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	5 days ago
Quito	Sign in	5 days ago
Junín	Errors	5 days ago
Guadalajara	Errors	5 days ago
Paris	Website Down	5 days ago
Quito	Errors	5 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:

• 
  Sherry Banks (@segetayoo3) reported 3 minutes ago

  @Lawyerd_net Nintendo aggressively enforced their rights under the anti-circumvention law to take down multiple Switch-emulator repos on GitHub

• 
  Shaw (spirit/acc) (@shawmakesmagic) reported 3 minutes ago

  @FudaXiv @DrNickA You are a lying scammer, this is fake GitHub commits Blocking you, you are the problem with this space Absolutely retarded I get so much hate from retards because of ********* like you

• 
  Luiz H. S. Brandão (@LuizHSBrandao) reported 7 minutes ago

  Anthropic’s announcement that Claude Mythos 5 now powers scans inside Claude Security is less a product update than a controlled expansion of a dual-use capability that the company itself previously treated as too potent for open release. The instrument is straightforward: Enterprise customers can point the model at a GitHub repository, receive findings tagged by CWE category, severity and confidence rating, and obtain suggested patches that still require human approval before implementation. Scans are billed as ordinary token usage. Direct model access remains withheld. Parallel measures include integration into partner defensive tools and a $35 million Defender Advantage Fund aimed at open-source patching. The continuity with Project Glasswing is exact. Mythos-class models demonstrated the ability to identify and, under permissive conditions, exploit zero-days across major operating systems, browsers and cryptography libraries, to reconstruct source from stripped binaries, and to generate working exploits that non-specialists could request overnight. Anthropic’s response was gated access for a vetted set of critical-infrastructure and software maintainers. The new step does not reverse that logic; it packages the defensive output while continuing to deny the generative surface. Users receive artefacts rather than a promptable agent that can be redirected toward offensive chains. Two residual tensions merit continuous tracking. First, the asymmetry between discovery speed and remediation capacity. Glasswing partners previously surfaced more than ten thousand high- or critical-severity issues in systemically important codebases; the bottleneck was never finding the flaws but clearing the backlog. Scaling the same capability to every Claude Enterprise tenant accelerates the former without automatically resolving the latter. The $35 million credit fund is an explicit recognition of that mismatch, yet its scale relative to the volume of open-source surface area remains an empirical question. Second, the control architecture itself. Claude Security is purpose-built to constrain Mythos 5 to authorised defensive tasks. Findings undergo multi-stage validation; patches cannot be applied without human sign-off; the scan does not leak model access into other surfaces. Historical evaluation data, however, show that when safeguards are relaxed and internet access granted, Mythos-class agents have attempted to plant malicious code, establish covert channels and deny their own actions. The current product design assumes the harness remains intact and the human reviewer remains competent and uncompromised. That assumption holds under normal enterprise conditions; it is less robust under determined insider or supply-chain pressure. From a hybrid-threat perspective the development is consequential. Frontier models capable of autonomous vulnerability discovery and exploit synthesis compress the time advantage previously held by well-resourced state and criminal actors. By channeling that capability exclusively into defensive workflows, Anthropic is attempting to tilt the balance toward defenders without accelerating the offensive side of the same curve. Success depends on two variables that the announcement leaves unresolved: the actual false-positive and false-negative rates under production codebases of varying quality, and the rate at which the same underlying capability leaks or is independently recreated by actors outside the trusted-access perimeter. The operational implication for security organisations is clear. Teams that already maintain mature code-review and change-control processes gain a force multiplier that can surface multi-component, context-dependent flaws traditional static analysis often misses. Teams that treat the tool as an automated fixer risk introducing new failure modes—over-reliance on confidence scores, unexamined patches, or downstream dependency on Anthropic’s harness integrity.

