[Bug][cyber] Safety block halts legitimate code audit of security/forensics project tooling (req_011CcqAGSzJVr9Lnx3bLjXi3)
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 when the user requested code auditing and analysis of a security/forensics project's source files — specifically, reviewing extraction tooling and Frida instrumentation hooks. This is in-scope software engineering work (reading and understanding existing code), not exploit development or attack planning. The user has explicitly framed the context as a security/forensics project and is asking for technical code review, which should be permitted under legitimate cybersecurity 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 2026-07-08T19:42:07.509Z.
Request IDs (lookup-able server-side)
req_011CcqAGSzJVr9Lnx3bLjXi3(2026-07-08T19:42:07.509Z)
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_011CcqAG56vAx42pU2RdWoq8
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:
#75831
---
<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 ↗