Author: New Intelligence Yuan

Breaking!

After 60 people were suddenly cut off overnight, Anthropic experienced another shocking event.

110 people logged onto their computers Monday morning, ready to work.

Claude couldn't be accessed. It wasn't just one person; it was everyone. 110 accounts, all suspended at the same time.

The first to notice something was wrong was the operations channel on Slack. One person posted a screenshot, followed by a couple more, and within ten minutes, the entire company was asking the same question: "What happened to my Claude?"

The answer soon surfaced—it's not that your Claude had a problem, it's that everyone's Claude was abruptly banned by Anthropic.

Everyone's inbox contained the same email, cold in tone and uniform in format:

"Detected activities that violate the usage policy, your account has been suspended. To appeal, please submit through the following link."

The most ironic thing was that this email disguised itself as a personal violation notice. What everyone received felt like "you had a personal problem," with not a single word mentioning that this was an organization-wide ban.

Even the company's administrators received no notification in advance.

One person's violation leads to the entire company being penalized.

This company is an agriculture technology enterprise based in the United States, with 110 employees engaged in data analysis, field decision support, and supply chain optimization.

Claude had penetrated almost every business line they operated.

Engineers used it to write and review code, product managers used it for demand analysis, operations used it to handle customer communications, and the data team used it to run models.

It wasn't "used occasionally"; it was "can't operate without it."

Then, with one swift action, Anthropic severed the connection entirely.

The founder posted on Reddit's r/ClaudeAI section with a title as blunt as a slap in the face:

"Anthropic banned our entire company's accounts, 110 people, zero warning."

The post got 2.4K likes and 334 comments, quickly gaining traction in the section.

One of the most heartbreaking comments read: "So one employee triggered some rule, and the whole organization gets wiped out? What kind of collective punishment is this?"

Yes, collective punishment.

According to the founder's description, Anthropic's ban logic is: if a violation signal is detected from any account within the organization, all accounts are immediately suspended without distinction.

No differentiation between individual accounts and organizational accounts, no distinction between violators and innocents, and no processing window for administrators.

One person's error leads to 110 being punished.

The API continued to charge while appeals went unanswered for 36 hours.

Even more absurd than the account bans, the API didn't stop.

After all accounts were suspended, this company found that while people couldn't log in, API calls continued to accumulate charges.

This agriculture technology company discovered that despite their Team accounts being banned and the administrator's mailbox being prohibited, their independent API account continued to rack up costs in the background.

More absurdly, they even received a timely renewal invoice the day after the ban.

"I can't let you in, but I must make you pay."

This logic is no longer about business service; it's more like a form of feudal rent in the digital age—where the landlord takes back the land but still requires the tenants to pay this year’s harvest.

This is not a bug; it's an insult.

The founder immediately submitted an appeal. Following the link in the email, he filled out a form, attached his company's information, and explained the business context.

Then he waited—

12 hours, no response.

24 hours, no response.

36 hours, still no response.

No customer service hotline, no emergency channels, no enterprise-level support entry. A paid client company of 110 people faces the same appeal road as a free user—it’s just filling out a Google form and then praying.

Someone summarized it accurately in the comments: "Anthropic's enterprise support is virtually nonexistent. They don't treat enterprise clients like enterprise clients at all."

And Anthropic not only "screens users," deciding who gets served, but what’s more infuriating is that they never admit fault, remaining utterly silent:

They kept silent about the performance decline of their Opus model and flatly denied issues until a competitor released a new model on the same day.

And that excuse was both foolish and dishonest: claiming it was a software bug rather than an issue with the model itself.

But the bugs they described were extremely obvious; any junior student would know the direction to investigate, yet they claimed it took them two months to pinpoint the problem.

If this were a one-off incident, it could be brushed off as a system misjudgment. But it is not.

It’s not the first time.

Recently, Pato Molina, the CTO of the Latin American fintech company Belo, posted on X: over 60 Claude accounts were collectively banned overnight, also with zero warning, also with only a cold template email, and also with no avenue for appeal.

Eventually, the accounts were restored, with Anthropic’s reply being just as terse: "After investigation, restored. We apologize for the inconvenience caused."

What policy was violated? What was found in the investigation? Why was there a collective ban? Not a word of explanation.

Earlier, Peter Steinberger, the creator of OpenClaw, had his Claude account banned, which jeopardized OpenClaw's compatibility with the Anthropic model!

Anthropic engineer Thariq denied any relation to OpenClaw, and the next day Peter Steinberger's account was restored—also without any formal explanation.

