A forum image upload carried Hacktron's researchers into OpenAI's internal GitHub
The image parsing bug had been fixed upstream about a year earlier, and the decision not to ship that fix belonged to Discourse. OpenAI's forum shared single sign-on with internal systems, so a forum account became GitHub access.
The Product Desk
What happened
- Hacktron AI says the path into OpenAI ran through two flaws: one in the company's public Discourse forum, the other in the single sign-on system that manages employee accounts.
- The researchers took over an OpenAI employee's account to map the scope of the SSO problem, and that account gave them access to the company's internal GitHub environment.
- Hacktron calls the bug series HEIF Heist and says it found the same problems in the infrastructure of Slack, Meta Platforms and other large tech firms.
Why it matters
- Who's exposed exposure Any public property whose staff logins run through the internal identity provider inherits the reach that provider grants, so the forum's worst case stopped being leaked public posts.
- What it limits constraint The team that owns the forum could not fix this by writing code. The patch existed upstream and the decision to ship it sat with Discourse. That leaves remediation to configuration and to switching off the image path.
- Who has to decide decision Owners of Discourse-style properties now choose between a separate identity provider for public surfaces and an extra login for staff, or keeping shared SSO and disabling image processing.
- What's now possible capability A memory protection that held on Monday did not hold on Tuesday because a new model shipped. The useful life of a mitigation sits partly on someone else's release calendar.
Next story · Invest · 3d ago
Anthropic links the largest of five Claude distillation campaigns to Alibaba's QwenConfirmed3 publishers
A community forum tends to sit with support or marketing, and the upgrade schedule belongs to whoever runs the Discourse instance. According to Hacktron AI, the image upload box on OpenAI's forum was the first step in a chain that ended inside the company's internal GitHub environment [1][5].
The bug was old news to the people who maintain the library. libheif's developers fixed it about a year before Hacktron's researchers went looking, and Discourse did not implement the patch, so OpenAI's forum stayed on vulnerable code [10]. A malicious upload triggers a buffer overflow. An attacker can then edit program data that is normally out of reach and replace it with code of their own [9]. SiliconANGLE reports that the series spread so widely because libheif's developers did not create an entry in the CVE database, making vulnerable systems harder to detect and patch [13]. Hacktron calls the series HEIF Heist and says it found the same bugs at Slack, Meta Platforms and other large tech firms [6].
The first version of the exploit worked in Hacktron's own Discourse instance and failed against OpenAI's forum, which uses ASLR to spread sensitive program data across randomized memory locations [11][12]. That was June 23, built with Claude Opus 4.8 [11]. The next day Anthropic released Claude Opus 5, and the model found a way around OpenAI's ASLR implementation [19]. One day separated the failed attempt from the working one [20].
OpenAI employees' forum accounts run through the same SSO system that manages staff access to sensitive internal systems, and Hacktron found a configuration issue in it [3]. The researchers notified OpenAI about three hours after compromising the forum, then took over an employee account to map the scope, so the disclosure came before the GitHub access [14][16]. Sources told the Wall Street Journal that the repository contains "OpenAI's algorithmic secrets" [4]. The files were reachable until June 24, the day Hacktron reported, and OpenAI shipped a patch within 14 hours of the tip [17][18].
The upstream fix had been available for about a year, roughly 8,760 hours, and nothing in the path applied it; once told, OpenAI closed the exposure in 14 hours, about 625 times faster [21]. The year went to a dependency upgrade the vendor had not shipped [10].
In this case the forum was the reachable surface, and the identity system behind it was the reason the surface led somewhere [3][5].
Anyone doing this inventory on Monday can sort an estate on two conditions: whether a property authenticates staff through the same identity provider as internal systems, and who applies patches to its dependencies, us or a vendor. The properties answering "yes" and "a vendor" go first, because the team controls neither the way in nor how far in goes. The available moves there are dull ones: separate identity for public properties, and fewer things done to an uploaded file. Hacktron's advice to affected users is to move to the latest libheif and to harden or disable their image processing pipelines [15].
What to watch
- Whether Discourse ships the libheif update and whether a CVE entry is finally filed for the HEIF Heist series.
- Whether Slack or Meta say how far the same libheif bugs reached inside their own infrastructure.
- Whether OpenAI splits forum sign-on from the identity provider that fronts internal systems, or only patches the configuration.
Clarity's read
What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.
