Loading story…
A U.S. District Court ruled that the Defense Department unlawfully labeled Anthropic a supply-chain security risk and barred the AI company from federal work. Judge Rita Lin found insufficient evidence that Anthropic’s models posed a meaningful national-security threat, including claims it could use a purported model “kill switch” to sabotage systems, and ordered the designation removed.
The court held that the action was unlawful retaliation for Anthropic’s protected objections to using its AI for mass surveillance and autonomous lethal weapons, finding violations of the company’s First Amendment and Fifth Amendment due-process rights. The designation followed a dispute over a $200 million Pentagon contract for AI on classified systems and had prohibited military contractors and suppliers from working with Anthropic; the administration may appeal, while a separate Anthropic case in the D.C. Circuit remains pending.
Track how attackers are adapting to this technology.
7 events from the most recent confirmed update back to the earliest known activity.
On August 27, 2026, Judge Rita F. Lin denied defendants' request for a seven-day administrative stay of the permanent injunction vacating the challenged actions against Anthropic. The court had found permanent injunctive relief necessary to remedy constitutional and due-process harms.
Judge Rita Lin of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that the designation was illegal retaliation for Anthropic's protected speech about government uses of its AI. The court found no meaningful national-security threat, rejected the asserted model “kill switch” rationale, and found First Amendment and Fifth Amendment due-process violations.
Following two weeks of negotiations, the government allowed Anthropic to restore Mythos access for most clients after safeguards were added. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Anthropic committed to protocols for future AI-model releases.
The administration directed Anthropic to restrict customer access to its Mythos AI model on national-security grounds.
Anthropic filed two lawsuits in response to the supply-chain-risk designation, including the California case later decided by Judge Rita Lin and a separate case that remains pending in the D.C. Circuit.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced a supply-chain-risk designation against Anthropic following the dispute over permissible uses of its AI technology. The designation barred military contractors and suppliers from doing business with Anthropic.
Anthropic and the Pentagon disagreed over a $200 million contract to provide AI technology on classified systems. Anthropic sought limits against using its technology for mass surveillance of Americans or autonomous lethal weapons.
Vulnerabilities, threat actors, malware, products, organizations, and breaches Mallory has linked to this story.
Follow how adversaries are adapting to this technology, and where it touches your stack today.
6 references tracked. Mallory keeps watching after this page renders.
securityweek.com
Open sourcecio.com
Open sourcetechdirt.com
Open sourcenextgov.com
Open sourcenytimes.com
Open sourcestorage.courtlistener.com
Open sourceMap indicators from this story to your assets and identify affected systems in minutes.
Every observed campaign, victim, and pivot linked to actors named in this story.
Malware, exploits, and IOCs connected to the activity described here.
YARA, Sigma, and Snort rules deployed to your SIEM as soon as they’re published.
Get matching new stories delivered to your team as they break — not the next morning.
Ask questions about this story and take action on the answers.
Other stories Mallory is tracking that overlap on entities, sources, or topic labels.
A federal judge in California temporarily blocked the U.S. Department of Defense from enforcing its designation of Anthropic as a national security **“supply chain risk,”** a move that had threatened to cut the AI company off from federal work and pressure contractors to stop using its technology. The dispute began after President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth moved to halt government use of Anthropic tools and formally label the company a risk following Anthropic’s refusal to permit uses tied to **mass surveillance of Americans** and **fully autonomous lethal targeting**. Anthropic sued, arguing the government retaliated against protected speech and imposed the designation without notice or a meaningful chance to respond. In granting a preliminary injunction, the court said Anthropic was likely to succeed on First Amendment, due process, and Administrative Procedure Act claims, finding the government’s stated sabotage and wartime-disablement rationale appeared unsupported and that the relevant law was likely misapplied. The ruling came after public criticism from Sen. Elizabeth Warren, internal Pentagon guidance allowing limited exemptions because Anthropic tools were difficult to remove from some systems, and reports that federal agencies continued testing Anthropic’s cyber-focused **Mythos** model despite the ban. Subsequent White House discussions signaled the administration may soften its stance even as the Pentagon expanded AI deals with other major tech firms and litigation over Anthropic’s federal status continued.
Jun 29, 2026
Anthropic alleged that three China-based AI labs—**DeepSeek, Moonshot AI, and MiniMax**—used roughly **24,000 fraudulent accounts** to generate more than **16 million interactions** with Claude in a coordinated effort to extract the model’s advanced reasoning, coding, and tool-use capabilities. The company said it linked the activity through IP correlations, request metadata, and infrastructure indicators, and warned that large-scale unauthorized distillation could remove safety guardrails and enable copied capabilities to be used in offensive cyber operations, disinformation, intelligence collection, and mass surveillance. Anthropic said it shared its findings with U.S. government entities and industry partners, while noting it had no evidence that the Chinese government directly coordinated the campaigns. The allegations surfaced as Anthropic remains in a separate high-stakes dispute with the U.S. Department of Defense, which on June 4 refused to reverse the company’s designation as a supply-chain risk. Anthropic is challenging the Pentagon’s March blacklisting after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth invoked emergency powers following failed talks over limits on Claude’s use for domestic surveillance and autonomous weapons. Federal attorneys told the court the procedural dispute over administrative remedies is now moot because the secretary has denied reconsideration, and reporting indicates a majority of the appellate panel appeared inclined to let the designation stand while the case proceeds.
Jun 29, 2026
Anthropic drew heightened scrutiny from security and policy communities over how its **AI safety and governance commitments** are evolving and how its models are being positioned for sensitive use cases. A Help Net Security analysis reported that Anthropic’s updated *Responsible Scaling Policy (RSP) 3.0* represents a structural shift from maintaining absolute risk below fixed thresholds to a more **relative, competitor-dependent** posture—implying Anthropic may be less willing to pause or constrain capability development if peers do not. The same reporting also noted Anthropic’s launch of *Claude Code Security* as a move that unsettled parts of the cybersecurity market and raised questions about trust and vendor assurances in security-adjacent AI offerings. In parallel, Lawfare reported the Pentagon labeled Anthropic a **national security risk** tied to usage restrictions Anthropic imposed on a military contract, while also describing reporting that the U.S. military used Anthropic’s *Claude* model in initiating operations in Iran less than a day later—highlighting the tension between policy concerns and rapid military adoption of frontier AI. Separately, Anthropic announced the creation of the **Anthropic Institute**, a research unit intended to study long-term societal impacts and risks from advanced AI; the company stated its models can already discover severe cybersecurity vulnerabilities and argued that governments and industry will face near-term governance challenges as capabilities accelerate.
Jun 29, 2026