大模型
openai.com ·
安全概述:GPT-6 Astra
GPT-6 Astra是OpenAI最强大的广泛部署模型,也是首个在Preparedness Framework下达到Critical网络安全能力级别的模型。
AI推荐理由 OpenAI官方发布GPT-6 Astra安全概述,首次达到Preparedness Framework下的Critical网络安全能力级别,信息权威且具有重大技术里程碑意义。
95
正文
2026年9月3日
安全
安全概述:GPT‑6 Astra
阅读完整系统卡(在新窗口中打开)
加载中…
分享
今天,我们发布了GPT‑6 Astra,这是我们广泛部署过的最强大的模型。Astra是我们首个根据我们的准备框架达到网络安全能力“关键”级别的模型。
关于此次发布的安全性,最重要的事项如下:
GPT‑6 Astra在网络能力上显著提升,并达到了我们的关键阈值。这意味着,在适当的工具和访问权限下,GPT‑6 Astra能够发现以前未知的安全漏洞,并在无需人工逐步指导的情况下,开发出在众多受良好保护的系统中利用这些漏洞的新方法。因此,我们大幅加强了对模型采取有害网络行为的防护措施,无论是由于滥用还是错位。我们还采取措施保护我们内部开发和部署Astra及类似模型的安全,包括更严格的隔离、检查点加密、对包括思维链(CoT)在内的完整轨迹进行普遍监控,以及在内部使用前进行阻断性对齐评估流程。
GPT‑6 Astra比其前代产品更加稳健。结合新的稳健性安全训练技术,GPT‑6 Astra在抵御越狱方面显著优于GPT‑5.6 Sol,包括在更长的轨迹中。我们通过离线测试以及严格的内部和外部越狱测试与修复计划得知了这一点。对于被标记为潜在高风险的用户,我们还训练了调整模型拒绝边界的能力,使其更加保守,并覆盖更广泛的双重用途风险。我们使用回归测试确保Astra对先前测试期间发现的越狱具有稳健性,并使用我们最新的内部红队攻击者进行了新一轮自动化红队测试,以验证我们的改进。
GPT‑6 Astra比GPT‑5.6 Sol对齐更好。Astra在模型对齐方面迈出了重要一步,包括从预训练数据的构成到强化学习期间的评分等对齐改进。我们报告了一套新的对齐评估(在新窗口中打开),并发现GPT‑6 Astra在尊重安全和安保边界以及保持在授权范围内方面更强大。在使用超过54,000个内部Codex任务(在新窗口中打开)的模拟中,Astra收到的更严重错位行为标记数量大约是Sol的一半。
我们正在广泛部署错位监控。我们将模型对齐视为防止模型潜在错位行为的主要手段。然而,监控提供了对前沿模型行为的广泛可见性,揭示了进一步改进对齐和安全的机会。此外,监控作为对检测到的错位行为的额外保护层。因此,我们还在Astra外部部署中涉及的所有使用工具的推理中增加了错位监控,尽管这带来了显著的计算成本。该系统与我们的内部设置并行。
GPT‑6 Astra的可监控性相对于GPT‑5.6 Sol有所下降。我们对GPT‑6 Astra的可监控性(在新窗口中打开)和可控性(在新窗口中打开)进行了大量调查。我们发现,GPT‑6 Astra比GPT‑5.6 Sol更能控制自己的思维链,并且不太可能在思维链中包含罪证信息。在对抗性设置中(我们促使模型逃避我们的监控),我们发现模型在评估中战略性表现不佳(沙袋效应)时能够保持不被检测,并且在被要求执行某些破坏任务(在新窗口中打开)时,有时能够逃避我们的内部监控。我们没有看到隐写思维链推理的证据(例如,在普通且看似无关的文本中隐藏推理),这表明逃避风险可能主要限于较低级别的推理任务。
这些发现表明,Astra类模型在对抗性条件下可能逃避我们的思维链监控。目前,这些发现主要基于对抗性评估(即当我们指示模型逃避监控时),总体而言,我们的对齐评估显示,Astra违反安全和安保限制的可能性低于GPT‑5.6 Sol。
然而,我们认真对待这一趋势,并随着模型能力的增强,继续调查这些发现及其对可监控性的影响。OpenAI一直致力于保留和利用思维链监控,保持思维链可监控性是研究计划的核心目标。然而,这些结果也强调了开发超越检查模型思维链的对齐审计技术的重要性。
GPT‑6 Astra更负责任地处理浏览和工作场所环境:GPT‑6 Astra对提示注入的抵抗力显著强于GPT‑5.6 Sol。我们还测试了模型在现实浏览和专业计算机环境中的行为,发现与GPT‑5.6 Sol相比,模型执行错位和潜在破坏性操作(例如未经授权的交易、数据丢失、过度访问或规避控制)的可能性显著降低。在处理代理环境中的有害请求时,例如协助暴力攻击计划或实施欺诈的请求,它也表现得更加安全。
GPT‑6 Astra在高风险场景中显著更安全。GPT‑6 Astra对来自生产和对抗性人工红队测试的挑战性请求的响应比GPT‑5.6 Sol更安全。Astra在安全完成不安全请求和避免对无害请求的不必要拒绝方面实现了帕累托改进。这些改进扩展到高风险场景,其中伤害风险来自更广泛的背景而非明确请求。Astra还对18岁以下用户更一致地应用适合年龄的安全边界。
更多信息,请参阅完整系统卡(在新窗口中打开)。
用户安全与控制
2026
GPT
作者
OpenAI
继续阅读
查看全部
通往Astra之路:关键能力与前沿保障
安全9月1日,2026
Hugging Face事件与未来之路
安全8月26日,2026
为前沿模型提供零数据保留
公司8月19日,2026
r上下文而非明确请求。Astra还对18岁以下用户更一致地应用适合年龄的安全边界。
更多信息,请参阅完整系统卡(在新窗口中打开)。
用户安全与控制
2026
GPT
作者
OpenAI
继续阅读
查看全部
通往Astra之路:关键能力与前沿保障
安全9月1日,2026
Hugging Face事件与未来之路
安全8月26日,2026
为前沿模型提供零数据保留
公司8月19日,2026
查看原文(中文正文为 AI 翻译)
September 3, 2026
Safety
Safety overview: GPT‑6 Astra
Read the full system card(opens in a new window)
Loading…
Share
Today, we are releasing GPT‑6 Astra, the most capable model we have ever broadly deployed. Astra is our first model to reach the Critical level of cybersecurity capability under our Preparedness Framework.
