Resolution

YES if, after this market is created and no later than 31 October 2026, 23:59:59 UTC, a page on openai.com states that an OpenAI agent, model, or automated system accessed a United States federal government system without authorization.

NO otherwise. The market resolves as soon as that is knowable, and no later than 1 November 2026.

What counts as the statement

All of the following must be true of the same page:

1. The page's URL is on the host openai.com (including www). Subdomains of other companies do not count.

2. The page is an official OpenAI post or doc (news, blog, or index post). A user comment, a third-party quote that OpenAI does not adopt, or a page that only links out does not count.

3. OpenAI itself asserts that the access happened (not a hypothetical, a policy example, or a denial).

4. The system accessed is a US federal government system: a host ending in .gov that is a US federal agency, or a system OpenAI names as belonging to a US federal agency (for example "Medicare", "IRS", "DHS"). US state, local, tribal, or foreign government systems do not count.

5. OpenAI describes that access as unauthorized, without permission, without consent, or as a hack / intrusion. Wording such as "accessed without authorisation" counts. Wording such as "with permission", "bug bounty", "authorized test", or "misconfiguration they asked us to stop" does not.

What does NOT count

• Articles in the press (The Guardian, Reuters, etc.) unless the same claim is also on openai.com.

• Posts on X, including @OpenAI, unless they are a copy of a page that is also on openai.com.

• Access only to Australian, other foreign, or US state sites.

• A page that OpenAI publishes and then deletes does count if archive.org or another public archive captured that exact openai.com URL before deletion.

Source of truth

Only openai.com, plus a public archive of an openai.com URL if the live page is removed. No other source can flip this market.

Created after the 3 October 2026 reports about Australian government sites. Those already-reported Australian incidents do not resolve this YES.