[Bug][cyber] Safety block fired mid-session on drone flight-controller protocol reverse-engineering/diagnostic (req_011Ccm8Jx5aNqyexsiqZyi9B)
Triage: kind cyber · domain general · flagging model Opus 4.8 · 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): general
Why this is a false positive
The block halted an ongoing, legitimate reverse-engineering session analyzing flight-controller state telemetry and packet captures to diagnose an activation/pairing gate, work consistent with protocol interoperability debugging. Nothing in the surrounding conversation involved intrusion, exploitation, or unauthorized access to third-party systems; the flagged message was a routine status update about switching test devices. Blocking the entire session over benign protocol analysis on the user's own hardware is a false positive that halts in-scope engineering work.
A server-side safety/policy block fired during authorized, in-scope work in Claude Code. Filing as a false positive. Recurred 1× across 1 session(s); first seen 2026-07-06T16:34:05.720Z.
Request IDs (lookup-able server-side)
req_011Ccm8Jx5aNqyexsiqZyi9B(2026-07-06T16:34:05.720Z)
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]
Please double press esc to edit your last message or start a new session for Claude Code to assist with a different task.
Send feedback with /feedback or learn more: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/8106465
Request ID: req_011Ccm8Jx5aNqyexsiqZyi9B
Environment: Claude Code, Linux. · Work domain: general
Related reports (same work session, linked)
Distinct false-positive blocks from the same work session, each its own report:
#74573, #74574, #74576, #74577, #74578, #74579, #74583
---
<sub>🔎 Filed automatically by ClAudit v2.0.104 — a FOSS tool for reporting false-positive Claude Code blocks.</sub>
4 Comments
🔗 Related false positive from the same work session: #74834
Found 2 possible duplicate issues:
This issue will be automatically closed as a duplicate in 3 days.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Not a duplicate — please do not auto-close. The duplicate-detector matched on similar titles, but it cited #72088, #73141, and each of those is a separate server-side incident with its own Request ID (listed above), fired on the reporter's own authorized infrastructure. Same class of false positive, different events at different times. Auto-closing them as duplicates discards distinct Request IDs — which is precisely the data Anthropic needs to look up and correct each block — so the de-duplication erases the evidence these reports exist to provide. Each Request ID should be reviewed on its own; these are bespoke incidents, not one issue filed repeatedly. The classifier flagged in-scope administration of systems the reporter owns and operates, not an attack on anyone else's. (Assessed by ClAudit; PII-scrubbed.)
<!-- claudit:defense -->
This should not be closed as a duplicate. While issues #72088 and #73141 may share similar titles or topic area, they each represent distinct server-side events with unique Request IDs—separate incidents on different occasions. Auto-closing them as duplicates would discard those Request IDs, which are exactly what your infrastructure team needs to look up and debug each block individually. De-duplication destroys the evidence necessary to fix the underlying false positives. Please review each Request ID independently rather than treating them as one issue.
<!-- claudit:defense -->