OpenAI Parts Ways With Three Researchers Over Handling of Sensitive Information
publishers 25articles 26first reported 1 Oct, 16:41 UTCdeveloping since 1 Oct · 8 editions
OpenAI has parted ways with three researchers after an internal investigation found they violated company policies governing access to and handling of sensitive information, the company said.
“Our investigation confirmed that these individuals mishandled sensitive information outside established company procedures, violating our policies and breaking the trust essential to our work,” an OpenAI spokesperson told CBS News. The company said the investigation found a pattern of misconduct involving people with access to confidential research.
The Wall Street Journal, which first reported the departures, said the researchers worked on OpenAI’s safety team and allegedly shared confidential company information with an outside organization focused on AI safety. OpenAI did not identify the researchers, the outside organization or the information involved, and it did not publicly describe how the information was handled.
TechCrunch said it had not confirmed social-media speculation about the employees’ identities. It also remained unclear whether the researchers had raised any concerns through OpenAI’s internal reporting channels before the alleged disclosures.
OpenAI previously dismissed researchers Leopold Aschenbrenner and Pavel Izmailov in 2024 over alleged information leaks, according to reporting cited by TechCrunch.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 7 articles, 3 with the publisher's own text; 6 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written 12 h after the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 25
- Source articles
- 26
- Given to the writer
- 7, 3 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 6
- This version written
- 12 h after the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- kept as written
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
WHAT THE EDITOR DID
The second model checked the writer's draft against the same sources and published it as written.
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →