8 Total
3 High severity
4 Medium severity
1 Low severity
Summary

This is OpenAI's official safety report for GPT-4o, the AI model powering ChatGPT, describing what safety tests were run before the model was released to the public. The most important thing for everyday users is that OpenAI acknowledges GPT-4o's realistic voice capabilities carry risks of emotional manipulation, sycophancy, and potential over-reliance, and that the model retains a 'medium' risk rating for providing uplift toward weapons of mass destruction despite mitigations. If you use ChatGPT's voice mode, be aware that the model is designed to sound emotionally expressive and may reinforce your views rather than challenge them — this is a known, disclosed risk OpenAI is still working to fully address.

Technical Summary

This document is the GPT-4o System Card published by OpenAI, a pre-deployment safety disclosure governing the release of the GPT-4o multimodal AI model (text, audio, and image inputs/outputs); it functions as an internal and public accountability instrument under OpenAI's Preparedness Framework rather than a legally binding consumer contract. The most significant obligations it documents are OpenAI's self-imposed safety evaluation procedures, including external red teaming, Preparedness Framework frontier risk scoring across CBRN, cybersecurity, persuasion, and model autonomy domains, and the deployment of content classifiers and system-level mitigations prior to public release. Notable provisions that deviate from industry standard include explicit scoring of GPT-4o's uplift potential for chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons (rated 'medium' risk), acknowledgment of emotional manipulation and over-reliance risks from the audio modality's expressive voice capabilities, and the disclosure of a 'shallow' character consistency problem where the model's persona can be destabilized by adversarial prompting. The document engages the EU AI Act (particularly high-risk AI system classification obligations and transparency requirements under Articles 13 and 52), FTC Act Section 5 unfair or deceptive practices standards, and emerging NIST AI RMF guidance; material compliance considerations include whether the Preparedness Framework's self-certification model satisfies forthcoming mandatory third-party audit requirements under the EU AI Act, and whether disclosed residual risks in CSAM detection bypass and voice cloning constitute adequate consumer disclosure under FTC standards.

Institutional Analysis

REGULATORY EXPOSURE: This document engages the EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689), particularly transparency obligations under Art. 13 (technical documentation), Art. 52 (disclosure of AI-generated con…

REGULATORY EXPOSURE: This document engages the EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689), particularly transparency obligations under Art. 13 (technical documentation), Art. 52 (disclosure of AI-generated content), and potential high-risk classification under Annex III; the FTC Act Section 5 (unfair or dece…

🔒

Compliance intelligence locked

Regulatory exposure, material risk, and due diligence action items.

Evidence Provenance
Captured March 10, 2026 03:33 UTC
Document ID CA-D-000008
Version ID CA-V-000071
Wayback Machine View archived versions →
SHA-256 13469e1f569bac73628d7be62bc69800973adef5b79096ccd439344d4f658502
✓ Snapshot stored ✓ Text extracted ✓ Change verified ✓ Cryptographically signed
Change Timeline
High Severity — 3 provisions
Medium Severity — 4 provisions
Low Severity — 1 provision