The White House is asking OpenAI to slow roll the release of its new model over safety concerns
penAI reportedly plans to share its newest model, GPT 5.6, with a select group of partners instead of to the broader public. The reason: the Trump administration told it to.
OpenAI’s release of its newest model, GPT 5.6, reportedly won’t be like its previous releases. Instead of distributing it to the public, the company plans to share it only with a select group of close partners because the Trump administration told it to, reports The Information .
At a meeting this week, CEO Sam Altman reportedly told staff that the government would be “approving access customer by customer” during a preview period. Altman reportedly added that if the limited release goes well, OpenAI hopes to follow with a general, broader release a “couple of weeks later.”
In other words, the Trump administration appears to be pressuring OpenAI to do what Anthropic is already voluntarily doing: keeping its most powerful AI models under wraps.
According to The Information, OpenAI’s new model is not only being reviewed by the administration, but its staffers also “worked closely” with the government on the upcoming release. The agencies that reportedly asked for a limited release were the Office of the National Cyber Director and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
The Trump administration — which originally positioned itself as taking a “hands off” approach to AI — has in recent months pushed for federal oversight of new models. Earlier this month, Trump signed an executive order directing certain AI companies to voluntarily submit new models to the government for testing and evaluation before releasing them publicly.
Earlier this year, Anthropic sparked no small amount of controversy when it announced that its new frontier cyber model, Claude Mythos, would only be released to a small coterie of partners through a program called Project Glasswing. Anthropic argued that its model was simply too powerful and could, in the wrong hands, cause more harm than good. Observers have since debated whether Anthropic’s rhetoric is a mere marketing gimmick or a legitimate attempt to keep a powerful model from being misused. The answer may be somewhere in between.
Cybercriminals have used automated tools for a very long time , but in the age of generative AI, they now have more digital ammunition than ever before. LLMs have proven adept at writing malware , and some can even execute entire ransomware attacks autonomously.
The specific concern with frontier cyber tools like Mythos is that they are ostensibly capable of both identifying and exploiting software vulnerabilities at speeds that no human analyst could match. Since many software systems contain hidden bugs that act as entry points into enterprise networks, this obviously poses an obvious and significant problem for any organization running complex software infrastructure. That said, since these models remain closed to the public, it’s difficult to tell just how much of a threat they really are.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission . This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Last chance to save up to $190 on TechCrunch Founder Summit. Join 1,000+ founders and VCs at all stages for real-world scaling insights and connections that move the needle. Savings end June 26, 11:59 p.m. PT .
Former Infosys chief has a new startup that wants to challenge the IT services world Jagmeet Singh
Former Infosys chief has a new startup that wants to challenge the IT services world
Former Infosys chief has a new startup that wants to challenge the IT services world
OpenAI unveils its first custom chip, built by Broadcom Russell Brandom
OpenAI unveils its first custom chip, built by Broadcom
OpenAI unveils its first custom chip, built by Broadcom
HaloBraid raises $7M from Seven Seven Six to end the six-hour hair salon appointment Dominic-Madori Davis
HaloBraid raises $7M from Seven Seven Six to end the six-hour hair salon appointment
HaloBraid raises $7M from Seven Seven Six to end the six-hour hair salon appointment
WhatsApp gets new chief as Meta taps India’s CRED founder Kunal Shah and invests $900M in startup Jagmeet Singh
WhatsApp gets new chief as Meta taps India’s CRED founder Kunal Shah and invests $900M in startup
WhatsApp gets new chief as Meta taps India’s CRED founder Kunal Shah and invests $900M in startup
Beyond Siri: Here are the practical AI features coming to your iPhone in iOS 27 Sarah Perez
Beyond Siri: Here are the practical AI features coming to your iPhone in iOS 27
Beyond Siri: Here are the practical AI features coming to your iPhone in iOS 27
Every new iOS 27 feature that’s worth knowing about Lauren Forristal
Every new iOS 27 feature that’s worth knowing about
Every new iOS 27 feature that’s worth knowing about
Aura’s impressive e-ink photo frame doesn’t even look digital Amanda Silberling
Aura’s impressive e-ink photo frame doesn’t even look digital
Aura’s impressive e-ink photo frame doesn’t even look digital
Key takeaways
- US government pressure may indicate a growing trend of AI regulation, affecting the Brazilian tech sector.
- AI security should be a priority for Brazilian companies, considering the risks associated with the misuse of advanced technologies.
- Brazil should prepare for an environment where compliance with safety and ethical standards will become a competitive differentiator.
Editorial analysis
OpenAI's decision to limit access to its new GPT 5.6 model under pressure from the US government reflects a growing concern over safety and ethics in AI development. For the Brazilian tech sector, this may signal that regulation and government oversight of AI are becoming more common, which could impact both startups and large companies developing similar technologies. The possibility of a more cautious approach to releasing new models may lead to a more controlled innovation environment, but it could also inhibit the agility needed to compete in a dynamic global market.
Moreover, the US government's pressure for a more restricted release may influence how Brazilian companies approach AI security. With the increasing sophistication of AI tools, such as those that can be used to create malware, it is crucial for local companies to consider not only innovation but also the ethical and security implications of their technologies. This could lead to greater collaboration between the private sector and the government in Brazil to establish guidelines that ensure the safe and responsible use of AI.
Looking at the international landscape, it is important for Brazil to pay attention to how other nations, especially the US, are shaping their AI policies. What we see is a trend toward increased regulation that may spread globally. Brazilian companies should prepare for an environment where compliance with safety and ethical standards becomes a competitive differentiator. What is emerging is a need for a more robust dialogue between AI developers and regulators, so that innovation is not sacrificed in the name of safety but rather guided by it.
Finally, the current situation highlights the importance of a broader debate about the role of AI in society. As concerns about the misuse of advanced technologies grow, it is essential for Brazil to actively participate in these discussions, promoting responsible development that benefits society as a whole. The ability to influence and shape AI policies could be an opportunity for Brazil to position itself as a leader in ethical technology practices on the global stage.
What this coverage includes
- Clear source attribution and link to the original publication.
- Editorial framing about relevance, impact, and likely next developments.
- Review for readability, context, and duplication before publication.
Original source:
TechCrunch AIAbout this article
This article was curated and published by AIDaily as part of our editorial coverage of artificial intelligence developments. The content is based on the original source cited below, enriched with editorial context and analysis. Automated tools may assist with translation and initial structuring, but publication decisions, factual review, and contextual framing remain editorial responsibilities.
Learn more about our editorial process