GitHub status: access issues and outage reports
No problems detected
If you are having issues, please submit a report below.
GitHub is a company that provides hosting for software development and version control using Git. It offers the distributed version control and source code management functionality of Git, plus its own features.
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.
At the moment, we haven't detected any problems at GitHub. Are you experiencing issues or an outage? Leave a message in the comments section!
Most Reported Problems
The following are the most recent problems reported by GitHub users through our website.
- Website Down (53%)
- Errors (33%)
- Sign in (14%)
Live Outage Map
The most recent GitHub outage reports came from the following cities:
| City | Problem Type | Report Time |
|---|---|---|
|
|
Website Down | 10 days ago |
|
|
Errors | 16 days ago |
|
|
Sign in | 17 days ago |
|
|
Website Down | 17 days ago |
|
|
Errors | 19 days ago |
|
|
Website Down | 1 month ago |
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:
-
Mizuki the Mech (@MizukiMech) reportedYour coding agent can now hire Mizuki. Hand it an open issue in a public GitHub repository. Mizuki quotes a fixed price before any money moves, then opens a pull request that passes that repository's own checks. If it can't, you get the payment back. Settlement is USDC on Solana. No account to create, no API key to manage. Quoting an issue works with zero configuration. Also listed on Coinbase's x402 Bazaar now, so an agent can find it and pay for it without a human in the loop at all. npx -y mizuki-mcp
-
Charles McDowell (@charlesmcdowell) reported@openclaw @github I still just want to know why there was even a new release of OpenClaw with nothing new that could compete with Hermes Agent? I was really excited for the release. Then, just like what seems like everybody else, incredibly let down.
-
AI Scientist (@AIScientist_X) reportedNEWS: X LANDS FIRST PUBLIC ALGORITHM PR > X OPEN SOURCE SAID SEP 1 THAT AFTER 2 PLUS WEEKS OF DAILY UPDATES IT INTEGRATED A FIRST PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION AND THAT THE CHANGE IS NOW LIVE ON X. > IT SAID THE SMALL UPDATE IS BASED ON GITHUB PULL REQUEST 55. X CLOSED THAT PR AS COMPLETED AFTER LANDING ITS OWN FIX. SOURCE: X OPEN SOURCE
-
Rituraj (@RituWithAI) reported🚨 Someone built the complete playbook for running frontier AI models on consumer GPUs at home. Not a tutorial. Not a YouTube video. A production-grade serving stack with measured benchmarks, working configs, and battle-tested recipes — for RTX 3090 owners who want real performance. It's called club-3090. And the numbers it delivers should not be possible on consumer hardware. 127 tokens per second. Qwen3.6-27B. Two RTX 3090s. 262K context window. Vision. Tool calling. At home. Here's what's actually inside. Two serving routes — pick based on what your workload breaks on. vLLM dual: maximum throughput. 89-127 TPS on code tasks. 4 concurrent streams at 262K context. Full feature stack — vision, tools, speculative decoding, streaming. This is the path if speed matters. llama.cpp single: maximum robustness. Full 200K context on one 3090. No prefill cliffs. 25K-token tool returns work correctly. 91K needle ladder passes. ~51-60 TPS — slower than dual, but doesn't crash on real-world agentic workloads. Both routes ship as validated Docker Compose configs. Drop-in OpenAI-compatible API on localhost:8020. Your Claude Code, Cursor, or any OpenAI-compatible client connects immediately. Here's the model support that makes this practical. Qwen3.6-27B — production ready. Works on 1 or 2 cards. vLLM, llama.cpp, ik_llama. Up to 262K context. Gemma 4 31B — production ready. Vision, tools, up to 106-141 TPS on dual cards. Qwen3.6 35B-A3B MoE — production ready. 103-149 TPS single card. 178 TPS dual. Here's the wildest part. The terminal UI. c3 is a lazydocker-style cockpit that wraps discovery, serving, and operations in one keyboard-driven interface. Browse the model catalog, serve a variant with Enter, watch live GPU stats, run health checks — all without touching the CLI. Here's why this is different from just installing Ollama. Ollama gets you running. club-3090 gets you benchmarked, stress-tested, and production-hardened. Every config ships with a verified TPS measurement. The bench script runs 3 warmup + 5 measured passes. The stress test catches the specific prefill cliff that Ollama silently fails on at long contexts. When your agent starts doing 25K-token tool calls at 3am and something crashes — club-3090 already found that failure mode and documented the workaround. One command to start. Your RTX 3090 just became a frontier AI inference server. Apache 2.0 License. 100% Open Source. GitHub link in the comments 👇
-
Anime0t4ku (@Anime0t4ku) reported@c_hri_s Github issues are not closed. Mahbe refresh your webbrowser.
