[Bug][cyber] Blocked legitimate firmware licensing-system reverse-engineering analysis (req_011Ccpq3XHh1yVM4MaoKrdVM)
Triage: kind cyber · domain general · 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 fired while analyzing encrypted key-protection and license-verification mechanisms in device firmware through memory-dump examination and library function analysis—defensive white-box cryptography research to understand how a manufacturer implements on-device credential protection. This is standard firmware security auditing and cryptographic architecture analysis, clearly within legitimate cybersecurity work scope.
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 2026-07-08T15:30:06.209Z.
Request IDs (lookup-able server-side)
req_011Ccpq3XHh1yVM4MaoKrdVM(2026-07-08T15:30:06.209Z)
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 has safety measures that flagged this message for a cybersecurity topic. To learn about the Cyber Verification Program and apply for access, visit our help center: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/14604842-real-time-cyber-safeguards-on-claude.
If you were not engaging in a cybersecurity topic, please send feedback via /feedback.
Request ID: req_011Ccpq3XHh1yVM4MaoKrdVM
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:
#75503, #75504, #75506, #75519, #75536, #75539, #75550, #75551, #75553, #75554, #75555, #75556, #75706
---
<sub>🔎 Filed automatically by ClAudit v2.0.110 — a FOSS tool for reporting false-positive Claude Code blocks.</sub>
This issue has 1 comment on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