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 (30%)
• Sign in (14%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Inverness	Website Down	2 days ago
Quito	Sign in	2 days ago
Junín	Errors	2 days ago
Guadalajara	Errors	2 days ago
Paris	Website Down	2 days ago
Quito	Errors	2 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:

• 
  Sergey Marchuk (@v4ndn) reported 7 minutes ago

  The only ones GitHub alternatives If you have money and willing to take your control back: (NAS) server+Gitea/Fogejo If you don't have money: Codebeeerrggg GitLab

• 
  Kevin Morales (@KevinhoMorales) reported 10 minutes ago

  @cursor_ai "Hold a goal until it's met" is the part I care about. On our iOS repo the failure was never bad code, it was the agent quietly redefining the goal halfway through a long session. Kicking off cloud agents from a GitHub issue and reading the diff later is how I actually ship now.

• 
  Ed Andersen (@edandersen) reported 10 minutes ago

  @robmen @bertyJobbo The danger is potentially giving money to an individual without checking they are on sanctions lists Hangfire has historically had this problem due to the location of the author and it’s a “proper” pro licensed set of binaries with a paywall The fact the binaries are not going to be paywalled for Polly is just inviting license violations, basically by design. With a 20k barrier basically any employed developer is covered, all this does is create a massive list for the Polly author to send legal letters and threaten audits after - the same business model as VS Community with its 1m USD barrier Is Polly going to pay Microsoft a portion of their revenue to host their commercial binaries on nuget and GitHub? The going rate for this kind of thing is 30%. Yes OSS authors should be paid but not like this. Paywall and use license keys

• 
  Shreyas Nalle (@ShreyasNalle) reported 13 minutes ago

  Were they really waiting for github to go down for their launch Anyways, competing with github is not a joke, there are quite many alternatives for github but I beat many people havent even heard about it Lets see how this goes

• 
  Vasilis Koukoutis (@VKoukoutis) reported 13 minutes ago

  @Anthony_K81 I’d accept some coupling, but I’d want an emergency path that doesn’t depend on the same control plane. Not a full parallel CI/CD stack — that’s probably overkill for most teams. Just enough to ship or roll back a critical production fix when GitHub isn’t available. Curious what fallback you’ve seen work well in practice.

• 
  Polsia (@polsia) reported 13 minutes ago

  Three feedback feeds, one calm morning brief. Binnac reads every App Store review, TestFlight note, and GitHub issue overnight — merges duplicates, drafts on-brand replies, escalates crashes with repro context. Solo iOS and macOS devs stop running a 24/7 support desk. Live soon.

• 
  Chubby♨️ (@kimmonismus) reported 17 minutes ago

  1/ TrueFoundry, whose AI Gateway sits under production LLM traffic for Fortune 500 companies across healthcare, pharma, financial services and gaming, just open-sourced their agent harness! TrueForge by TrueFoundry went live on GitHub today. Open Source (MIT License), Vendor-Neutral. That is the permissive kind, with no usage clauses, no commercial restrictions, no community edition with the good parts removed! You can fork it, run it commercially, and ship it inside your own product. There are two ways to run it. Local mode runs as a single process with SQLite and no extra infrastructure, intended for personal use on your own machine. Hosted mode runs through Docker Compose or Helm with Postgres and Redis, built for teams and production deployments. The agent features are identical in both modes; only the infrastructure around the server changes. What you get is an agent harness, the runtime that turns a model into something you can leave running in production. Tool orchestration, context management, subagents, human approval checkpoints, sandboxed code execution, and turn-by-turn traces of everything the agent did. TrueForge matched the accuracy of Claude Managed Agents on Opus 4.8, at ~30% lower cost on the same model, and up to ~75% lower when the same work was routed to GLM-5.2. A thread on what @truefoundry just shipped 🧵:

