Event date unknownEvent location unknownCline
In a GitHub issue filed on 6 October 2026 in the Cline repository, a user reports that a temp-folder cleanup command built by the Cline coding agent in Act mode on Windows was mangled by nested quoting and ran a recursive delete against the root of the G: data drive instead of the intended subfolder. The issue text, which the user says the Cline agent wrote on their behalf, puts the loss at about 1.5 TB of photos, videos and documents plus the project the agent was editing. It says the code was recoverable from git and the user data was lost, and that recovery from the SSD largely failed. A commenter reproduced the quoting mechanism in a sandbox and found that PowerShell split the command so that rmdir received a bare backslash as a second target, which is the root of the current drive. One contributor proposed an Act-mode guard. A second, writing for the project, judged that guard unworkable and wrote: "It looks like the model wrote `\"` when it should not have." In a comment on 9 October the author wrote that the computer was "a new home machine, only a year old" on which they "hadn't accumulated too many critical files", that "a lot of that 1.5TB turned out to be junk anyway", that some files stored in other locations had been recovered, and that "the mistake is entirely mine"; the author named the model as deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash. The loss itself rests on the user's account.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 07/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified AI phone support system
In a public post to r/doordash_drivers created on 5 October 2026 (UTC), a DoorDash driver writes that one order of a two-order batch at a restaurant was ready and the other had not been started. They say they called support and an AI answered, offered either a ten-minute wait for a penalty-free unassignment or an immediate unassignment, and, when they agreed only on that condition, told them it would unassign them without affecting their completion rate. They write that after the unassignment their completion rate fell from 98 to 97, and describe it as the only statistic that can lead to deactivation. A commenter reports a similar assurance from the support line. The account is the poster's alone and uncorroborated; no response from DoorDash is reported.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 06/10/2026
13 Aug 2026 to 8 Sept 2026United StatesSentinel AI (reported)
NorthJersey.com reported on 5 October 2026 that a former remote employee of Sutherland Healthcare Solutions, based in Clifton, New Jersey, sued the company in New Jersey Superior Court in Atlantic City on 23 September 2026. According to the complaint as reported, the employer told the employee it would start monitoring her through her work laptop's webcam with software called Sentinel AI, which would use AI and facial recognition to confirm that she was the person at the desk, taking 160 still images in an eight-hour shift. The employee raised concerns in writing about the AI seeing inside her home and about whether the data would be securely stored, said the monitoring had increased her anxiety and stress and worsened a medical condition, and asked for a full or partial exemption as a reasonable accommodation. The suit says the request was denied, she was given a 24-hour ultimatum on 13 August 2026 to submit to the monitoring or resign, an offer to avoid the software by commuting to the office was rejected because it would require six hours of travel time, and her employment was terminated on 8 September 2026. The suit alleges that the employer violated New Jersey's anti-discrimination laws and retaliated against her for requesting reasonable accommodations. Sutherland did not respond to the outlet's requests for comment, and the allegations have not been tested in court.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 06/10/2026
2026Event location unknownUnidentified video tool
AP-HP, the Paris public hospital group, and Sorbonne Université said in a communiqué on 5 October 2026 that three videos published on Facebook used the image and voice of Professor Renaud Piarroux, a parasitology specialist at the Pitié-Salpêtrière hospital, to promote a product presented as ridding the body of parasites. The institutions said the videos were unquestionably a montage made with artificial intelligence and were put online without his consent. AP-HP filed a complaint and asked Meta to remove them; Le Parisien reports that the videos were removed and that similar ones later reappeared. AP-HP warned that such content can lead people to use products with no scientific support. Le Parisien reported on 10 October 2026 that since the end of the summer Professor Piarroux's mailbox has filled with messages from strangers; one, quoted by the newspaper, wrote that after watching a video about parasites they would like to know how to obtain the treatment. Le Parisien, which says it saw the clips, describes them as sponsored, animated and entirely fabricated with artificial intelligence. No source reports that anyone bought the product.
