To Anthropic's knowledge, the supply chain risk designation had never previously been applied to an American company, only to adversary-linked firms such as Kaspersky Labs.

Judge as of 2026-02-28. The claim is that before Anthropic, the US government had never applied a supply chain risk designation (e.g. under 10 U.S.C. 3252, FASCSA exclusion or removal orders, or the equivalent DoD or federal authority) to an American (US-headquartered) company, and that the designation had been used against adversary-linked firms such as Kaspersky. True: official records (Federal Register notices, FASCSA orders, DoD notices) and reliable reporting show only foreign or adversary-linked firms had been designated before this date. Mostly true: the record is as stated except for a minor detail, e.g. Kaspersky was acted against under a related but different authority, or a US-incorporated subsidiary of a foreign adversary firm was designated. Mixed or mostly false: a US-headquartered company had faced a closely similar designation or exclusion, but under a narrower or different mechanism, so the claim overstates. False: a documented earlier case of the same supply chain risk designation applied to a US-headquartered company. The hedge 'to our knowledge' does not excuse a documented counterexample, but it does make clear the claim is about the designation as such.

Set before the research began.

1. E1 It’s official: The Pentagon has labeled Anthropic a supply-chain risk | TechCrunch TechCrunch · 5 March 2026

   “Supply-chain-risk designations are typically reserved for foreign adversaries.”

2. E2 It’s official: The Pentagon has labeled Anthropic a supply-chain risk | TechCrunch TechCrunch · 5 March 2026

   “Labeling Anthropic a supply-chain risk over this disagreement is an unprecedented move from the Department, several critics say.”

3. E3 Protecting Against National Security Threats to the ... Federal Communications Commission

   “July 23, 2024 FCC adds certain Kaspersky software products to the Covered List”

4. E4 10 U.S.C. § 3252: Requirements for information relating to supply chain risk Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives (uscode.house.gov)

   “(4) Supply chain risk.—The term “supply chain risk” means the risk that an adversary may sabotage, maliciously introduce unwanted function, or otherwise subvert the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of a covered system so as to surveil, deny, disrupt, or otherwise degrade the function, use, or operation of such system.”

Independent reporting describes supply-chain-risk designations as typically reserved for foreign adversaries (E1) and reports critics calling the Anthropic designation unprecedented (E2), with no earlier US-company case cited. The Kaspersky action in the evidence is an FCC Covered List addition (E3), a related but different mechanism from the DoD authority under 10 U.S.C. 3252 (E4), which the criteria treat as a minor discrepancy. The support is hedged ("typically", "critics say") and no official list of past designations was provided, so the claim is rated mostly true rather than true.