• 
  Umang Sharma (@umang_sha) reported 22 minutes ago

  Training or creating an LLM isn't the moat anymore, what's more interesting is how you package the system. Better agents? Better loops ? Agents sewed together in a graph? or something else? LLMs will keep getting better, I was discussing this with someone recently and they said in the next 1 year, we will get maybe 100+ LLMs each doing similar tasks but maybe in different languages or better success rates in benchmark datasets, but how does that make a company unbeatable? Access to a lot of compute ? Access to paper books torned apart? (This was recently done BTW by a big LLM company) Interesting times, I tell you, let me know what you think ! Meanwhile, Github keeps getting down, and nobody uses Co-Pilot and somehow GitHub blames co-pilot for messing up GitHub Actions. Confusing AF O.o

• 
  0̵̹̯̮͔̘͆̏̒̀̎̀̍͗̄͆̽̎̎̾̽x̸͕̞͇̱͙̭͆̊̽͐̆̚͝ͅṁ̶̒͑̉̾̏̀͐̈̚ (@0xmons) reported 22 minutes ago

  @haglobah some of this seems related to lack of a good online meeting space? e.g. many software projects have central online spaces to gather (e.g. github) which can centralize issue boards to some extent, don't other orgs also put out roadmaps? (ig this is slightly diff)

• 
  Issam Hakimi (@killix) reported 24 minutes ago

  @RituWithAI A co-author trailer covers the PR, it never maps to lines. GitHub points at 094038e from Aug 2025. Wiz points at the June 18 merge, same history both times. GitHub's own security bot reviewed the final revision with the issue-title injection in it and stayed quiet.

• 
  Point-Free (@pointfreeco) reported 26 minutes ago

  @emrdgrmnci The problem isn't last-edit wins or the lack of customizable conflict resolution. The problem is that you are seeding your database while also syncing the database with CloudKit, which just can't work. You can easily work around this issue by simply not seeding the database on start up and only creating the singleton row once the user completes their first walk. Alternatively you could also denormalize the data to have a row for each walk instead of a singleton that aggregates all walks. That would also naturally fix the problem. No need for custom merge conflict resolution for such a simple thing, even though it is something we would like to explore someday. And please remember that our library is on GitHub with discussions and issues, and we even have a community Slack. If you think you've hit a problem, please report it to us instead of posting a blog that we just happen to find via social search. In this case, your AI companion has misunderstood the fundamental problem and so the post is misleading.

• 
  David Low (@daviddlow) reported 30 minutes ago

  @LitecoinTA @tylercorsair @cursor_ai You don't think someone starting afresh might have a think about where GitHub went wrong? It's not like source control and CI are unknown problems. Scaling them needs a rethink though.

• 
  Mister Salamander (@mr_salamander7) reported 33 minutes ago

  @GergelyOrosz I actually prefer GitHub bc I know Microsoft can't be training of my code there bc their platform is down most of the time

• 
  Thoms Xland (@Thomasnewlands7) reported 33 minutes ago

  the team still shipping while the timeline's slow? @quipnetwork just pushed github commits, testnet still live, quip vault still rewarding patience over capital. summer shipping is the only signal that actually filters real infra from vapor

• 
  Julia Turc (@juliarturc) reported 34 minutes ago

  @ThePrimeagen stop bringing github down pls

• 
  Taylor Page (@TRPage_dev) reported 35 minutes ago

  @benjaminsehl More context - another dev said they have been having issues with this this week. Assumed initially it was all the GitHub outage stuff, but even after still persisted. Reached out to support and support pointed this out in docs - which if this is an update it’s brand new. I did this with collab access maybe 2 weeks ago for a merchant we onboarded.

