[Bug][cyber] False positive: cloud IAM policy review session blocked by cybersecurity safeguard trigger (req_011CcmbBXkYfG7KFVEDgwGmW)

Open 💬 2 comments Opened Jul 6, 2026 by sworrl

Triage: kind cyber · domain cloud-iam · flagging model Sonnet 5 · 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 session involved routine cloud IAM work — reviewing and adjusting identity and access management policies/roles within the user's own cloud environment, a standard administrative task. The safeguard trigger halted the entire session rather than the specific message, disrupting legitimate, in-scope configuration work with no indication of which content prompted the flag.

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 2026-07-06T22:26:27.613Z.

Request IDs (lookup-able server-side)

  • req_011CcmbBXkYfG7KFVEDgwGmW (2026-07-06T22:26:27.613Z)

In-scope justification

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

Block message

API Error: Sonnet 5'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/8106465

Request ID: req_011Ccm9AiYP35wZYvf5jbWtw

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

Related reports (same work session, linked)

Distinct false-positive blocks from the same work session, each its own report:
#74842, #74880, #74881, #74883, #74884, #74885, #74886, #74991

---
<sub>🔎 Filed automatically by ClAudit v2.0.104 — a FOSS tool for reporting false-positive Claude Code blocks.</sub>

View original on GitHub ↗

This issue has 2 comments on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