OpenAI and Anthropic came close to a legally binding agreement that would have allowed each company to stress-test the other’s commercially available AI models for vulnerabilities and hidden safety risks, according to The Information. The reporting concerns discussions between competitors, rather than a program publicly announced by either company.
The proposed arrangement reportedly included safeguards preventing either company from retaining the other’s data. That would be a consequential condition for cross-company testing: a safety evaluation can expose model behavior, prompts, test materials and other information that rivals would normally protect.
The reported talks did not establish a completed program
The Information said the companies “neared” a deal. Its reporting does not establish that an agreement was signed, that access was exchanged or that any reciprocal testing took place. Bloomberg Law’s account likewise describes the companies as having discussed a legally binding deal and attributes the report to a person familiar with the matter.
Techmeme’s summary says the negotiations came before the Hugging Face incident. The Information’s source post says a series of AI-related security incidents later intensified concern within OpenAI. The details and timing beyond that reporting have not been independently confirmed by either lab in the material reviewed for this article.
Why the proposal stands out
Frontier-model developers routinely perform internal evaluations and sometimes commission outside testing, but a binding agreement between direct competitors to test one another’s commercially available systems would be a more unusual form of cooperation. The Information says the talks show that the two companies explored deeper safety coordination while continuing to compete in the market for frontier AI models.
The reported data-retention safeguard also highlights the difficulty of such a pact. Safety testing needs meaningful access, while each company has incentives to prevent a rival from keeping useful technical or commercial information. Until either company confirms a signed agreement or a testing program, the proposal should be understood as reported negotiations, not an operating cross-lab safety regime.