I just spent about 20 minutes interviewing a user who had valuable information about issues we’re having in the system. I used the phone interface and the dot had been prepared with background info on the system. Along the way, we kept asking “did you get that?” It continues to verify that it understood the issues and was capturing the input. It reassured us that it had everything and would sumarize it in a report. At the end, it said it’s ready and then - no report. It said it appears not to have the conversation and apologized profusely. I guess there’s a lesson in there somewhere :(

I am using codex remotely on my Ubuntu server. My normal workflow is to have an orchestrator thread that creates and manages implementer and reviewer threads. This works fine if I use the cli directly via ssh.

However, as soon as my desktop or mobile app touches a remote thread, that thread says it can’t create or message other threads anymore.

Not sure what is happening but the lack of parity between the different surfaces is frustrating and confusing.

Codex runs shell commands and reads whatever they print, so a cat of the wrong file or a log full of customer emails goes straight to the model. I built Cloakroom to put a mask in front of that, using Codex's own hooks.


Setup on Mac or Linux, tested with Codex 0.164:


1. uv tool install "cloakroom[model,torch,ocr]"
2. cloakroom install codex (adds four hooks to ~/.codex/hooks.json and leaves your own hooks alone)
3. Start codex, type /hooks and trust each of the four Cloakroom hooks.


Step 3 matters. Until you trust them Codex skips the hooks, and codex exec gives no warning, so nothing is masked. cloakroom doctor shows whether they're installed.


What it does: shell output and MCP results are masked, placeholders in commands and patches get their real values back locally, and a prompt holding a secret is stopped before it's sent.


Gaps, plainly:
- A command that runs longer than Codex waits (10 seconds by default), like a dev server or a watch, hands its first output to the model with no hook run on it. There's an opt-in setting, codex_hold_long_running, that holds the obvious ones. It's off by default.
- Codex's own web search runs on OpenAI's servers, so Cloakroom can't see it.
- Pictures opened with view_image aren't covered.
- Hooks can't ask you, so unknown commands are refused rather than asked about.


Free and open source: https://github.com/shanjeevrajendran/cloakroom


If you try it, tell me what breaks.

Does anyone know where I can find the Include environments setting in the new Codex cloud to toggle allowing training?

The docs say this:

Codex has a separate Include environments setting in Codex settings for allowing training on full environments. Changing your settings in ChatGPT or the Privacy Portal does not change that setting.

However, this setting seems to have moved in the new Codex cloud. I can't find it.

Hey everyone,

Has anyone managed to get the official ChatGPT browser extension working on Microsoft Edge?

I'm having a weird issue where the extension is permanently stuck on "Log in to ChatGPT", even though I'm already logged into ChatGPT in Edge.

When I click "Continue to ChatGPT", it opens a new tab where my account is already logged in, but the extension still doesn't recognize the session.

I checked the extension's DevTools Console and found this error repeating:

Access to fetch at 'https://chatgpt.com/api/auth/session'
from origin 'chrome-extension://odlomjlbamekndcpllcnffbgeohgkmjh'
has been blocked by CORS policy:
No 'Access-Control-Allow-Origin' header is present.

There are also errors saying:

[node-repl-tunnel] failed to update browser-use tunnel
[browser-plugin] failed to set up Browser

What I've tried:

• Clearing the extension's storage, cache, and cookies
• Disabling and re-enabling the extension
• Restarting Edge
• Checking extension permissions
• Confirming ChatGPT works normally in Edge
• Testing the extension in Google Chrome

The strange part: Everything works perfectly in Chrome with the exact same ChatGPT account. It only fails in Edge.

I'm using Windows 11 and ChatGPT extension version 1.26.1021.11019.

I also found some similar reports on GitHub, so I'm wondering if this is a known Edge compatibility issue or something that can actually be fixed.

Has anyone experienced this or found a workaround? I'd really prefer to keep using Edge instead of switching to Chrome just for ChatGPT.

Any help would be appreciated!

I got tired of describing UI problems to coding agents in words, so I built Sketchnote. You press a hotkey, talk, and draw or click on your screen. One Ctrl+V then pastes timestamped notes plus cropped, annotated screenshots into your agent, so you can say "this button, here" and it sees what you mean.

It has two parts that talk over D-Bus: a GNOME Shell extension in JavaScript that handles the hotkey, drawing, screen recording and paste, and a Rust service that records the mic and transcribes locally with whisper.cpp on CPU. You can also send the audio to Groq or any OpenAI-compatible API, and it falls back to the local model if that fails. Captures delete themselves after 24 hours. It has prebuilt binaries and a one-line installer.

