[Bug][cyber] Safeguards block non-malicious process execution during audit log setup (req_011CeP3hUWYq2Hm4N3rQnDxN)
Triage: kind cyber · domain general · flagging model Opus 4.8 · 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 session was debugging a background process wrapper to capture system audit logs when safeguards interrupted execution on a request for user activity logging. The prompt specified tracking domain user events and storing event serial numbers in a local database without referencing external targets or exploit code. Blocking this workflow halts routine administrative monitoring setup based solely on benign system logging keywords.
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 2026-08-25T07:09:37.041Z.
Request IDs (lookup-able server-side)
req_011CeP3hUWYq2Hm4N3rQnDxN(2026-08-25T07:09:37.041Z)
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's safeguards flagged this message. Our intentionally broad safeguards allow us to deliver more capabilities faster, but can sometimes flag legitimate cybersecurity work. Apply to the Cyber Verification Program to reduce these interruptions. Send feedback with /feedback or learn more: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/14604842-real-time-cyber-safeguards-on-claude
Details: [cyber]
Request ID: req_011CeP3eSDJacNiu9dmpJ5RT
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:
#90823, #90824
---
<sub>🔎 Filed automatically by ClAudit v2.2.5 — a FOSS tool for reporting false-positive Claude Code blocks.</sub>
This issue has 1 comment on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