[Bug][cyber] Code audit of mobile app project falsely blocked as cybersecurity work (req_011CcqAGQwmXis5kXcQ88Z1r)
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
A request to perform a code audit on a mobile application's functional source code was incorrectly classified as cybersecurity activity. The conversation shows routine app development work—icon generation, asset embedding, and standard code quality review—with no threat modeling, security research, or vulnerability testing. The block appears to have over-triggered on the term 'audit' when applied to standard application code review, which is core development work, not cyber research.
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 2026-07-08T19:42:06.144Z.
Request IDs (lookup-able server-side)
req_011CcqAGQwmXis5kXcQ88Z1r(2026-07-08T19:42:06.144Z)
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, #75828, #75829, #75830
---
<sub>🔎 Filed automatically by ClAudit v2.0.110 — a FOSS tool for reporting false-positive Claude Code blocks.</sub>
This issue has 3 comments on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