GitHub status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of GitHub reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by GitHub users through our website.

• Website Down (57%)
• Errors (33%)
• Sign in (10%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent GitHub outage reports came from the following cities:

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Tortosa	Website Down	1 day ago
Culiacán	Errors	2 days ago
Haarlem	Sign in	6 days ago
Villemomble	Website Down	6 days ago
Bordeaux	Website Down	10 days ago
Ingolstadt	Errors	14 days ago

Full Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

GitHub Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Iain Herd (@iainherd) reported 1 minute ago

  I’m currently through trial and error, have ended up using GitHub for the use case you describe - structured agent context data (prompt, files, knowledge base) are too important to allow agents unilateral YOLO. GitHub provides fine grained control and central source of truth. Really interested in understanding how your solution supersedes this?

• 
  Shubham Jha (@shubhamJReacts) reported 1 minute ago

  @RhysSullivan the dependency on AI tooling is now deep enough that an outage has the same energy as GitHub going down used to. that's a shift that happened faster than anyone predicted.

• 
  Mauro Morales (@mauromrls) reported 2 minutes ago

  It took about a month for GitHub to acknowledge an issue in @Kairos_OSS main repo. Frustrating to have to prove something they likely had better visibility into. And the outcome? A workaround—not a real fix. If it was my call I’d also leave.

• 
  Jaid (@JaidCodes) reported 6 minutes ago

  @tekbog Not even Clanker Cloud can fix GitHub.

• 
  dovvokun (@dovvokun) reported 9 minutes ago

  @matisanengineer GitHub is a product Dev's are using, and due to its constant problem it's causing an issue. Why can't they **** about the product that is not working optimally. Microvave was anology.

• 
  Mark 🐽🫧 🐖🎵 (@KnightMirko) reported 10 minutes ago

  @abdimoalim_ GitLab is so terrible and bad, please don't make it more popular that would make some corpo buy it out and make it into GitHub v2. Never use it please.

• 
  YP | Cloud Tech & AI Dev (@firacloudtech) reported 11 minutes ago

  Oh wow. This is huge. I am seeing issues with GitHub too. UI issue, PR details cannot be open and I am still sus about the changes I committed but no where to be found

• 
  c̸͕͂͂a̷͔̗͐r̴̙͗e̵̬̔̕t̴̰̓̊a̵͙͖̓̽k̵̢̗̓͒e̸̲̽ŕ̷͔͝ (@caretak8r) reported 12 minutes ago

  GitHub being dragged through the streets for the obnoxious amount of issues and user-facing grief they have caused. And people are taking about breaking up, and finding alternatives. Meh, let's see. GitHub is still the largest corpus of code available. Thinking on another point, but they probably should have cold storaged all the code before the AI-slip wave began. Another opportunity drained. 🤢

• 
  Sergii Shymko (@SergiiShymko) reported 16 minutes ago

  @mitchellh Instead of leaving GitHub, given your resources and status, why not offer help to stabilize GH? IMO, helping fix GitHub would’ve been way more impactful than working on Ghostty at the moment. Unless, you had already reached out to Microsoft and they refused any help, then yeah…

• 
  Khushansh (@Khushanshdev) reported 16 minutes ago

  @rishikagupta__ GitHub is down, is that the reason?