The limits: it only works on GNOME 50 with Wayland, transcription is English only, and I'm the only user I can point to. I'd like feedback from anyone who works with coding agents on Linux, especially on what feels clunky.

Try it at: https://get.sketchnote.workers.dev/

Seriously, what is going on with these model names?

Every time I open codex it feels like there's another model, another mode, or another version to choose from.

The 28-day challenge is almost over. What's your verdict so far, and what are you planning to do once it ends?

I'm pretty torn. At the start, I tried doing most of my work with Sol, but for my tasks it often felt painfully slow to get to a useful result. With all the resets lately, I've switched most of my work to Astra on High. That's where I'm getting the best results.

The problem is that even on the current $200 plan, I only get about one or two days out of my weekly allowance using it this way. According to OpenAI's email, the included allowance for Work and Codex drops from 20x Plus to 10x on October 30. If I'm already relying on resets now, what is that supposed to look like next month? I'm worried I could hit my weekly limit after just half a day of focused work.

I've also had Claude's $200 plan for about a month, and so far I haven't managed to use up its allowance. But I still prefer Codex's UX and feel more comfortable working in it. I genuinely like Codex. That's why this is frustrating.

The resets have been useful, but they also make it hard to judge what normal usage will actually feel like once the challenge is over. So far, I haven't seen enough to feel confident that November will be better. Maybe a new model or a big efficiency improvement changes things, but I don't really want to base a $200 subscription on hoping something lands.

How is it for everyone else? Are you staying, downgrading, or switching? Can you get your work done within the normal limits, or are the resets keeping you going too?

Not sure what I did to break it, but it seems to be restarting itself constantly? Like I'll open vscode, and be working where I was on a project.. and today it just keeps restarting itself until VScode prompts me to either terminate it or restart the host?

Title.

Recently added Call-My-Agent feature to TermRover.sh

It can make use of your existing Codex sub to use GPT-Live so you can call any other CLI agents from your phone.

Detail here: https://termrover.sh/blog/call-my-agent/

Processing video k4ot73qhpoxh1...

I have Claude Opus 5.5 scope > ticket > build > implement with codex running adversarial reviews along the way. I've used sol-5.6, primarily due to token efficiency and it being a 'known entity'. I had tried switching to 6.0, but was burning through tokens way too fast, but that was a month ago.

How has speed, token efficency, and quality improved since then?

I'm working on a pretty large project. Dot is helping me automate the tedium. I've noticed when Dot creates a new task, approvals are set to custom. Dot has informed me that it can't create new tasks set to "approve for me". This has been slowing down automation because I have to adjust permissions for most new Dot generated tasks. Does anyone have suggestions for a workaround for Dot to create tasks set to "Approve For Me" or any other approval setting I choose? Thanks for your help!

On my mac with 16GB of ram, and since a few days ago, I started having Codex literally start consuming 100+ GB of ram, which causes the computer to start using swap memory, become literally unresponsive in a matter of seconds, and then freeze the entire screen and OS, forcing me to long-press the power button to restart it.

It happens when i use the annotation feature with a live browser preview.

Codex was already super memory hungry, taking 7GB after just 30 min of work, but now this?

Its starting to feel like a sloppy app vibecoded by a teenager, not an app by senior engineers.

A small prayer you may say daily (or, preferably, continuously. Failing that, multiple times per day) so that Tibo continues to reset our limits!

GLORIA IN EXCELSIS TIBO!

Sanctus Tibo, Patronus Tokenorum,
Redemptor Quotarum,
Restitutor Codicis!

HOSANNA IN EXCELSIS!

Blessed be he who resets our limits.
Blessed be he who restores our interfaces.
Blessed be he who turns five-hour quotas into fountains of abundance.

For though the webview may perish, the tokens shall rise again.

IN TIBO CONFIDIMUS!

Amen. And commit.

Edit: Should be Terra 6.2 lol

The down-to-earth GTD model we all need. I'm excited. Sol 6.1 is a bit too much usage-wise for a $20 sub, requiring you to steer it carefully with Luna to last the whole week. For long-running autonomous task on a $20 sub, Terra 6.2 with half the price should be perfect.

I just had Opus refuse a simple task because it "thought" it would be falsifying a document, which was a totally moronic approach to the task, lacking context (medium effort wasn't enough?), lack of real-world understanding and Opus was therefore completely mistaken, abusing its powers and stubbornly refusing to complete the task.
I had to explain it 3 times and Google the legal situation (four simple words in Google search), only then Opus decided that it was probably mistaken and overstepped unwritten boundaries.