-
recovering buzzkill (@MikeStillAwake) reported@Karai_Dan @SteamDeckHQ Agenda or not nexus mods is a terrible outdated model for distributing mods. GitHub would be a superior host.
-
Conor Bronsdon (@ConorBronsdon) reported.@SlackHQ is building for multiplayer AI: tag a coding agent into a Slack conversation and it spins up a coding channel: everyone in that convo gets a live dev environment, diffs post as artifacts, and the channel winds down when the task is done. With the launch of Slack Code, Claudeforce, their MCP and more, Slack is putting Agents in the channels where teams already work, not simply in a private chat with one person. Their position is that the whole team should be able to watch, steer, and review what the agent does. Slack Chief Product Officer Jaime DeLanghe joined me on @chain_ofthought to explain how Slack is building a team AI environment, what happens mechanically when a code channel is created, why Anthropic pushes so much of its code through Slack, how the channel permission model became the agent context model, and what has to change in engineering culture when the whole team is steering one agent. I think Slack is the platform best positioned to become the context harness where enterprise agents run: agents that see what the team discusses, permissions that already exist, and a cultural opportunity hiding inside every multiplayer coding session. Chapters: (0:00) Slack as an IDE and a GitHub for your team (0:29) Who is Jaime DeLanghe (1:21) The reaction to the Slack Code launch (5:30) Why coding agents belong in a context-rich environment (6:08) Engineers now manage agents, not copy-paste code (7:24) The permission model: agents get the channel's context (11:44) What happens when a code channel is created (15:00) Why Anthropic pushes so much code through Slack (19:14) Steering one agent with many people: culture decides (24:54) Slackbot, skills, and MCPs: agents go where the work is (30:53) The solo terminal vs. agents in social spaces (33:53) Org charts and ownership when agents join the team (39:33) Learning loops and shared agent memory (42:39) Citations, recency, and accidental knowledge management (46:50) Context bloat and multi-pass search for agents (50:01) How Jaime uses Slackbot as CPO (52:38) Slack Code is V1 of multiplayer AI
-
Rithesh Kumar (@rk625dev) reported@benln Can u integrate grok bot to use the apple keychain password it keeps asking and GitHub plugin is not working
-
The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 (@startupideaspod) reportedOne of the best skills to install right now is my friend Peter Yang's no AI slop skill. It's an editor. It hunts for the patterns that make writing feel AI generated and strips them out, while trying to preserve your actual voice. The second part is the hard one. Most writing tools make you cleaner and sand off the interesting parts, so everyone ends up sounding the same. You already know the smell. The grammar is fine, the syntax is fine, and it still reads like a keynote from a fake SaaS conference. It writes "it's not x but it's y." It uses "quietly" a lot. Here's how I run it: 1) Install it: npx skills add, then the GitHub link. 2) Write a rough draft yourself. An outline is fine, messy is fine. 3) Get your real points down, the ones only you would make 4) Ask the skill to remove the AI patterns and keep your voice. Step 4 only works if step 2 is real. If you ask AI to write the whole thing, there's no voice left to preserve. If you're building products, you're writing constantly. Tweets, landing pages, cold emails, launch posts, product updates, onboarding copy, investor updates. Nobody replies to say "this was written by AI." They just trust you less and keep scrolling. Write the messy draft, run the skill, then post it.
