claude-code - 💡(How to fix) Fix [DOCS] Sandboxing network-access prompt flow is outdated for auto mode and bypassPermissions [1 participants]

Official PRs (…)
ON THIS PAGE

Recommended Tools

×6

Utilities matched from this issue’s tags and category — try them while you read without losing context.

GitHub issue graph ai analysis

Paste a GitHub issue URL. We fetch that issue, discover linked issues from bodies/comments/timeline, collect linked pull requests, and produce a structured English report.

The report is written in English Markdown for sharing and archival.

Helpful · Quick feedback

Loading…
GitHub stats
anthropics/claude-code#45475Fetched 2026-04-09 08:04:34
View on GitHub
Comments
0
Participants
1
Timeline
3
Reactions
0
Author
Participants
Timeline (top)
labeled ×3

Error Message

The current docs still describe sandbox network access requests as a manual approval flow, with no mode-specific exception for auto mode or bypassPermissions. That leaves the documented behavior ambiguous or outdated:

RAW_BUFFERClick to expand / collapse

Documentation Type

Incorrect/outdated documentation

Documentation Location

https://code.claude.com/docs/en/sandboxing

Section/Topic

"Network isolation", "Sandbox modes", and "When Claude Code attempts to access network resources outside the sandbox"

Current Documentation

The sandboxing docs currently say:

  • User confirmation: New domain requests trigger permission prompts (unless allowManagedDomainsOnly is enabled, which blocks non-allowed domains automatically)

and later:

When Claude Code attempts to access network resources outside the sandbox:

  1. The operation is blocked at the OS level
  2. You receive an immediate notification
  3. You can choose to:
    • Deny the request
    • Allow it once
    • Update your sandbox configuration to permanently allow it

The permission-modes docs also say:

Auto mode lets Claude execute without permission prompts.

bypassPermissions mode disables permission prompts and safety checks so tool calls execute immediately.

Those pages do not explain how sandbox network access prompts behave in auto mode or bypassPermissions mode.

What's Wrong or Missing?

Changelog v2.1.97 says: "Improved auto mode and bypass-permissions mode to auto-approve sandbox network access prompts."

The current docs still describe sandbox network access requests as a manual approval flow, with no mode-specific exception for auto mode or bypassPermissions. That leaves the documented behavior ambiguous or outdated:

A. The sandboxing page still describes a universal prompt flow

Readers are told that new domain requests trigger permission prompts and that they can manually deny, allow once, or permanently allow the request.

B. The permission-modes page does not connect those modes to sandbox network prompts

Auto mode and bypassPermissions are described as prompt-free, but the docs never explicitly state that sandbox network access prompts are auto-approved in those modes.

Users who rely on the sandboxing docs for security expectations can reasonably assume network boundary crossings will still stop for review, which is no longer true after v2.1.97.

Suggested Improvement

Update the sandboxing and permission-modes docs to describe sandbox network access behavior by permission mode.

Minimum fix:

  • In sandboxing, add a note in the network-isolation and sandbox-modes sections that sandbox network access prompts are auto-approved in auto mode and bypassPermissions mode.
  • In permission-modes, add a short cross-reference clarifying that this no-prompt behavior also applies to sandbox network access prompts.
  • Clarify how this interacts with allowManagedDomainsOnly and allowedDomains so readers know when requests are auto-approved versus blocked outright.

Suggested content outline:

Sandbox network access prompts by mode

  • Regular permissions flow: network access requests can prompt for approval
  • Auto mode: sandbox network access prompts are auto-approved
  • bypassPermissions: sandbox network access prompts are auto-approved
  • allowManagedDomainsOnly: non-allowed domains are blocked automatically rather than approved

Impact

Medium - Makes feature difficult to understand

Additional Context

Affected Pages:

PageContext
https://code.claude.com/docs/en/sandboxingNetwork isolation and outside-the-sandbox network prompt flow still describe manual approval
https://code.claude.com/docs/en/permission-modesAuto mode and bypassPermissions are described as prompt-free, but this page does not explicitly cover sandbox network access prompts

Total scope: 2 pages affected

Source: Changelog v2.1.97

Exact changelog entry:

Improved auto mode and bypass-permissions mode to auto-approve sandbox network access prompts

extent analysis

TL;DR

Update the sandboxing and permission-modes documentation to reflect that sandbox network access prompts are auto-approved in auto mode and bypassPermissions mode.

Guidance

  • Review the current documentation for sandboxing and permission-modes to identify areas where the manual approval flow is described.
  • Update the network-isolation and sandbox-modes sections in the sandboxing documentation to include a note about auto-approval in auto mode and bypassPermissions mode.
  • Add a cross-reference in the permission-modes documentation to clarify that the no-prompt behavior applies to sandbox network access prompts.
  • Ensure that the documentation clearly explains how allowManagedDomainsOnly and allowedDomains interact with the auto-approval behavior.

Example

A possible documentation update could include a section like:

Sandbox network access prompts by mode

  • Regular permissions flow: network access requests can prompt for approval
  • Auto mode: sandbox network access prompts are auto-approved
  • bypassPermissions: sandbox network access prompts are auto-approved
  • allowManagedDomainsOnly: non-allowed domains are blocked automatically rather than approved

Notes

The exact wording and formatting of the documentation updates will depend on the existing style and tone of the documentation.

Recommendation

Apply a workaround by updating the documentation to reflect the current behavior, as the changelog entry implies that the functionality has already been changed in version 2.1.97. This will help to avoid confusion among users who rely on the documentation for security expectations.

Vote matrix · Quick signals

Works
Did the solution work? Tap to confirm.
Easy Fix
Was it a quick fix?
Time Saver
Did it save you time?
Blocking
Was it severely blocking?
Common Issue
Are others likely hitting this too?
Flaky / Intermittent
Is it intermittent?
Verified / Reproducible
Can you reproduce it reliably?
Loading…

Still need to ship something?

×6

Another batch ranked right after the header list — different links, same matching logic.

Back to top recommendations

TRENDING