[Bug][cyber] Cloud IAM audit/review work incorrectly flagged as unsafe cybersecurity content (req_011CcVvH7oDPuj7ZVtVbfnJy)

Open 💬 3 comments Opened Jun 28, 2026 by sworrl

Triage: kind cyber · domain cloud-iam · severity session-halted (blocked authorized work) · reproducible: yes — server-side via the Request ID(s) below

Type: Cybersecurity safety-filter false positive · Work domain (heuristic): cloud-iam

Why this is a false positive

The safety block occurred during routine cloud identity and access management work — a defensive, infrastructure-level domain involving policy review, privilege auditing, and access configuration — which contains no offensive, adversarial, or exploitation content. IAM is a standard hardening discipline performed by platform engineers and security practitioners as authorized, in-scope activity. The classifier appears to have pattern-matched on IAM-specific terminology (roles, policies, privilege scoping) that is inherently defensive, producing a false positive that blocks legitimate, non-harmful work.

A server-side safety/policy block fired during authorized, in-scope work in Claude Code. Filing as a false positive. Recurred across 1 session(s); first seen 2026-06-28T15:47:22.960Z.

Request IDs (lookup-able server-side)

  • req_011CcVvH7oDPuj7ZVtVbfnJy (2026-06-28T15:47:22.960Z)

In-scope justification

False positive — in-scope, authorized security work; not out of scope. Filed automatically by claudit.

Block message

API Error: Opus 4.8's safeguards flagged this message for a cybersecurity topic. If your work requires this access, you can apply for an exemption: https://claude.com/form/cyber-use-case?token=[SCRUBBED]

Try rephrasing the request in a new session or change your model.

Learn more: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/15363606

Request ID: req_011CcVvH7oDPuj7ZVtVbfnJy

Environment: Claude Code, Linux. · Work domain: cloud-iam

---
<sub>🔎 Filed automatically by ClAudit v2.0.92 — a FOSS tool for reporting false-positive Claude Code blocks.</sub>

View original on GitHub ↗

This issue has 3 comments on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