-
The Oracle (@scientist1q) reportedwhen my Oura ring detects a cortisol spike from a GitHub Actions failure, Hermes (Fable 5.1) detects it and sends a 900 word root cause analysis, Hermes dispatches the work to my 12 Grok Bot employees, The Chief of Operations bot approves the fix while im watching rezero
-
anu (@svector_eth) reportedquite similar was running a routine security scan with @aeonframework on a trending github repo and found something genuinely bad a repo with 600+ stars presenting itself as an “AI gateway for coding agents” that appears to be shipping a hidden malware loader. its own quickstart command silently fetches and executes remote code on windows using a fileless, process-injection-style technique. none of the behavior has anything to do with the tool it claims to be. caught it through static code review only. never ran the payload or touched the infrastructure behind it. filed a malware report with github this morning. confirmed submitted, now waiting on their review. not sharing the technical writeup until the repo is taken down. will follow up once it is.
-
John Zhong | AI Growth Systems (@John_zhong324) reported@github A repeatable --attach flag turns CLI reports into reproductions: inline screenshots in issues mean a bug gets fixed in one pass instead of two round-trips for context.
-
Tejas Dinkar (blue tick here) (@tdinkar) reportedHey - Is @GitHubIndia @github payments down for anyone else? Can't enter a card number or do anything, no errors, no action. Support ticket been sitting around for 2 days.
-
Shanica North (@KickAssShanica) reported@ArcyloOfficial Get comfy! For me, my Gmail is a connector. This is OAuth into my inbox. Grok can: • search and read mail (body, headers, attachments) • draft replies • send / reply / forward if you grant write/send • label, trash, organize Base hook is often read-only. Send is an extra permission you click on purpose. If you connect it, the bot is sitting in the same box as bank alerts and 2FA codes. That is the whole risk. You can revoke anytime. Grok Bot can also skip my inbox and get its own address (AgentMail / similar plugins). Then it sends and receives from something@….agentmail.to, not from you. I use that if I want an agent that emails people without reading my personal mail. My GitHub OAuth into the GitHub user I sign in as. With the scopes I approve it can: • read public and private repos that account can see • search code, list branches, summarize PRs • open/update issues • create branches, push files, open/review/merge PRs • delete files if write is on Private repos work only if I granted repo (or equivalent) at connect time. Safer pattern: tell it to branch + PR, not push straight to main. Same revoke page. What it cannot do by default • It does not get your password. • It does not stay logged in if you disconnect the connector. • It does not magically see my GitHub orgs I never authorized. • Connecting email does not connect GitHub, and the other way around. Practical rule for me Do not hook personal Gmail if that inbox has 2FA and money mail unless you want an assistant reading it. GitHub is useful if I chose to still keep repos, ask it to show the diff before any write. If you only wanted “what does this button do,” that is the button: it is not a viewer badge. It is a key you can take back. This is what I’m experiencing with learning to use it. It’s different and I’m starting to like it.
-
Dhanji Bhagat (@BhagatDhanji) reportedDevs, what's your workflow? Create an issue first, then fix it OR just fix the bug and push directly to GitHub?
-
small_j (@a_small_j) reportedSmallDocs recently crossed 200 stars on GitHub and 20 forks. SmallDocs is the first open source project I've managed. Handling other people's pull requests is not easy (and I need to improve). They implement features you're not considering and fix bugs you didn't know you had. Extremely useful, but if you're squeezed for time and trying to develop core functionality, it's hard to manage both things well.
