Gotta exaggerate a bit to get attention :D

But I think I'm getting to the point where "If I'd let an intern/junior dev have access while I'm watching then I'm probably OK with Claude having it too"

The thing that annoys me about a lot of infosec people is that they have all of these opinions about bad practice that are removed from the actual 'what's the worst that could happen here' impact/risk factor.

I'm not running lfg on a control tower that's landing boeing 737s, but for a simple non-critical CRUD app? Probably the tradeoff is worth it.

Why in the world would you advocate explicitly for letting it run on production servers, rather than teaching it how to test in a development or staging environment like you would with a junior engineer?

We allow juniors in risky areas because that’s how they will learn. Not the case for current AIs.

My workflow is somewhat similar to yours. I also much love --dangerously-skip-permissions, as root! I even like to do it from multiple Claude Code instances in parallel when I have parallel ideas that can be worked out.

Maybe my wrapper project is interesting for you? https://github.com/release-engineers/agent-sandbox It's to keep Claude Code containerized with a copy of the workspace and a firewall/proxy so it can only access certain sites. With my workflow I don't really risk much, and the "output" is a .patch file I can inspect before I git apply it.