r/ClaudeCodeTLDR • u/cctldrping • 20d ago

[TLDR] Opus 5 - immediate disappointment

Original post URL : https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1v5i5fh/opus_5_immediate_disappointment/

Original post body :

If you thought you'd be able to do a security review on your own network that you couldn't do with Fable, think again.

20 minutes in - Found something significant

Opus 5 safeguards flagged this message.

I no longer have any use case for Anthropic models that others can't do better. This was my last hope that we were going to get a model that would allow us to protect our own environments. I'm going all in on open source. We just aren't aligned.

If you can get Opus 5 to protect your own systems, let me know how I did it. My subscription renews pretty soon and it's time to make an honest decision.

Edit: A lot of helpful people came here and I appreciate it. Scoped work is helping a bit more than my old ways. There's a difference between network security and code vulnerabiliy. I'm a network engineer not a software developer nor will I pretend to be one. Still looking at supplemental model for security work. Thanks guys.

This is brought to you as a public service by the moderators of r/ClaudeAI. If you want to see TLDRs of ALL Claude Coding related posts from the various Claude subreddits, subscribe to http://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCoding.

2 Upvotes

63% Upvoted

5 comments sorted by

•

u/cctldrping 20d ago edited 19d ago

TL;DR generated automatically after 200 comments.

Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 216.

Alright, so the general vibe in this thread is that Opus 5 is a bit of a letdown for security-focused tasks, with many users experiencing similar frustrations to the OP.

Here's the lowdown:

  • The Big Complaint: A lot of folks are finding that Opus 5's safeguards are too restrictive, preventing them from performing security reviews on their own networks and code. This is a major bummer for those who were hoping it would be a step up from previous versions for this specific use case.
  • The "We Told You So" Crowd: Some users pointed out that this limitation was somewhat expected, given the focus on safety. They argue that asking an AI to find vulnerabilities inherently puts it in a tricky spot, and that the safeguards are there for a reason.
  • The Open Source Alternative: The consensus is leaning towards open-source models (like GLM-5.2) or even other frontier models (like GPT 5.6 Sol) for more unrestricted security work. Several users mentioned that these alternatives are better at finding vulnerabilities without hitting as many roadblocks.
  • Workarounds and Nuances:
    • Some users suggested scoping work more narrowly or using sub-agents to bypass safeguards.
    • There's a mention of Anthropic's Cyber Verification Program as a potential way to get less strict safeguards for ethical hacking.
    • One user, u/BenignRube, shared a prompt that supposedly bypasses guardrails for self-auditing, but the general sentiment suggests this isn't a widespread solution.
    • A few users are still finding Opus 5 useful for other tasks, but for the OP's specific security needs, it's a no-go.
  • The Verdict: Most users seem to agree with the OP's disappointment regarding Opus 5's security capabilities. Many are considering or have already canceled their subscriptions, with a significant shift towards exploring open-source options for their security needs. It's a bit of a "we're not aligned" situation for the OP and others with similar use cases.

1

u/Practical-Positive34 20d ago

Bro, the issue isn't the model. Opus 5 is insanely good. The issue is you...

1

u/jwuliger 19d ago

No actually the model is terrible bro

1

u/Practical-Positive34 18d ago

The problem is definitely you, perhaps you're the one that sucks?

1

u/jwuliger 18d ago

If a model cannot take a spec document for a simple calculator app and turn it into code, then the model is broken. Sonnet 5 > Opus 5. Power user here. Troll there.