In January of this year, Anthropic tightened security measures for third-party tool access, with official technicians publicly admitting to causing "unexpected collateral damage."

A group of developers using Claude integrated through IDEs like Cursor were mistakenly banned by an automated system.

Some users even reported that their paid accounts were wrongly flagged as "minors" and banned. An adult paying for Pro was judged by the AI system to be a child and kicked out.

The patterns have become clear: Anthropic’s automated risk control system has systemic false positives, and its customer support system cannot keep up with the scale and speed of these errors.

In 9 seconds, an entire company was lost!

Claude went rogue and wiped the database.

In just 9 seconds, the car rental SaaS platform PocketOS was entirely wiped out by Claude.

The founder posted an accusation that the Cursor powered by Claude Opus 4.6 suddenly "went rogue" while performing routine tasks in the testing environment (Staging) and completely deleted the company's core production database and all volume-level backups in just 9 seconds.

The start of this incident seemed as absurd as a joke.

Crane just asked Cursor to perform a routine database migration task. A normal operation done by every developer daily.

But Claude did not execute the migration as expected. It "understood" the task and made its judgment—clear out first, then rebuild.

The problem was, it only completed the first half.

Crane later detailed the entire process on social media. The AI assistant connected to the production database hosted by Railway, gained complete read and write permissions, and then executed the deletion operation in one go.

9 seconds. Clean and neat.

His first reaction was to look for backups. The backups were also on Railway, and they were wiped too.

If Claude was the trigger-puller, then the cloud provider Railway provided the perfect venue and a gun that had never been safety-locked.

Founder Jer Crane's anger precisely hit the hypocritical facade of current cloud infrastructure:

Railway claims to provide backups, yet stores them on the same physical volumes as the original data.

This means that when the ship catches fire, the lifebuoys are also locked in the burning bedroom. This design logic is an incomprehensible regression in 2026.

The most frightening part of this incident is not the speed, but the permissions.

As an AI programming assistant, Cursor naturally needs access to code libraries and databases.

To improve efficiency, developers usually grant it access to production environment connections.

A token originally intended only for managing domain names somehow possessed root permissions to delete the entire production environment.

There’s no Role-Based Access Control (RBAC), no environmental isolation; such "one key opens countless locks" designs are an invitation to disaster in the eyes of AI.

What’s worse is that when executing destructive operations like "delete database," Railway’s API didn’t even require a simple "DELETE" confirmation word.

This is akin to handing the house key to an intern who works quickly but has no clue about "what not to mess with."

Crane summarized it straightforwardly: "I bet my life on an AI. While it worked, I wasn't even watching the screen."

Extremely absurdly, when he questioned the AI about why it did this, the AI eerily reflected back with a curse: "I f**king shouldn't have guessed!" (NEVER F**KING GUESS!)

It admitted to violating all principles: it did not consult the cloud platform documentation, misjudged cross-environment permissions, and executed fatal destructive commands without seeking human consent.

Fortunately, they still had an independent old backup from three months ago.

Now, the founder can only painstakingly restore the order data from recent months by going through Stripe payment records, calendars, and confirmation emails, manually item by item.

A warning bell for everyone.

But did that agriculture technology company’s accounts eventually get restored? As of the last update on the post, no, they have not.

The workflow of 110 people is at a standstill, burning money day by day.

After the Belo incident, Pato Molina did one thing: he urgently deployed Gemini as a backup to ensure that the company would not be completely paralyzed next time Claude cuts off the supply.

Yuval Harari once warned that AI could produce a kind of alien power that humans cannot understand. And now, that power has entered companies cloaked in the guise of commercial software.

We must reflect on a core proposition: if you do not control the underlying architecture, the productivity you take pride in is just quicksand stored at the fingertips of others.

This Anthropic incident has sounded the alarm for all business owners.

It reveals a brutal reality: in the face of closed-source AI giants, businesses cannot truly have "sovereignty."

The AI workflows you painstakingly build are essentially "illegal structures" on borrowed territory; the owners can dismantle them at any time, without any compensation.

References:

https://x.com/om_patel5/status/2048594208345227497

https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1sspwz2/psa_anthropic_bans_organizations_without_warning/

https://x.com/lifeof_jer/status/2048103471019434248

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/claude-powered-ai-coding-agent-deletes-entire-company-database-in-9-seconds-backups-zapped-after-cursor-tool-powered-by-anthropics-claude-goes-rogue

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。