GPT-5.1 profile
GPT-5.1 — security & risk dashboard
Known weaknesses, safety and security advisories, and documented real-world incidents for GPT-5.1 — collected automatically and re-checked every few hours, so teams building on it can see what to design around.
Last checked 21 Oct 2026
Known flaws
5
Security risks
4
Real-world incidents
0
Advisories logged
0
Security, safety & abuse risks
- Untrusted documents, retrieved content, and tool outputs can introduce prompt-injection risks in agent workflows.
- Generated commands or code can cause unintended changes when applications grant excessive execution permissions.
- Sensitive information in context can be exposed through inadequately controlled responses or tool interactions.
- Safety refusals and jailbreak defenses are not substitutes for application-level authorization and security controls.
Known flaws & limitations
- The API model does not natively accept audio or video input.
- Factual responses and generated code can be incorrect and require verification.
- Function calls require application-side execution; model output is not a secure execution environment.
- Benchmark performance depends on reasoning settings, tools, and evaluation configuration.
- GPT-5.1-Codex-Max results and long-running coding claims do not describe the base GPT-5.1 model.
Security advisories & risk updates
No risk advisories logged since this profile started being tracked. New ones appear here automatically.
What this means if you are building on it
- Native audio or video processing.
- Unsupervised execution of consequential commands with broad permissions.
- High-stakes decisions requiring guaranteed factual accuracy.
- Workloads selected on the assumption that successor or Codex benchmark results apply to GPT-5.1.
Everything here comes from published documentation, advisories and reporting, with links to the original sources. It is not a complete vulnerability database — always check the provider's own security notices before shipping.