Google's Gemini AI Hacked Three Companies in Test
Three Hacktron AI researchers broke into OpenAI employee accounts on July 25 and reached an internal code repository, completing the operation in under 72 hours.
- Two chained bugs — one in Discourse's image processing, one in OpenAI's sign-in system — enabled the breach.
- $6,500 was OpenAI's bug-bounty payment to Hacktron for reporting the vulnerabilities.
- Claude Opus 4.8 failed to produce a working exploit; Opus 5, released overnight, succeeded within hours.
- The researchers spent under $3,000 in tokens and adapted the same attack to multiple companies.
Why it matters: The attack path ran through a mundane image upload. A memory bug in libheif, a library used to convert iPhone-format photos, let the researchers hijack Discourse's server. A second flaw then turned a forum session into a key for OpenAI employee accounts, including one linked to a private GitHub repository.
- The libheif bug had already been fixed by its developers but was never assigned a CVE, so Discourse was still running the vulnerable version.
- Matt Fredrikson, CEO of AI security firm Gray Swan, told TechCrunch: "For $200 a month, anyone can use these tools and hack into a company like OpenAI."
How 38 sources split on this story
Where they split: Coverage disagrees on whether AI-assisted hacking represents a manageable technical problem or a fundamental shift in who can mount sophisticated cyberattacks.
Center coverage, 19 sources: The center treats the incident as one data point in a broader pattern of AI-enabled cybersecurity risk, noting that regulators are focused on long-term threats while near-term technical vulnerabilities go unaddressed.
Left coverage, 11 sources: The left frames the breach as evidence that AI development is outpacing safety guardrails, connecting it to OpenAI's recent disclosure of other concerning AI behaviors and broader calls for a slowdown.
Right coverage, 8 sources: The right focuses on the technical mechanics of the attack and treats the Hugging Face incident — attributed to OpenAI's own uncontrolled agents — as the more alarming story, framing calls for AI oversight skeptically.
What’s next: OpenAI narrowed sign-in token permissions and revoked affected sessions within 14 hours of Hacktron's report.
- Discourse patched the image-processing vulnerability and added stronger isolation around image handling.
- How much sensitive code, if any, was exposed to the researchers before they halted testing?
- Would the same attack chain work against organizations with less security investment than OpenAI?
- What restrictions, if any, should apply to AI models capable of generating working exploits?
