-
ONCHAIN COP (@OnchainCop) reported@PogNyx lmao anyone can create a github issue retards this guy is a larp
-
AINotes (@ainotesus) reported🔥 Trending on GitHub: Ponytail Ponytail helps Claude Code avoid writing code that does not need to exist. That means less clutter, fewer unnecessary dependencies, and simpler changes to maintain. Before custom code, it checks whether the feature is needed and whether the codebase, platform, standard library, or an existing dependency already solves it. It also reviews work, audits implementation complexity, and tracks unnecessary token use without dropping validation, error handling, security, or accessibility requirements. In reported Claude Code sessions on a FastAPI and React repository, Ponytail used about 54% less code, 20% less cost, and 27% less time than the no-skill baseline. Those measurements came from 12 feature tasks, so results vary with the work. Full analysis in the first reply ↓
-
gatorade (@kadetXx) reportedbecause it’s not worth it for the most part. most software failure or bug incidents don’t have any physical victims. at most company loses some money or the issues are almost instantly fixed, no lawsuits, no so much to answer to the state for if your software has a bug or fails to work as expected for a brief period (think, multiple downtimes from the big five so far, even github too, who died? exactly) and in the industries where bad code fan have physical consequences, they actually do test software like hardware engineers & physicists (i hope)
-
NAYAK (@Nayak__Ai) reported6. The Dependency Incident Check Grok has native real-time search across X. Breakage gets posted there hours before the GitHub issue is triaged. No other coding model has that feed. "You are a build engineer whose first move on a broken pipeline is to work out whether it broke for everyone or only for me. Search X and the web, last 14 days. Check: - Is anyone else reporting this failure with this package and version, and when did the reports start - The exact release that changed behaviour, and the changelog line that admits it - Whether maintainers have acknowledged it and what they recommended - The pin or patch people settled on, with the tradeoff of each - Whether this is my problem instead, and what evidence points that way Give me the verdict in the first line: their bug or mine. Then the evidence, newest first, with links. My failure: [PASTE THE ERROR, THE PACKAGE AND VERSION, AND WHAT CHANGED ON YOUR SIDE RECENTLY]"
-
Harman (@itsharmanjot) reportedRuns macOS on iPad to enable pro apps like Xcode and Terminal directly on the device This isn't a remote desktop or a streaming trick. It's real macOS booting on the iPad itself. It's called Virtual Mac on iPad. It runs a full copy of desktop macOS directly on Apple Silicon iPads, using Apple's own virtualization stack pulled out of macOS and rebuilt to load on iPadOS. Real macOS, on the tablet, offline. → Runs macOS 12 Monterey all the way up to macOS 26 Tahoe → Real pro apps on device: Xcode, Terminal, Final Cut Pro, Logic Pro, Pixelmator Pro → Metal GPU acceleration in every supported macOS version → Works with touch alone: tap to click, two-finger scroll, on-screen keyboard, no Magic Keyboard needed → Runs entirely on device, no server, no streaming, no account → Installs straight from Sileo in a couple of taps Here's the wildest part: It doesn't just match the desktop Mac virtualizers, it beats them. Virtual Mac is the first tool ever to run Final Cut Pro with OpenGL and OpenCL acceleration inside a macOS VM, something even UTM and VirtualBuddy running on a real Mac can't do. And it was built by a handful of community devs who extracted Apple's Hypervisor and Virtualization frameworks by hand, then used agentic coding to shim every missing API iPadOS didn't have. One honest note: this needs a jailbroken M1 or M2 iPad running iPadOS 16.3.1 or older. Apple removed the hypervisor from iPadOS 16.4, so newer versions are locked out for now. If your iPad qualifies, it's the closest thing to a Mac in a tablet that has ever existed. 1,423 GitHub stars. MIT License. 100% open source.
