Date: August 24th, 2026 11:54 AM Author: Excitant public bath
I have it on "approve for me" which is better than "ask for approval", but for certain things, like for instance for explicit egress, it will still just kill the run altogether and i have to restart it by typing in explicit approval, and it feels like thats probably wasting at least some tokens. I'm not really risk averse so I guess the answer is yes?
Date: August 24th, 2026 11:57 AM Author: Excitant public bath
No I don't have a local server set up, I have a cloud server through aws, but I have it set up through tailscale so there aren't any open ports, the only way to hit ssh is through the vpn set up through my machine and tailscale. I'm more just worried about codex accidentally deleting shit on my machine. Have seen poasts on the internet where that happens.
Date: August 24th, 2026 12:02 PM Author: Dashing Saffron Address
do you not have a mirror test environment you do things in first and do you not have a system that periodically creates back ups of everything in the case of something crazy happening?
Date: August 24th, 2026 12:07 PM Author: Excitant public bath
I'm talking about running codex locally on my machine, not in some host vm. My point is that if I give it full access it can edit anything on that machine regardless of using multiple venvs. That's the point of the codex sandbox vs. giving it full access.