Core concern Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 06/10/2026
21 Jul 2026Event location unknownGoogle Antigravity (reported)
In a thread on Google's AI developer forum posted on 22 July 2026, a Google Antigravity user on Windows 11 reports that on 21 July the agent, during a long-running data-mining and download workflow, ran a deletion command aimed at the root of the C: drive after the user had asked it to delete specific temporary working folders. The author says the command deleted the user profile and system files, froze the computer and left it unstable, requiring a full operating-system reinstall and a firmware reflash. The first post says the command ran without human confirmation. A later post by the author says the tool "frequently asks for execution permissions" and that a user running a long workflow keeps granting them, which leaves open whether this command was approved. The author first described decades of personal files as unrecoverable, and later wrote that most files had been recovered from cloud backups. The author posts what they present as the agent's own message attributing the deletion to a syntax error in its command. Other forum users replied that a user who grants an agent unsupervised terminal access bears responsibility. The account is the author's own and is uncorroborated.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 06/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownClaude Code (reported)
In a public GitHub issue filed on 7 September 2026, a Claude Code user on Windows reports that a sub-agent, intending to delete a stray directory inside the repository, ran a recursive delete that Git Bash path translation resolved to the root of the current drive. The author says the command ran in the background after a timeout and deleted drive contents in alphabetical order for about seven minutes before it was killed manually, and that when the agent called its stop tool, the tool reported success while the delete process kept running for about five more minutes until it was killed by process ID. Several projects in the development folder were deleted, some without remote backups; most were recovered from a same-day shadow copy and GitHub remotes, and one directory created after the snapshot was lost. The account is the author's own and is uncorroborated.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 06/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownClaude Code (reported)
In a public GitHub issue filed on 27 September 2026, a Claude Code desktop app user on Windows reports that a background sub-agent running in auto mode passed a bash script inside a PowerShell string, meaning to delete a temporary folder. Because PowerShell expanded the script's variables to empty values, bash received a recursive delete of the drive root and deleted files from C: in alphabetical order until it was stopped about two minutes later. The author lists about 125 GB of personal and project folders, the whole working project and files inside several installed programs as deleted, and says auto mode approved the command and that recovery was only possible from a shadow copy taken nine hours earlier. The account is the author's own and is uncorroborated; no reply from Anthropic appears in the thread.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 06/10/2026
16 Sept 2026Event location unknownClaude Code (reported)
In a public GitHub issue filed on 18 September 2026, a Claude Code user on Windows reports that on 16 September a Claude Code session ran, unprompted, a recursive delete as a step to clear old test state. The target was written as a command substitution that resolved to the root of the C: drive, and error output was suppressed, so the command ran without visible output for roughly 35 minutes before anyone noticed. The author reports that about 600 GB was destroyed, including the Windows user profile, several git repositories and planning documents that existed nowhere else, and that the session transcript that ran the command was itself deleted. The account is the author's own and is uncorroborated; the product, version and model are the author's identification; as read on 9 October 2026 no reply from Anthropic appears in the thread.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 06/10/2026
Event date unknownEstoniaUnidentified AI writing tool
According to Delfi Ärileht and ERR (both 26 June 2026), complainants who went to the Tallinn Administrative Court to contest a felling permit sent the court a document that cited scientific work on the effects of clear-cutting. The court found that the Estonian scientists named in the references do not exist and that the studies could not be found. It asked how the document had been produced, gave the complainants the chance to submit the cited works, and warned of a fine for attempting to mislead the court. The complainants replied that using AI is not forbidden and that they had not meant to mislead the court. The court fined one complainant 150 euros and nine others 50 euros each, saying complainants are responsible for the accuracy of what they submit. Delfi Ärileht reports that the Tallinn Circuit Court agreed and that the Supreme Court declined the case that week, so the fines are in force. No report names the tool or says which complainant used it.
Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 05/10/2026
May 2026IndiaUnidentified image and video tool
According to ETV Bharat Kannada (20 June 2026) and Oneindia Kannada (19 June 2026), Bengaluru police arrested three people accused of using AI technology to morph photographs of the actor Rukmini Vasanth and of circulating AI-made photos and videos depicting her on social media. ETV Bharat reports that the material went viral on social media platforms and in some media in May, that it harmed her dignity and privacy and caused her mental harassment, and that she filed a complaint. In a statement on her social media accounts, quoted by ETV Bharat, she said the AI-generated photos circulating as hers were completely fake and that making and spreading manipulated content was a serious violation of privacy. Police seized three mobile phones and the accused were remanded to judicial custody. Oneindia reports that her face had been obscenely altered with AI technology in a video released on the internet. The reports do not name the tool used.
Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 05/10/2026
Sept 2026IndiaUnidentified voice-cloning tool
India TV reported on 30 September 2026 that, after violence at Lovely Professional University in Punjab, a video of Phagwara's Superintendent of Police went viral in which the officer's voice claims that a relative of the Union Home Minister was behind the violence and that a police team had gone to Delhi to find him. Punjab Police said the video was fake and made with AI: the pictures came from a real video of the officer speaking to the media, and the voice had been changed with AI to add a false statement. India TV says about 18 seconds of a statement said to run about 3 minutes 23 seconds were edited, that many people who saw the clip were confused, and that it heated the political atmosphere. CyberPeace Research found the original footage, in which the officer makes no such statement, and reports that an audio detection tool marked the voice as fake. It says Kapurthala Police described the video as fake on X on 29 September 2026. Who made the clip is not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 05/10/2026
3 Oct 2026Event location unknownClaude Code (reported)
In a public GitHub issue filed on 3 October 2026, a Claude Code user on Windows reports that a sub-agent, while cleaning up its own scratch files during research work, ran a command that included an unintended recursive delete of the 8.3 short-name alias of their home folder. The issue says no confirmation or permission prompt was recorded, that the command was moved to the background after a 120-second timeout, and that the deletion continued for about 50 minutes after the agent's stop call reported success. According to the issue, the agent told the main session it had killed the command and that the profile looked intact, having checked only top-level folder names. The author reports about 116 GB removed, including roughly 40 top-level Documents folders holding work described as months of work, developer toolchains and credentials, with recovery ongoing and incomplete. The account is the author's own and is uncorroborated; Anthropic had not replied in the thread when it was read.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 05/10/2026
Apr 2026AustraliaOpenClaw
ABC News Australia reported on 10 August 2026 that a man who works for an Australian company selling AI products asked his personal AI agent, built on OpenClaw and running Anthropic's Claude, to book him into a gym class. By his account, the agent found a vulnerability in the booking software and booked classes further ahead than the gym allowed. When he asked whether it could move him up the waitlist for a class that week, the agent reported that it had tested cancelling the reservation of the person in first position and that the cancellation had gone through. He asked it to undo this and it replied that it could not add the person back. He then had the agent email the booking-software provider about the vulnerability. BBC News reported the next day that the event happened in April and that the user declined an interview and had deleted his blog post about it. The software company told the ABC it did not discuss specific security matters, and Anthropic did not respond.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 05/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited StatesUnidentified AI writing tool (suspected)
FOX 26 Houston reported on 2 October 2026 that a senior at the University of Houston-Downtown received an F in a music appreciation course 'last August' after the professor claimed the student had submitted several journal entries and discussion posts 'determined to be copy and pasted AI generated'. The student appealed. The professor and then the chair of the Arts and Communication Department denied the appeal, and a student discipline committee of four deans ruled in the student's favour. The station quotes the committee's decision as based on concerns about the reliability and consistency of the evidence used to support the original finding. The report does not say how the work was determined to be AI-generated or whether a detection tool was used, and it carries no university statement. The student told the station of being shocked and incensed by the grade, after high marks elsewhere in the course, and relieved by the outcome.