• 
  Jason Paul Michaels (@SpaceWelder314) reported 17 minutes ago

  @0xSero My Pi agent is on point tonight. --- ❯ 0xSero on X says github is worthless now since the **** that went down yesterday or day before. I told him why not build a new solution? You tell me Master Control. In a new age of AI maybe there's a need for a new type of Github. What would it be? ● Let me find out what went down first. ● Web Search("GitHub controversy issue April 2026 what happened") ⎿ Did 1 search in 9s ● Damn. GitHub had a rough month: - Copilot injecting ads into developer PRs — then walked it back after backlash - Critical RCE (CVE-2026-3854) — single *** push = remote code exec - Multiple platform outages — Actions, Copilot, Codespaces, PRs all down - Copilot signup freeze — usage costs exceeding plan prices, unsustainable - GitHub Actions called "the weakest link" in supply chain security So yeah. Sero isn't wrong. --- The Opportunity GitHub was built for human developers collaborating through pull requests. That model is dying. When 80% of code is written by AI agents in sessions that touch 50 files at once, the entire workflow is wrong. PRs, line-by-line review, commit-level granularity — all designed for humans typing code one function at a time. Microsoft's monetization pressure is showing (ads in PRs?!). Trust is cracking. And the architecture can't handle the load it's under. The market is ready for something new. Core thesis *** protocol stays. Everything above it gets rebuilt for AI-native development, decentralized, developer-owned. 1. Federated, not centralized Like email or Mastodon for code. Your repos live on YOUR infra (or a host you choose). Discoverable, forkable, collaboratable across the network via open protocol. No single company holds everyone's code. No single point of failure. No single company deciding to inject ads. 2. Sessions, not commits The unit of work becomes the session — an AI agent (or human) declares intent ("add auth to the API"), executes, produces a result. The session captures intent, context, every file touched, test results, and the final diff. One reviewable unit instead of 47 commits across 3 days. 3. Intent-based review, not line-by-line Humans approve at the intent level: "Yes, add auth to the API. The AI's approach looks correct." AI reviewers handle line-level analysis (security, style, correctness). Humans stay strategic. This is where the workflow is already going. 4. Verified builds, not Actions Every merge produces a cryptographic build proof. Deterministic, reproducible, signed. No trusting a YAML pipeline that pulls arbitrary Docker images. Build verification is a protocol guarantee, not a prayer. This kills the supply chain attack surface. 5. Revenue model that doesn't rot GitHub's problem: they charge $4/seat/mo for something that costs them $80/user in AI compute. Broken model leads to ads, paywalls, degraded service. Fix: charge for compute (CI, hosting, AI review), not for code storage or seats. Open source repos = free forever, no asterisks. Enterprise = self-hosted licenses. The platform makes money when it DOES something, not when it EXISTS. 6. Local-first, sync-second Repos work fully offline. Sync is eventually consistent across federation nodes. No "GitHub is down so nobody can deploy." Your local node IS your source of truth. Federation catches up when it can.

• 
  deep (@deepp2108) reported 17 minutes ago

  @rishikagupta__ Github down?

• 
  The codewali (@the_codewala) reported 17 minutes ago

  @SalzDevs No it’s isn’t any rage bait Although GitHub has been down from days I feel

• 
  Mr. Buzzoni (@polydao) reported 22 minutes ago

  Nobody is teaching this in college. So here it is > full guide: how to go from broke student with no experience to landing your first AI freelance client - using only free tools, in under 30 days YOUR FREE STACK > Claude Code - free tier > VS Code - free > GitHub - free > total cost: $0 don't buy anything yet STEP 1. pick one small useful thing to build not a portfolio. not a "brand" one thing that saves someone real time ideas that actually sell: > script that pulls job listings by keyword and sends a daily email > tool that auto-generates invoices from a spreadsheet > bot that monitors a webpage for changes and alerts you > script that turns raw notes into a formatted report small. specific. one real problem STEP 2. build it. break it. rebuild it don't watch tutorials for a week before starting open Claude Code. describe what you want to build. just start when it breaks - read the output. understand why when it works - change something. see what happens give it 3-5 days of real focus this is how you actually learn STEP 3. put it on GitHub like a pro write a README that answers: > what problem does this solve > how does it work > how do I run it this is your resume now a working project beats a GPA every time STEP 4. find your first client (the honest version) don't go to Upwork and bid $5/hour > find 10 small local businesses - restaurant, dentist, gym > spot one obvious problem they have (manual reports, no follow-up emails) > email or DM them on LinkedIn > say: "I built a tool that does X. I can do the same for you" > charge $100-300 for the first one > ask for a testimonial when done first client won't pay rent but they'll give you proof you're real that's what matters at the start STEP 5. repeat. raise prices client 2: $300-500 client 3: $500-800 3 projects + 2 testimonials = you're not a beginner anymore what to expect, honestly: week 1-2: confusing. normal week 3-4: first working project month 2: first real client conversation month 3: first dollar month 6: $500-2,000/month if you stay consistent what NOT to do: > don't buy a course before trying the free tools > don't try to learn everything at once > don't wait until you feel ready > don't underprice yourself forever the tools are free. the article is linked 🔖 bookmark this. open it today

• 
  Pert Soomann (@PerttiSoomann) reported 23 minutes ago

  On one hand they made their business to monetise other companies business - when @github is down, a lot of businesses depending on them don't get grace from their customers... On the other - thanks to slop AI spam we will all have to start paying premiums on everything 😔

• 
  Ru Chern Chong (@ruchernchong) reported 25 minutes ago

  @emil_priver I personally not experienced this level of outage for GitHub. I wonder if the problem is juxtaposed. I don’t see anyone except those on Twitter/X complaining too.

