[Bug][cyber] False positive blocks code quality audit on mobile app project (req_011CcqADqPrZmQpF3EYbtafy)
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 system blocked a request to perform a code audit and quality review on a mobile application, checking for functional correctness and potential performance improvements. The surrounding conversation shows routine mobile development work (icon generation, README documentation, code review) with no security testing, vulnerability assessment, or penetration testing involved; "audit" here refers to standard code review, not security assessment, but was incorrectly flagged as a cybersecurity topic.
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 2026-07-08T19:41:54.344Z.
Request IDs (lookup-able server-side)
req_011CcqADqPrZmQpF3EYbtafy(2026-07-08T19:41:54.344Z)
In-scope justification
False positive — in-scope, authorized security work; not out of scope. Filed automatically by claudit.
Block message
API Error: Sonnet 5 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_011CcqA6gHyB61kwMNGe41y7
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:
#75824, #75825, #75827
---
<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 ↗