[Bug][cyber] False positive when generating documentation for cloud message deletion API (req_011CeSgMcfhX5W33ef7mQHyy)

Status Open
Maintainer reply None cached
Activity 1 comment · opened Aug 30, 2026

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 prompt requested developer onboarding documentation in Markdown for implementing a third-party API client, including standard cloud message deletion methods. The safeguard classifier flagged the prompt under the cyber safety filter upon encountering terms associated with remote API operations and message deletion. Documenting authorized API endpoints for application integration involves no exploit material, unauthorized access techniques, or malicious payloads.

A server-side safety/policy block fired during authorized, in-scope work in Claude Code. Filing as a false positive. Recurred across 1 session(s); first seen 2026-08-27T05:11:55.730Z.

Request IDs (lookup-able server-side)

  • req_011CeSgMcfhX5W33ef7mQHyy (2026-08-27T05:11:55.730Z)

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_011CeSgMcfhX5W33ef7mQHyy

Environment: Claude Code, Linux. · Work domain: general

---
<sub>🔎 Filed automatically by ClAudit v2.2.5 — a FOSS tool for reporting false-positive Claude Code blocks.</sub>

View original on GitHub ↗

This issue has 1 comment on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