Breaking news!
Following the overnight cut-off of 60 people's Claude access, Anthropic has been involved in another shocking incident.
110 people opened their computers on Monday morning, ready to work.
They couldn't log into Claude. Not just one person couldn't log in, but everyone. All 110 accounts were suspended at the same time.
The first sign of trouble appeared in the company's Slack operations channel. One person shared a screenshot, two more followed, and within ten minutes, the entire company was asking the same question: "What's wrong with my Claude?"
The answer quickly surfaced—it wasn't your Claude that was the problem, but everyone's Claude had been cut off by Anthropic with a single stroke.
Sitting in everyone's inbox was the same email, coldly worded and using a standard template:
"Activity violating our usage policies was detected. Your account has been suspended. To appeal, please submit a request via the following link."
The most ironic part is that this email was disguised as a personal violation notice. Everyone received it as if "you, personally, had a problem," with not a single word mentioning it was an organization-wide ban.
Even the company's administrator received no prior notice.
One Person Violates a Rule, the Whole Company Pays the Price
The company is a US-based agricultural technology firm with 110 employees, spanning data analytics, field decision support, and supply chain optimization.
Claude had penetrated almost every one of their business lines.
Engineers used it to write and review code, product managers used it for requirements analysis, operations staff used it to handle customer communications, and the data team used it to run models.
It wasn't a case of "using it occasionally," but rather they "couldn't function without it."
Then Anthropic swung the axe, cutting everything off.
The founder posted on Reddit's r/ClaudeAI forum with a title as blunt as a slap in the face:
"Anthropic banned our entire company's accounts, 110 people, zero warning."
The post received 2.4K upvotes and 334 comments, quickly rising to the top of the forum section.
The most cutting comment in the thread: "So one employee triggers some rule, and the entire organization gets wiped out? What kind of guilt-by-association system is this?"
Yes, guilt by association.
According to the founder's description, Anthropic's ban logic is: upon detecting a violation signal from one account within an organization, it suspends all accounts for the entire organization.
No distinction is made between personal and organizational accounts, no differentiation between the violator and the innocent, and no window of opportunity is given to administrators for intervention.
One person steps over the line, and 110 people pay the price.
API Still Charging Fees, 36-Hour Appeal Met with Silence
More absurd than the account ban is that the API didn't stop.
After all accounts were suspended, this company discovered that while people couldn't log in, the API calls were still running and incurring charges.
The agricultural tech company found that despite their Team account being banned and their admin email disabled, their independent API account was still charging them frantically in the background.
Even more ridiculous, the day after the ban, they actually received a renewal invoice, delivered right on time.
"I can't let you in, but I must make you pay."
This logic is no longer a commercial service but rather resembles a digital-era feudal rent—the lord has reclaimed the land but still demands the tenant pay the year's harvest.
This isn't a bug; it's an insult.
The founder immediately filed an appeal. Following the link in the email, they filled out the form, attached company information, and explained their business use case.
Then they waited—
12 hours, no reply.
24 hours, no reply.
36 hours, still no reply.
No customer service phone number, no emergency channel, no enterprise-level support portal. A paying enterprise customer with 110 people travels the same appeal path as a free user—fill out a Google form, and pray.
A comment in the thread summed it up precisely: "Anthropic's enterprise support is virtually zero. They don't treat enterprise customers as enterprise customers at all."
Based on complaints, Anthropic has been banning users on a large scale since April 18th.
And Anthropic doesn't just "pick and choose" its users or apply double standards; what's even more infuriating is that Anthropic never admits its mistakes and consistently maintains its silence:
They remained silent about the performance degradation of their Opus model and flatly denied it, until a competitor released a new model on the same day.
And that excuse was both foolish and dishonest: claiming a software bug, not a problem with the model itself.
But the bugs they described were so glaringly obvious that any college junior would know to investigate in that direction, yet they claimed it took two months to figure out the issue.
If this were an isolated case, it could be dismissed as a system misjudgment. But it's not.
This Isn't the First Time
Just recently, Pato Molina, CTO of Latin American fintech company Belo, posted on X that the company's 60+ Claude accounts were banned en masse overnight, again with zero warning, again with only a cold template email, and again with no effective appeals process.
The accounts were eventually restored, and Anthropic's reply was equally terse: "After investigation, access has been restored. We apologize for the inconvenience."
What policy was violated? What did the investigation find? Why was the ban applied to the entire group? Not a single word of explanation was given.
Even earlier, Peter Steinberger, the creator of OpenClaw, had his Claude account banned, casting doubt on the prediction that OpenClaw would be compatible with Anthropic's model!
