yeah, this isn’t exactly new for us :d

All of codex is a wrapper around their models. There’s still value in a purpose-built harness.

Yeah, I think so too.

Yeah but management loved the idea.

They are entirely different products

By default, you can sign in with your ChatGPT/Codex account or use an OPENAI_API_KEY. It also does not require cyber registration but it can help if you encounter refusals. If you give it a try, please feel free to message me, I would love your feedback.

Hi

oh yeah well I got my agent to analyze your write up and do a write up here:

https://pornoscan.us/codex-security-analysis.html