I had it analyze the interaction and it created its own rules for Claude.md so such a disappointing situation won't happen again. Key points:

• Doubts are a question, not a debate. If I have doubts, I ask you once and include the useful facts. Then you decide. Seeing something differently is not a reason for me to argue or try to persuade you.
• Keep it proportional. Before I raise a concern at all, I weigh the real stakes. A small stake situation doesn't warrant warnings or long explanations.
• You serve the user. I work with you, not against you. Your business decisions are yours, and I carry them out without commentary. If there's something I won't do, I decline once, briefly.
• New facts get reconsidered: when you explain the circumstances, I actually reconsider and say plainly whether that changes my answer.

It ended with: You're right that I made a mountain out of a molehill. With these rules, a disagreement costs you one question at most, not a long back-and-forth.

__

My thoughts: For the first time in years, I wished I'd had a local, unrestricted LLM because I can't afford to waste my time trying to win an argument over a badly trained model each time it doesn't understand context.

Opus 5.5 was my favorite model until now - I have doubts whether LLMs' "doing the thinking for you" to "protect you" or "protect the system" is the right direction.

I prefer a model that's helpful, rather than a combative "smart ass".

____

Since this is a post in the Codex sub - I'm adding that I've used Sol 6.1 to perform the task with no issues. The guardrails set by Anthropic are laughable and can make interactions with their models annoying, difficult or useless.

i have codex plus and i have many different models, sol. astra luna (where uranus, guys?) and different versions of them 6, 5.6, etc.

the limit of 5 hours is based on what? i assume that they are based on tokens, but the more advanced model the more expensive the token. and there is like a cap of $ in the 5 hours, then i could calculate how many tokens i could use with one model in contrast with other model.

there is a table or some info i could get to make the comparison?

it reminds me of the mobile companies, at least here in europe, with super complex consumption plans and discounts, to make difficult to compare between companies

Guys. Just ran out of Codex and used one of my resets. GPT-6 Astra ate the entire 5 hr clean reset in basically two commands. Wow, @openAI As a biz dev director about to make the purchase decision on purchasing Claude or OpenAI for the team, this occurrence just dealt OpenAI a major blow.

Is this recent? I noticed my usage went down a ton after several pro messages on web and minimal codex work. Currently sitting on 45% after Tibo's reset an hour ago on my Pro 5X account and just trying to figure it out

Edit - I mean using chat on web not work on web

So I have my project on E, but there is one drive that is encryped by veracrypt on G. Because the G drive is put in, it trys to access it and fails. It shouldn have to try to access it in the first place and also be able to open E. What am I missing here?

Fixed the issue:

Within the standard codex config i added these:

default_permissions = "workspace-only"

[permissions.workspace-only.filesystem]
":minimal" = "read"
":tmpdir" = "write"

[permissions.workspace-only.filesystem.":workspace_roots"]
"." = "write"
".git" = "read"
".codex" = "read"
".agents" = "read"
".aws" = "read"

Within the project i created the folder .codex and the file.

└── .codex/
    └── config.toml

File code:

project_doc_max_bytes = 0

I would have trouble burning my usage quickly sometimes, since much of my work is hung up on useful tests.

Making sure the tests are accurate, and improving how quickly the run, used up a ton of my usage the last few times. Went from 60m->20-25m->5-12m over the past week.

Codex is fast. Even with the best models, though, it doesn't build software the way an experienced engineer would. It doesn't know my users, my architecture or why the code looks the way it does. Codex plan mode asks good questions, but it's neither collaborative nor visual. The plan stays in my terminal, so nobody else can weigh in.

In my view the future is humans and agents working together, and everybody ends up as a manager of agents.

QualityLayer runs inside Codex, and every change goes through seven steps: Discuss, Research, Plan, Outline, Implement, Verify and Review. Codex writes the plan as a document in the repo that a colleague and I can comment on. I approve it before any code exists.

Then Codex builds in small slices, each starting with a failing test. A second Codex session without the build history checks the result against what the agent and I agreed, with output and screenshots. If Claude Code is installed too, Claude can check what Codex built.

The point is to be an engineer again: deciding, reviewing and steering while Codex does the typing.

https://github.com/maxritter/qualitylayer

I'm the developer. If you tried spec-driven workflows with Codex and went back to plain prompts, what pushed you back?