[not_a9]

> Opus 5’s safeguards match those of Claude Fable 5’s, with one change: it now permits source-code vulnerability discovery at all access levels. This means that the model can support defensive cybersecurity work while still blocking vulnerability discovery in compiled binaries, which is more commonly used offensively.

Okay so it’s worse than Opus 4.8 for my purposes I guess?

[dannyw]

I don't think there's been any official confirmation, but even Fable safeguards seem to have gotten quite a bit of tuning, is less trigger-happy and less like regex matching.

[sebzim4500]

Presumably it drops back to 4.8 in those cases so it's not really worse

[bobbylarrybobby]

If it switches mid conversation, this is a massive increase in token consumption because it has to re-read your conversation into cache, right?

[tyre]

yes. At the bottom of the release post it says that they are releasing two new features, one of which is customizing fallback behavior instead of blocking for restricted models

[yukIttEft]

What are your purposes?

[not_a9]

Reversing for the most part, though lately I’ve been doing some code obfuscation/binary rewriting stuff. Fable will switch to Opus instantly on these and I’m unsure how this will perform. I suppose the only way to find out is to test.

[ciefa]

Try GPT 5.6 Sol if you haven't yet.

I recently created a patch for Riftborne via static IL patching and Fable 5 outright kept refusing to do it, no issue whatsoever with GPT 5.6 Sol lol.

[roboyoshi]

It's rather broad right now. I started reverse engineering a mac app and it started reading some binary data and then quickly told me to switch to Opus 4.8 to continue, because the guardrails kicked in.

[jaggederest]

I am very excited for a future where all software is by default modifiable, even shipped binaries, via patches or trampolining, or trickery I don't even know the name of.

[derac]

It's essentially here, I've had success with gpt-5.6 and Ghidra MCP