# Claude Code: Getting "Cybersecurity Refusals" for Hardware Hacks > Source: > Published: 2026-07-23 13:48:36+00:00 # Claude Code: Getting "Cybersecurity Refusals" for Hardware Hacks The weird part is that both Fable and Opus flagged this as a "cybersecurity topic" and basically shut me down. Here is the exact error I got: ``` Fable 5's safeguards flagged this message. The safeguards are intentionally broad right now and may flag safe and routine coding, cybersecurity, or biology work. These measures let us bring Mythos-level capabilities sooner, and we're working to refine them. Switched to Opus 4.8. Send feedback with /feedback or learn more: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/15363606 ⎿ Tip: You can configure model switch behavior in /config 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. ``` It feels absurd because I own the hardware. I'm just trying to understand font rendering from the firmware up to avoid that stale look most e-readers have. I suspect the LLM is treating firmware modification as "compromising a system." If writing a simple driver or custom rendering software for proprietary hardware is flagged as a security risk, it makes me wonder about the future of AI workflow for low-level dev. Does this mean any project involving reverse engineering or closed-source chips (like Broadcom) is going to trigger these broad filters? I'm trying to figure out if this is a prompt engineering issue or if the models are becoming too restrictive for real-world hardware projects. If the "Cyber Verification Program" is now a requirement just to tinker with an old e-reader, that's a steep barrier for a hobbyist. [Next Patreon Layoffs: AI Workflow Efficiency vs. Headcount →](/en/threads/2320/)