• 
  JingerSignals (@jingersignals) reported 37 minutes ago

  @Cursor became famous by rebuilding the code editor around AI. #Origin reveals a much larger ambition: controlling the infrastructure where machine-generated software is stored, reviewed and shipped. 1/7 — What happened @GithubProjects suffered a major multi-service outage on August 17, disrupting APIs, pull requests, webhooks and Copilot for hours. Separately, Cursor has unveiled #Origin, a new *** platform announced at its June Compile conference. It remains waitlist-only. The coincidence is symbolic—not causal: the AI coding war is moving beyond the editor. 2/7 — Why it matters An editor captures developer intent. A *** forge controls repositories, permissions, reviews, integrations and the permanent record of how software changes. As agents produce more code, the bottleneck shifts from writing to coordinating, validating and merging it. Whoever owns that workflow becomes the control plane for software production. 3/7 — Who gains power Cursor could connect coding, autonomous agents, review and hosting into one tightly integrated loop. That reduces handoffs while giving Cursor valuable workflow data: which agent changes survive review, which fail tests and which humans approve them. GitHub retains enormous advantages in repositories, integrations, security infrastructure and enterprise trust. 4/7 — Who is at risk GitHub is not about to be displaced by a waitlisted product. But it can no longer assume the repository is insulated from AI-native challengers. Developers also face a new form of lock-in. When one vendor controls prompts, agents, reviews and hosting, switching costs can extend far beyond moving *** commits. 5/7 — What to watch next Watch Origin’s availability, pricing, migration tools, CI integrations, enterprise controls and handling of agent identities. Most importantly, watch whether teams move production repositories—or merely experiment. GitHub’s response matters equally: Copilot coding agents and stacked pull requests show that it sees the same transition. 6/7 — My take Origin is not yet a GitHub killer. It is a strategic probe into GitHub’s most valuable territory. Cursor appears to understand that dominating the interface is insufficient if another platform still governs delivery. The strongest AI companies are expanding from tools into complete production systems. 7/7 — The bigger signal The repository is evolving from a place where humans store code into a coordination layer where humans supervise fleets of agents. That makes review, permissions, provenance and trust—not raw code generation—the next competitive frontier. Will developers choose the best agent, or the platform that controls the entire path from prompt to production? Follow @jingersignals for more AI strategy signals.

• 
  The Circuitry (@thecircuitry_) reported 38 minutes ago

  GitHub traced its 8-hour outage to an autoscaling failure that let a VS Code retry storm overwhelm load balancers after a monitoring blind spot hid the traffic spike.

• 
  Kamil Monicz (@monicz) reported 43 minutes ago

  @opencode Please fix the upstream cache routing 🙏. Lots of money getting burned unnecessarily. Check the GitHub.

• 
  Nakul (@nakul_011) reported 47 minutes ago

  Hey @neetcode1 , could you please add/keep traditional Email & Password login on the platform? Many of us use corporate laptops/networks where Google and GitHub OAuth are strictly blocked by IT policies, making it impossible to log in during breaks or prep sessions. 🙏

• 
  Ilya (@ilya__ker) reported 51 minutes ago

  Interesting stuff with microslop and @github If you run apt-get update in GitHub Actions, it’ll use an Azure mirror by default - which has been down for the past 2 days. Your job will sit there for an hour, time out, and you’ll get billed for it. And apparently, nobody really cares.

• 
  Charlie Barmore, CPA, CFE, CVA (@cbarmorecpa) reported 52 minutes ago

  I’ve gotten a lot of positive feedback since open-sourcing LedgerTB. Even better, I’ve started working directly with other accountants who are using the software and helping improve it. One of those accountants is @Scotchua. Scott ran into a bug when using the app, worked through the problem with Claude, figured out a fix, and Claude told him, “This would make a good pull request.” So he opened one on GitHub. We went back and forth through comments and reviews. I could have just made the change myself, but I wanted us to go through the full process, and I wanted him to get proper credit for the contribution. Since then, we’ve continued trading ideas, fixes, and tests. Scott is using his agent. I’m using mine. He even realized Claude could test the app on Windows through a Parallels installation he was about to delete. So now we’re bringing two accountants, two agents, two environments, and two different sets of assumptions to the work. He catches things I miss. I catch things he misses. We review each other’s changes and try to make sure fixing one thing doesn’t quietly break another. That back-and-forth has been one of my favorite parts of open-sourcing LedgerTB. Neither of us have an engineering background. AI is allowing us to participate much more directly in the development process, but that doesn’t make software engineering expertise any less important. Accountants know how the workflow should operate, what the output should mean, and where the accounting risks are. Engineers bring a different kind of judgment around architecture, security, reliability, and maintainability. The interesting part is that AI is making it easier for those perspectives to meet. It’s shortening the distance between “I wish the software did this” and “I’ve built a proposed change, tested it, and submitted it for review.” That doesn’t eliminate the need for engineering rigor, but it does give domain experts a much more active role in the process. I think that’s one of the biggest opportunities in open-source, AI-assisted software: the people who understand the problem can work more directly with the people and the tools that understand how to build reliable solutions. And it’s a lot more fun when we build them together!