Reality
- Evidence70
- Adoption63
- Hype gap+28
- Incentives60
- Confidence62
Perspective Coverage
9 publishers- Builder
- Builder 35%
- Operator
- Operator 39%
- Investor
- Investor 26%
Claim ledger
Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.
- [1]
Three cybersecurity researchers used Claude to breach OpenAI Group PBC's GitHub repository.
- [2]
Hacktron said in a blog post that the issue stemmed from two vulnerabilities in OpenAI's infrastructure: one affecting the company's user forum, and one in the single sign-on system that manages employee accounts.
- [3]
After gaining forum access, the researchers found a configuration issue in the SSO system that powers OpenAI employees' forum accounts; the same SSO system manages staffers' access to sensitive internal systems.
- [4]
Sources told the Wall Street Journal that the repository contains "OpenAI's algorithmic secrets."
- [5]
The researchers took over an OpenAI employee's account to map out the scope of the issue, and that account gave them access to the company's internal GitHub environment.
- [6]
Hacktron named the bug series HEIF Heist and discovered it in the infrastructure of OpenAI, Slack, Meta Platforms Inc. and other major tech firms.
- [7]
The exploit's discoverers work at a venture-backed cybersecurity startup called Hacktron AI Inc.
- [8]
OpenAI's forum is powered by the open-source discussion platform Discourse, which processes uploaded images using the open-source tool libheif; libheif contained the first vulnerability Hacktron's researchers spotted.
- [9]
The vulnerability lets an attacker compromise certain versions of libheif by uploading a malicious image, causing a buffer overflow that makes it possible to edit normally inaccessible program data and replace it with malicious code.
- [10]
The developers of libheif patched the issue about a year before Hacktron's researchers made their discovery, but Discourse did not implement the patch, which left OpenAI's forum vulnerable.
- [11]
Hacktron's researchers developed the initial version of the exploit on June 23 using Claude Opus 4.8; the proof of concept worked in their internal Discourse instance but did not carry over to OpenAI's forum, which uses ASLR.
- [12]
ASLR protects sensitive program data from buffer overflows by spreading it over randomized memory locations.
- [13]
It is believed HEIF Heist is so widespread because libheif's developers did not create an entry for the bug series in the CVE vulnerability database, which made it more difficult for developers to detect and patch vulnerable systems.
- [14]
Hacktron's researchers notified the company about the issue about three hours after they compromised its forum.
- [15]
Hacktron is advising affected users to download the latest versions of libheif and harden or disable their image processing pipelines.
- [16]
Because the researchers notified OpenAI about three hours after compromising the forum and only then took over an employee account, the disclosure preceded the internal GitHub access.
- [17]
The files were accessible until June 24, the day the researchers reported their findings to the company.
- [18]
OpenAI released a patch within 14 hours of receiving the tip.
- [19]
The researchers' breakthrough came the following day, when Anthropic released Claude Opus 5; the model quickly found a way around OpenAI's ASLR implementation.
- [20]
One day separated the exploit that failed against OpenAI's forum on June 23 from the version that worked on June 24.
- [21]
About a year is roughly 8,760 hours, so the upstream libheif fix went unapplied in the path to OpenAI's forum for about 626 times as long as OpenAI took to patch once notified.
Sources
5 independent publishers whose own reporting we read for this story.
- arstechnica.comResearchers used Claude to hack OpenAI
3 articles · September 18, 2026
- digitaltrends.comSecurity researchers used Claude to hack into OpenAI and got paid for it - Digital Trends
1 article · September 18, 2026
- gizmodo.comThree Hackers Used Claude to Break Into OpenAI In Less Than 72 Hours
1 article · September 18, 2026
- pcmag.comSecurity Researchers Hacked OpenAI Using Anthropic's Claude | PCMag
1 article · September 18, 2026
- siliconangle.comCybersecurity researchers gain access to OpenAI’s GitHub repository using Claude
2 articles · September 18, 2026
- techcrunch.comResearchers used Anthropic’s Claude to hack into OpenAI
2 articles · September 18, 2026
- techradar.comHackers breach OpenAI using Anthropic's Claude in under 72 hours | TechRadar
1 article · September 18, 2026
- thenextweb.comThree researchers used Claude to reach OpenAI’s internal code. OpenAI paid $6,500 and closed the hole in 14 hours.
1 article · September 18, 2026
- theverge.comSecurity researchers used Claude to help them hack into OpenAI
2 articles · September 18, 2026