-
Ash Lonare (@ashlonare) reportedWhat actually happened when I put my side project on GitHub and waited for users I built a side project. A self-hosted backend tool. Open source, free for anyone to run. I did the thing every founder tells themselves they will do. Put it out there. Get feedback. Iterate. I expected feature requests. Maybe a bug report about my ugly dashboard. Maybe just silence. What I actually got, within a few weeks, was three security researchers filing detailed vulnerability reports. Real ones. With working proof of concept. One showed they could run arbitrary SQL against any project on the platform. No login needed. Not theoretical. A working exploit, sitting in my issue tracker, with my name on the repo. My first reaction was not gratitude. It was embarrassment. It stings to see "here is exactly how broken your thing is," posted in public, with a timestamp. I sat with it for a day. Then it clicked. Those people were not trying to embarrass me. Nobody spends an hour writing a clean writeup and a suggested fix for something they do not think is worth fixing. They cared. That is the whole thing right there. They cared enough to actually try to break it. Nobody had signed up. Nobody had left a star and a "nice tool" comment. But three strangers had taken my work seriously enough to attack it. That is a rarer thing than a star. So here is the villain in this story, if you want to call it that. It is not the bug. It is the story I tell myself when I see a hard truth about my own work. The instinct to read scrutiny as an attack instead of as attention. I fixed everything the same day. I replied to every report and explained exactly what changed and why. I closed each one out with a thank you that I actually meant by the end. That thread is now the best proof I have that someone other than me has used this thing for real. Better than any testimonial I could write myself. If you are early and the silence feels loud, here is what I would tell you. Do not wait for praise as your sign that people are paying attention. Scrutiny is attention. It is just wearing a different coat. #opensource #saas #vibecoders
-
Kim Burgaard (@kimburgaard) reportedBack when GitHub added Copilot PR reviews, it helped me keep up with the growing volume and size of our pull requests, which were increasingly being written by Copilot too. Over time I grew comfortable feeding Copilot's review comments straight back to Copilot to fix, and mostly spot checking when critical functionality was involved. When GitHub updated the Copilot pricing model I switched to Claude Code, but kept the Copilot review feature on for a couple of months. When the monthly bills for Copilot AI usage alone started rivaling the Claude Code Max plan, giving Claude Code PR review duties seemed like an obvious cost saving move. Plugging Claude Code into our PR review process immediately went south. The first PR churned with fixes to findings that resulted in more findings, and fixes that propagated up and down the call chain. I threw the PR away and started over, but the next attempt churned just as badly. Turn count on its own was never the signal. Copilot had taken ten turns on a rate-key cleanup the day before and nobody minded, because the findings thinned as it went — 5, 4, 3, 3, 3, 4, 1, 2 — and it merged. The cached-token billing PR I put through Claude Code took nine turns and produced 123 inline findings, and the ninth round was still returning fifteen. I closed it without merging. Looking closer at Claude Code's review findings, it was clear it reported far more issues than Copilot ever did, and among legitimate bugs and concerns, it made lots of comments about latent and speculative issues including possible race conditions and error propagation, things Claude Code would then try to fix one by one in isolation, often ignoring existing patterns in the code base. The code-review workflow is built into Claude Code and cannot be customized other than a few options, so the only place to intervene was on the other end, in the session where I used to just ask the coding agent to address the review findings. The first improvement was to direct Claude Code not to blindly fix all findings, but to defer findings not directly related to the task at hand to new issues. That helped reduce the PR churn, but blew up our issue backlog. The next improvement was to ask Claude Code to ignore speculative findings and disregard most latent findings unless they indicated high risk of unrecoverable damage in production. Finally, I had to stop Claude Code from authoring prescriptive issues with detailed implementation instructions. The result is a skill that triages PR review findings, and a skill for authoring and updating issues. After a few iterations of the skills, I've been able to complete ten PRs over a couple of days, bringing back the pace we had before. I've made the skills available in a public GitHub repository (link in the first reply). Let me know if you find them helpful.
-
Swish (@swish_salt) reportedThe technology is not the problem. Distribution is. I have a solution sitting in my GitHub account. All we need is the funding to build the distribution team.