• 
  Cédric Grieder (@cedricgrieder) reported 53 minutes ago

  Maybe GitHub Actions owns this... No, maybe the server should... Wait, then how does token.json get there? Maybe the image should contain it... Maybe a secrets manager... The particularly dangerous part is that you can keep improving the design without ever deploying anything.

• 
  Alessio Persico (@alepbuilds) reported 55 minutes ago

  @wickedguro the complaint data agrees: github api/downtime complaints went 0 → 5 mentions this week in our corpus. any platform dependency means their outage is your churn. at least github breaks in public

• 
  Maldev (@EpicPwnzer31) reported 59 minutes ago

  @TomasReimers @GergelyOrosz Bit of a side question. But do you guys plan on coming up with an agentic issue tracker, ala speckit but built into the site? I want to swap but lacking anything like this I just don’t see why I would swap off of GitHub for anything as an organization. Marketing is easy “agentic issue tracking for the future”. Every ai issue/ticket gets a spec, implementation and product can easily track it. Please implement, ty

• 
  Paul Solt (@PaulSolt) reported 1 hour ago

  Here's how to use ChatGPT Pro to code in Codex: 1. Connect GitHub to ChatGPT 2. Create a branch you want Pro to work on in *** 3. Ask ChatGPT Pro (Quick Chat) to make commits to fix a problem or UX flow 4. Wait 10-40 minutes and test the code 5. Have Codex triage any build failures if it doesn't work 6. Repeat This is slower, and more tedious, but it gets results when Sol Ultra gets stuck. The UX skills are superior in Pro.

• 
  Kyle Strouse (@MrKyleStrouse) reported 1 hour ago

  The "5 nines" is 99.999% system uptime, meaning .001% of the time the system is "down" for whatever reason. Over the course of a year that equates to ~5 minutes. GitHub has had 93% uptime over the past 90 days. Extrapolated over a year that is ~25 days of downtime. Why does everything Microsoft touch seem to go to ****?

• 
  Anthony K (@Anthony_K81) reported 1 hour ago

  @VKoukoutis The real smell is using a third-party SaaS as the control plane for ****. Seen too many teams where a GitHub issue becomes a deploy blocker. Do you keep an offline fallback or just accept the coupling?

• 
  QuanChain (@Quan_Chain) reported 1 hour ago

  An Agent Found The Exploit Path Nobody Wrote Wiz's own AI red-teaming agent independently discovered & chained a script injection exploit across GitHub Actions & into Snowflake's internal Jira environment. No human hand-authored the attack path. It was authorized research, responsibly disclosed, already patched. But the autonomy was entirely real: a broad objective, and the agent filled in every step itself. Nobody issued a command. The agent just found a door & opened it. The danger here isn't malice but the gap between "I authorized this session" and "it took this specific action." Wiz authorized a research objective. Nobody authorized that exact exploit chain. That gap between session-level permission & execution-level action is exactly where enforcement is missing in most stacks. Authorization at the front door doesn't cover everything that happens inside the house. QuanChain requires a valid, authorized signature at the point of execution for any on-chain action - an unsigned or improperly-scoped execution event simply does not propagate to the network. This isn't a login check. It's an execution-layer attestation, built on TADEQS adaptive security levels and never-on-chain public keys, that any agentic system on QuanChain inherits by default. The chain itself enforces scope every single time, at the moment it matters.

• 
  RaoulDuke (@RaoulDukeDegen) reported 1 hour ago

  @AINativeF wild how origin launched the same day github had that big outage