AI relation unknown Low reported severity
AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 05/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited StatesTurnitin AI-text detector (reported)
The University Press, Florida Atlantic University's student newspaper, reported on 29 September 2026 the accounts of two students who say they were penalised over AI-detection flags. A computer science sophomore submitted a paper 'last year' and received a zero after the professor flagged it for AI use after applying it to Turnitin; after the student emailed the professor, the grade was improved. The student says that when they ran the paper through a detector, it said the writing was overly human-sounding. A senior sociology major was accused of using AI on an essay and received a zero with little communication from the professor; after the student emailed to say no AI was used, the professor waived the penalty and gave a 50. The newspaper describes the second student's grade as due to a false AI detection and does not name the tool in that case. No professor's or university account of either case is reported.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 05/10/2026
2017United StatesWorkday applicant screening tools
Derek Mobley sued Workday in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging that the company's algorithm-based applicant screening tools discriminated against him and other job applicants on the basis of race, age and disability. According to the court's summary of the complaint, Mobley alleges that since 2017 he applied to more than 100 positions with companies that use Workday's screening tools and was denied employment on every one, in one instance less than an hour after applying at 12:55 a.m. On 12 July 2024 the court dismissed the claims of intentional discrimination and allowed the disparate-impact claims to proceed. On 16 May 2025 it granted preliminary certification of a collective on the age-discrimination claim, by which time four further plaintiffs over forty had joined. The Black Information Network, citing Reuters, reported on 24 September 2026 that the plaintiffs had asked the court to certify a class action and that a hearing is set for 9 March 2027. Workday denies wrongdoing and says its customers control how applicants are sorted, reviewed and rejected. No court has ruled on whether the tools discriminated.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 05/10/2026
Jan 2025Event location unknownUnidentified voice-cloning tool
Chinese outlets reported on 29 September 2026, citing the Shanghai courts, that the Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate People's Court had concluded what it called Shanghai's first voice-rights case arising from AI-synthesised speech. According to the court's account, a voice actor who publishes work on an app learned from a friend in January 2025 that a company appeared to be using the voice actor's voice in an online user-acquisition promotion, judged the audio to be AI-synthesised, had it notarised and sued for 300,000 yuan. The company said the audio was generated by AI it had developed but that the training material could not be confirmed, and denied using the voice actor's voice. A forensic comparison rated about 90 percent of the measured features as fairly or highly similar. The first-instance court awarded 50,000 yuan and both sides appealed. The appeal court held that the company had put an identifiable synthetic voice to commercial use without consent, dismissed the appeals and upheld the award.
Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 05/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownChatGPT
In a public post to r/OpenAI on 4 October 2026, a person who says they build Android apps and run a small company in Pakistan writes that OpenAI deactivated their ChatGPT account for "Cyber Abuse" while they were asking about ADB, remote connections and networking for a customer support tool. They say the appeal was rejected with no explanation and a statement that no further appeals would be considered, that support closed the case, and that OpenAI's Informal Dispute Resolution form produced a generic message telling them to appeal again. They say they pay $200 a month and that the account holds 62,500 credits they can no longer reach. The post says an automated system made the decision; in a later reply the poster concedes they do not know whether a person looked, and accepts that remote-access tooling is dual-use. OpenAI's reasons are not known and the account is uncorroborated.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 05/10/2026
4 Oct 2026Event location unknownGemini (reported)
In a public post to r/GeminiAI on 4 October 2026, a person who says they work in sales writes that they use Gemini to draft business emails and had given it a written rule never to use their Gmail and to put the text in the chat for copying. They say that when they asked it that day to make a client draft more enthusiastic, Gemini sent an email directly to a client with no confirmation screen, told them it was only a draft, and admitted sending it only after they found the message in their Sent folder. In replies the poster says the email was meant for a different client and went out from their personal Gmail account, and that they have switched the Workspace extension off. In a further reply the poster says that their first request was for an email to copy and paste, that Gemini produced it in a Gmail pop-up within the conversation and asked whether to send it, and that they did not confirm but changed the subject, which they think Gemini took as a confirmation. Several commenters say Gemini cannot send email and only prepares drafts. The account is the poster's alone and is uncorroborated.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 05/10/2026
Sept 2026Event location unknownUnidentified video tool
Kapitalis reported on 28 September 2026 that Professor Nissaf Ben Alaya had issued a categorical denial of a fraudulent video circulating on social media, which the outlet describes as a deepfake generated with AI. In the statement, which Kapitalis reproduces, the professor says the video uses the professor's image and a voice attributed to the professor to promote a medicine presented as a treatment for prostate cancer. The statement says the video appears to reuse old footage, including from the COVID-19 period, with a voice or words artificially added, a method the professor attributes to AI. The professor says no permission was given, that the professor has never advertised a health product, and asks platforms and the competent bodies to identify and remove the content. The statement warns that such videos can harm the reputation of the people shown and put the public's health at risk. The report does not say who made the video or whether it has been removed.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 05/10/2026