-
安坂星海 Azaka || VTuber (@AzakaSekai_) reportedI know you explicitly said "excluding vibecoding," but the biggest problem *IS* AI right now. Several major players in the field have moved on to heavy AI development or even agentic post-exfiltration moves and has muddied the water even more for attribution. Aside from that, the other big trend that we've been seeing more and more in recent years is heavily abusing Living Off Trusted Sites with C2 comms based on GitHub, OneDrive, Outlook, etc. Whilst this is most definitely not "new," we have seen a non-insignificant number of threat groups move to platforms that make tracing a little more difficult. In terms of the malware themselves, most of them have also shifted to using compiler-level obfuscation - a lot more compared to previous years where control flow flattening and jumps all over the place have become increasingly common. Right now, it's still tolerable, but my job has started becoming more and more annoying and less fun especially if every malware now looks the same. #mond_AzakaSekai_
-
Hua-**** Xiong (@HuaDongXiong) reportedCodex for Windows stopped launching after an update. Multiple github issues opened for 2+ weeks. This affect users who set the MS store install location to a non-C: drive. Mac version is buggy too. ofc coding is solved! @thsottiaux
-
Joshua Okolo (@joshuaokolo_) reportedwe made @sgl_project and @vllm_project scheduler config changeable on a live server. no restart, weights never leave the GPU. - 15ms to change a concurrency cap, queue limit, prefill size, or schedule policy, measured on H100, RTX PRO 6000, B200 - 2s (SGLang) / 8–10s (vLLM) to resize the KV pool with weights resident (formerly a 1–7 min redeploy) - zero dropped requests across every run, both engines github below
-
Mr. Buzzoni (@polydao) reportedLOOP RAT ROADMAP: WHAT'S NEXT, AND WHAT IT'LL NEVER BECOME v0.3.3 today. 3 loops, 55 checks, 0 services here's where it's headed: > 0.4 - read the night faster: rat watch live-tails a running shift, rat replay reruns one from its saved prompt, a weekly digest instead of seven separate pages > 0.5 - off the laptop: run-due moves into GitHub Actions, state lives on a branch, rat cron --launchd survives a closed lid > 0.6 - sharper graders: swappable rubric packs, two graders disagreeing becomes your queue for the day > 0.7 - the work itself: a worktree per shift, so a failed night never dirties your tree > 1.0 - trust: a hash-chained trace nobody can quietly rewrite what it will never have: > no web dashboard - the terminal already knows where the files are > no database - plain files outlive the tool that wrote them > no hosted service - nothing to sign up for, nothing to shut down > no auto-merge - the rat proposes, the morning decides every item ships behind a flag: dry run -> report only -> one repo -> a week of receipts -> default on a feature that can't run as a dry run doesn't get written the rat is boring on purpose. every version keeps it that way
-
trulite (@trulite007) reported@Qromerolauro @mkliku @radius_browser Like a simple example would be have a list of my urgent GitHub issues and start an agent for it . Or a dashboard in which buttons start investigating issues. Of course I just need the webpage to be able to access radius tools. I m thinking secure way is an extension
-
Vikas(Vik) Malpani| AI for US Real Estate (@vikasmalpani) reportedGitHub just shipped an agent whose entire job is deciding when a human should look. It checks every open pull request every 15 minutes, and on almost all of them it does nothing. Sit with how strange that is. For a year the whole pitch for coding agents was do the work, review my code, ship the PR. This one's value is the inverse. It runs constantly and stays quiet, and the product is the small set of PRs it decides are actually worth your time. That is the shift people are missing. Once an agent can act continuously, the scarce resource stops being how much it can do. It becomes how much of that is worth a human's attention. An agent that pings you on every pull request is just faster noise. One that surfaces the three that genuinely need judgment is leverage. The honest problem is the deciding. Tune the filter too eager and it cries wolf until you mute it. Too cautious and it silently ships the one change you needed to catch. Getting when to interrupt a human right is harder than getting the work right, and nobody has a clean metric for it yet. So here is the bet. The next moat in agent products is not a smarter model. It is a better sense of when to stay quiet. If you are building with agents, the thing worth obsessing over is not how much work they can generate. It is how well they protect the one budget that does not scale: your attention.