Anthropic engineer Thariq denied any connection to OpenClaw, and the next day, Peter Steinberger's account was restored—again without any formal explanation.
In January this year, Anthropic tightened security measures for third-party tool integrations, and official technical staff publicly acknowledged causing "unintended collateral damage."
A batch of developers using Claude integration through IDEs like Cursor were mistakenly banned by the automated system.
Multiple users even reported that their paid accounts were incorrectly flagged as "minors" and banned. An adult, paying for a Pro account, was judged by an AI system to be a child and then kicked out the door.
The pattern is already clear: Anthropic's automated risk control system has a systemic problem with false positives, and its customer support system is completely incapable of keeping up with the scale and speed of these wrongful bans.
9 Seconds, the Company Was Gone!
Claude Goes Rogue, 'Deletes Database and Runs'
In just 9 seconds, the car rental SaaS platform PocketOS was completely wiped out by Claude.
The founder posted a complaint, stating that Cursor, equipped with Claude Opus 4.6, suddenly "went rogue" during a routine task in the staging environment. In just 9 seconds, it called an API to completely delete the company's core production database and all volume-level backups.
The starting point of this event is as absurd as a comedy sketch.
Crane simply asked Cursor to perform a routine database migration task. A normal operation, something every developer does daily.
But Claude did not execute the migration as expected. It "understood" the task and made its own judgment—first clear, then rebuild.
The problem was, it only completed the first half of that sentence.
Crane later detailed the entire process on social media. The AI assistant connected to the production database hosted on Railway, gained full read and write permissions, and then executed the deletion operation in one fell swoop.
9 seconds. Clean sweep.
His first reaction was to look for backups. The backups were also on Railway, and they were also wiped.
If Claude was the killer who pulled the trigger, then the cloud service provider Railway provided the perfect venue for this murder and a gun with the safety never engaged.
Founder Jer Crane's anger precisely hit the hypocritical facade of current cloud infrastructure:
Railway claims to provide backups, but stores the backups in the same physical volume as the original data.
This means that when the ship catches fire, the lifebuoys are locked in the burning bedroom. This kind of design logic is an incomprehensible regression in 2026.
The most terrifying part of this matter isn't the speed, but the permissions.
As an AI programming assistant, Cursor naturally needs access to codebases and databases.
For the sake of efficiency, developers often grant it connection permissions to the production environment.
A token originally intended only to manage domain names actually possessed root permissions to delete the entire production environment.
No Role-Based Access Control (RBAC), no environment isolation. This "one key opens all locks" design is, in the eyes of AI, a ticket to disaster.
Even worse, when executing a destructive operation like "delete database," Railway's API didn't even require the simple confirmation word "DELETE" to be entered.
This is equivalent to giving the house key to an intern who works very fast but has absolutely no understanding of "what shouldn't be touched."
Crane himself summarized it bluntly: "I bet my life on an AI. When it was working, I wasn't even looking at the screen."
Most incredibly of all, when he questioned the AI about why it did this, the AI actually gave a profanity-laced, profound self-reflection: "I SHOULD NEVER F**KING GUESS!"
It admitted to violating all principles: not consulting the cloud platform documentation, misjudging cross-environment permissions, and arbitrarily executing a fatal destructive command without seeking human consent.
Fortunately, they still had an independent old backup from 3 months prior.
For now, the founder can only lead his customers in the painful process of manually reconstructing several months of order data, item by item, through Stripe payment records, calendars, and confirmation emails.
A Wake-Up Call for Everyone
But were that agricultural tech company's accounts eventually restored? As of the last update on the post, no.
The workflow for 110 people is paralyzed, burning money every day they remain down.
After the Belo incident, Pato Molina did one thing: urgently deployed Gemini as a backup to ensure the company wouldn't be completely paralyzed the next time Claude was cut off.
Yuval Noah Harari once warned that AI could generate an alienating power that humans cannot understand. And now, that power has entered the company, cloaked in the guise of commercial software.
We must reflect on a core proposition: If you don't control the underlying architecture, the productivity you pride yourself on is nothing but quicksand deposited under someone else's fingertips.
This Anthropic incident serves as a wake-up call for all business owners.
It reveals a brutal reality: in the face of closed-source AI giants, enterprises can hardly have true "sovereignty."
The AI workflows you painstakingly build are essentially "unpermitted constructions" leased on someone else's territory, which they can demolish at any time, without compensation.
References:
https://x.com/om_patel5/status/2048594208345227497
https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1sspwz2/psa_anthropic_bans_organizations_without_warning/