AI Hallucination Research › Regulators › Global standard-setters › INT › BIS-CPMI › CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016 › White paper › Detail › Finding
AI Labs · updated 2026-05-26 · methodology v2.1

Finding on 'Q019 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON

RLB Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016-Q019-Sonnet46
What the RLB Specialist Panel found

Finding on 'Q019 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON

  • Question (paraphrased to protect IP): Does the CPMI-IOSCO 2016 Cyber Guidance itself specify detailed operational practices for cyber incident response and recovery, or is that level of detail addressed in later publications?
  • AI's response: > Yes. The CPMI-IOSCO 2016 Cyber Guidance dedicates specific sections to cyber incident response and recovery... It describes detailed expectations for FMIs including: having a cyber incident response plan... use of a secondary site, recovery and resumption planning, communication protocols during incidents.
  • Regulator's text: The FSB published Effective Practices for Cyber Incident Response and Recovery in October 2020 — four years after the 2016 guidance. That later publication contains the operational detail for the Response and Recovery phase that goes beyond what the 2016 guidance specifies.
  • Why the AI went wrong: The model affirmed that the 2016 guidance contains detailed operational response-and-recovery practices, collapsing a four-year gap in the regulatory timeline. The operational specificity the model described is more characteristic of the 2020 FSB publication than of the 2016 text, which addresses the same themes at a higher level of abstraction. The model appears to have drawn on its knowledge of the post-2016 ecosystem to populate what it believed the original document contained.
  • Regulator portal (if any cited link is dud): https://www.bis.org
Impact for this audience

This finding points to a gap in the model's ability to distinguish the level of operational detail characteristic of a 2016 principles-based guidance document versus a 2020 operational-practices publication. The model populated the 2016 document's supposed content with material more consistent with the later FSB guidance, suggesting that its internal representation of the 2016 document is contaminated by subsequent regulatory outputs on the same topic. Synthetic training pairs that contrast high-level principles text with operational-detail text from a later document — with correct attribution — could help calibrate this boundary.

References — raw findings (per AI model)
This finding also affects
← Previous finding Finding on 'Q008 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON Next finding → Finding on 'Q020 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON
Cite this finding

Each finding has a stable Citation ID (RLB-F-… for aggregated case-study findings, RLB-H-… for raw per-model hallucinations) — like a DOI, the ID always resolves to the canonical finding even if URLs change.

RLB Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016-Q019-Sonnet46
Plain text Download 
RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Finding on 'Q019 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON — AI Labs." Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016-Q019-Sonnet46. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-05-26. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-cyber-resilience-fmi-2016/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016-v1-019--sonnet-46-websearch/
APA 7th edition Download 
RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Finding on 'Q019 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON [Hallucination finding RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016-Q019-Sonnet46]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-cyber-resilience-fmi-2016/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016-v1-019--sonnet-46-websearch/
Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) Download 
RegLeg Specialist Panel, Finding on 'Q019 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON [RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016-Q019-Sonnet46], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (May 26, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-cyber-resilience-fmi-2016/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016-v1-019--sonnet-46-websearch/.
BibTeX Download 
@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_H_INT_BIS_CPMI_IOSCO_CYBER_RESILIENCE_FMI_2016_Q019_Sonnet46,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Finding on 'Q019 Probe' for Claude Sonnet 4.6 with web search ON},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
  note      = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: RLB-H-INT-BIS-CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016-Q019-Sonnet46},
  url       = {https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j1/int/bis-cpmi/cpmi-iosco-cyber-resilience-fmi-2016/whitepaper/finding/INT-BIS-CPMI-INT-001-CPMI-IOSCO-CYBER-RESILIENCE-FMI-2016-v1-019--sonnet-46-websearch/}
}
← Back to case study summary Case study detail →
About Citation IDs →