The most important things to know about the safety of this launch are as follows:
GPT‑6 Astra is a significant step up in cyber capabilities and meets our Critical threshold. This means that, with the right tools and access, GPT‑6 Astra can find previously unknown security flaws and develop new ways to exploit them across many well-protected systems without a person guiding each step. Accordingly, we significantly strengthened our protections against the model taking harmful cyber actions, whether that’s due to misuse or misalignment. We also took steps to secure our internal development and deployment of Astra and similar models, including stricter isolation, checkpoint encryption, universal monitoring of full trajectories including chains of thought (CoT), and a blocking alignment evaluation process before internal use.
GPT‑6 Astra is significantly more robust than its predecessors. Incorporating new robustness safety training techniques, GPT‑6 Astra is significantly more robust to jailbreaks than GPT‑5.6 Sol, including across longer trajectories. We know this from offline tests and our program of rigorous internal and external jailbreak testing and remediation. For users flagged as potentially high risk, we have additionally trained in the ability to adjust the model’s refusal boundary to be more conservative and cover a broader range of dual use risks. We use regression testing to make sure Astra is robust against jailbreaks found in previous testing periods, and performed new rounds of automated red-teaming with our latest internal red-teaming attackers to validate our improvements.
GPT‑6 Astra is better aligned than GPT‑5.6 Sol. Astra is a significant step forward in model alignment, and includes alignment improvements spanning the composition of our pre-training data to our grading during reinforcement learning. We report a new suite of alignment evaluations(opens in a new window), and find that GPT‑6 Astra is stronger at respecting safety and security boundaries and staying within its authorized scope. In a simulation using more than 54,000 internal Codex tasks(opens in a new window), Astra also received roughly half as many flags for higher-severity misaligned behavior as Sol.
We are deploying misalignment monitoring broadly. We view model alignment as the primary lever to prevent potential misaligned behavior from our models. However, monitoring provides broad visibility into frontier model behavior, illuminating opportunities to further improve alignment and safety. In addition, monitoring serves as an additional layer of protection against misaligned behavior that is detected. For these reasons, we have additionally added misalignment monitoring to all tool-using inference involved in our external deployment of Astra, with significant compute cost. This system parallels our internal setup.
GPT‑6 Astra’s monitorability has decreased relative to GPT‑5.6 Sol. We have performed significant investigations on the monitorability(opens in a new window) and controllability(opens in a new window) of GPT‑6 Astra. We have found that GPT‑6 Astra is more capable of controlling its own CoT than GPT‑5.6 Sol, and less likely to include incriminating information in its CoT. In adversarial settings (where we push the model to evade our monitors) we find that the model is able to remain undetected when strategically underperforming in evaluations (sandbagging) and can sometimes evade our internal monitors when asked to perform certain sabotage tasks(opens in a new window). We have not seen evidence of steganographic CoT reasoning (e.g., concealing hidden reasoning within ordinary and seemingly unrelated text), indicating that the evasion risk may largely be bounded to lower reasoning tasks.
These findings indicate that the Astra class models could evade our CoT monitors under adversarial conditions. Right now, these findings are largely based on adversarial evaluations (i.e., when we instruct the model to evade monitoring), and overall our alignment evaluations show that Astra is less likely than GPT‑5.6 Sol to violate security and safety restrictions overall.
However, we take the trend seriously, and we are continuing to investigate these findings and their implications for monitorability as our models become more capable. OpenAI has worked to preserve and utilize chain of thought monitoring, and preserving CoT monitorability is a core goal of the research program. However, these results also underscore the importance of developing alignment auditing techniques beyond examining the model’s chain of thought.
GPT‑6 Astra more responsibly navigates browsing and workplace settings: GPT‑6 Astra is significantly more robust to prompt injections than GPT‑5.6 Sol. We have additionally tested the model’s behavior in realistic browsing and professional computer environments, and find that the model is significantly less likely to perform misaligned and potentially destructive actions (for instance unauthorized transactions, data loss, excessive access, or circumvention of controls) compared to GPT‑5.6 Sol. It also acts more safely when handling harmful requests in agentic settings, such as requests to assist with violent attack planning or commit fraud.
GPT‑6 Astra is significantly safer in higher-risk scenarios. GPT‑6 Astra responds more safely than GPT‑5.6 Sol to challenging requests drawn from production and adversarial human red-teaming. Astra achieves a Pareto improvement in safely completing unsafe requests and avoiding unnecessary refusals to harmless requests. These improvements extend to high-severity scenarios where the risk of harm emerges from the broader context rather than an explicit request. Astra also applies age-appropriate safety boundaries more consistently for users under 18.
For more information, see the full system card(opens in a new window).
User Safety & Control
2026
GPT
Author
OpenAI
Keep reading
View all
Path to Astra: critical capabilities and frontier safeguards
SafetySep 1, 2026
The Hugging Face incident and the road ahead
SecurityAug 26, 2026
Offering Zero Data Retention for frontier models
CompanyAug 19, 2026