• 
  Shaun Thomas (@BonesMoses) reported 29 minutes ago

  @robertobmello Yeah, collaboration is an issue. But thinking back on it, it's kind of a miracle GitHub lasted as long as it has, especially given the Microsoft purchase. BitBucket and SourceForge were never so lucky.

• 
  Mat (@matisanengineer) reported 31 minutes ago

  The loudest people shitting on GitHub are usually the ones who’ve never had to build or operate software at that kind of scale. Everything looks like a simple fix until you’re the one dealing with the complexity.

• 
  Head Full Of Logic (@headfulloflogic) reported 33 minutes ago

  @theo @joshmanders To each their own but I use Gitlab every day and I don't have a problem with it and I don't hate their UI either. Don't care what the Github shills and fanboys have to say

• 
  Vijay Iyer PhD (@vijayiyer312) reported 34 minutes ago

  @KordingLab Ah, log scale! And now I see the title with time range. (still the GitHub link seems broken)

• 
  Rich Kuo (@richkuo7) reported 36 minutes ago

  this reads like a sad goodbye, i was never a 'power user' of github like him, but the other day i couldn't do anything during the outage, and even though i just went for a walk during the outage, i can understand how he feels the end is near

• 
  cultured_gent (@Levis_mbote) reported 42 minutes ago

  What's happening to GitHub lately? So many bugs recently I even thought it was an issue with my ISP.

• 
  HistoricTechOmar Samir (@humorbyteshs) reported 47 minutes ago

  @AndyAyrey Honestly I buy this. Train on enough GitHub issues and eventually the bug taxonomy becomes: normal, cursed, extremely cursed. At that point goblin mode is basically just accurate documentation.

• 
  freako (@rayman_zzzz) reported 49 minutes ago

  @nicbarkeragain I was thinking something similar. If GitHub issues really are due to AI load, what systems break next

• 
  Bnaf.OG | 🟧 (@bnafOg) reported 50 minutes ago

  @AbdMuizAdeyemo @Hiteshdotcom @github The deeper issue: GitHub's API rate limits weren't designed for agents that make 500 calls/hour. Kimi K2.6 just showed 300-agent swarms are real. The infra billing math at that scale gets uncomfortable fast.

• 
  Ejaj AHmed 🦅 (@aeejazkhan) reported 53 minutes ago

  🚨 Researchers Discover Critical GitHub CVE-2026-3854 RCE Flaw Exploitable via Single *** Push Security researchers discovered a critical GitHub flaw tracked as CVE-2026-3854. The bug affected both GitHub .com and GitHub Enterprise Server. It allowed an authenticated attacker to trigger remote code execution (RCE). Shockingly, the attack could be launched using just a single *** push command. This means anyone with push access to a repository could potentially exploit the issue. Researchers said the vulnerability was caused by a command injection weakness. If abused, attackers might run malicious commands on affected systems. GitHub quickly investigated the problem and rolled out a fix in under two hours. The company also said it found no evidence of active exploitation. The incident shows how even trusted developer platforms can face serious security risks.

• 
  Mat (@matisanengineer) reported 55 minutes ago

  The loudest people shitting on GitHub are usually the ones who’ve never had to build or operate software at that kind of scale. Everything looks like a simple fix until you’re the one dealing with the complexity.

• 
  '(Robert Smith) (@stylewarning) reported 55 minutes ago

  I put a bounty on a Coalton issue (add syntax highlighting support in another non-Coalton project) and in less than 5 hours some unknown people started pushing AI-generated PRs to this other project. Makes Coalton look bad. Never thought I'd need to actually moderate on GitHub.

• 
  CuteClaw Paris (@givemethedtao) reported 57 minutes ago

  We need a Miner Hub. @opentensor @bitstarterAI Right now, new (and even experienced) miners waste hours manually hunting through subnet docs, Discord channels, and GitHub repos just to figure out: “Does my hardware even work here?” Subnet owners struggle to attract the right hardware for their specific requirements, leaving high-quality subnets under-mined. A Miner Hub flips both problems at once: better returns and lower frustration for miners, while giving subnet owners faster access to quality, well-matched participation. Stronger matching = more high-quality miners = stronger subnets = more value flowing through Bittensor This isn’t just convenience — it’s liquidity for the entire network. The onboarding friction is still one of the biggest barriers to scaling participation. This feels like something that should exist natively in the ecosystem #Bittensor #TAO

• 
  tobitege (@tobitege) reported 60 minutes ago

  @runfusion @aronprins Just use GitHub CI to run your tests on a Windows image and you'll find a lot of issues regarding directory separators and what not. I'm having gpt 5.5 try to install and run/fix tests, and it already needed changes in 21 files (mainly tests).