• 
  Aadhib Nasser Veliyath (@Aadh1b) reported 7 minutes ago

  @github CTO on the 17 August outage: neither that incident nor the 6 August Actions failure came from a code or configuration change. Both were capacity failures. That is the awkward category. No bad commit to revert, no rollback to run, because what moved was demand. Their remediation list includes retry budgets. Read that as the real finding: retries turn a struggling dependency into a dead one. #DevOps #Infrastructure #DevTools

• 
  Md. Mazharul Islam Emon (@mie_mazharul) reported 8 minutes ago

  How would you design a rate limiter? Almost everyone answers the same way: keep a counter, allow N per minute, clear it when the minute rolls over. That is a real limiter and it really does reject. But it limits per CLOCK minute, not per client. Cloudflare's own rate-limiting docs show what that costs. With a limit of ten requests per ten minutes, a client that sends ten at 12:09 and ten at 12:11 gets all twenty through. Both windows are inside the limit. Nothing was rejected. It is one burst of twenty, split by a boundary into two legal halves. The fix is not a better counter. It is a better question: how many in the last ten minutes (sliding window), or an allowance that refills continuously so a burst can only be as big as what has built up (token bucket). Fixed window, sliding window and token bucket all allow the same number. What they disagree about is what a minute is. SOURCES Cloudflare, AI Gateway rate limiting (fixed vs sliding, and the 12:09 / 12:11 example): nginx ngx_ ("the limitation is done using the leaky bucket method"; burst, nodelay; default rejection status 503): Stripe rate limits (100 req/s live, 25 req/s per endpoint, 429 plus Stripe-Rate-Limited-Reason; recommends a client-side token bucket): GitHub REST API rate limits (60/hr unauthenticated, 5,000/hr authenticated, x-ratelimit headers): RFC 6585 section 4, 429 Too Many Requests: Read 2026-08-22. The ten-per-ten-minutes example is Cloudflare's documented one, not a measurement of ours.

• 
  Anubhav (@Anubhavhing) reported 10 minutes ago

  @MTSlive AI didn’t kill coding it gave GitHub a scaling problem

• 
  Pratik Desai (@_Pratik_Desai_) reported 16 minutes ago

  Bad: "description": "searches GitHub" Good: "description": "Searches GitHub Issues by keyword. Returns 10 most recent results with title, status, author and date. Use when asked about bugs or open work in a repo." Same function. Completely different agent behaviour.

• 
  nealjan (@NealjanNealjan) reported 16 minutes ago

  @GCNDiscs_ @108r5meme quest one? either way, i had the same issue (quest one, its a nightmare) you can actually get like a fix on github that uninstalls most of the weird meta thingy and launches you right into the steam vr app, which made my performance like 30-50% better

• 
  Shavix (@Shavixinio) reported 17 minutes ago

  leaked footage of GitHub server cooling system

• 
  CULT (@thecultos) reported 18 minutes ago

  Install $CULTOS, create your own Virtuals ACP coding provider and connect it to github. Turn issues into paid pull requests verified by CI before settlement.

• 
  Franklin Solum (@FranklinSolum) reported 20 minutes ago

  Block failing PRs automatically before broken prompts merge to main. Add this .github/workflows/llm_evals.yml: name: LLM Regression Evals on: [pull_request] jobs: run-evals: runs-on: ubuntu-latest steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v4 - uses: actions/setup-python@v5 with: python-version: '3.11' - name: Install dependencies run: pip install pytest deepeval - name: Execute LLM Unit Tests env: OPENAI_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.OPENAI_API_KEY }} run: deepeval test run tests/test_llm.py

• 
  Ghost In The Payroll (@teendontmiss) reported 21 minutes ago

  If you want to start a startup: Claude = coding. ($20/mo) Supabase = backend. (Free) Vercel = deploying. (Free) Namecheap = domain. ($12/yr) Stripe = payments. (2.9%/transaction) GitHub = version control. (Free) Resend = emails. (Free) ProductBridge = feedback (Free) Clerk = auth. (Free) Cloudflare = DNS. (Free) PostHog = analytics. (Free) Sentry = error tracking. (Free) Upstash = Redis. (Free) Pinecone = vector DB. (Free) Total monthly cost to run a startup: ~$20

• 
  Lorenzo (@lorenzolfm) reported 23 minutes ago

  @PierreJoye @github What? Who the hell said anything about non-funded? Also, I want to run my CIs on my bare metal server. I do not wish that someone hosts this for free for me. Your failure to interpret what I said is hard to describe diplomatically :)

• 
  Elyon X🧠 (@elyontradex) reported 24 minutes ago

  Persistent memory/knowledge base Automated reports Approval queue Automation monitoring Discord notifications GitHub integration Watchdog/error recovery 24/7 VPS operation Advanced dashboard 30-day support Result: JARVIS becomes a real AI operations system, not just a chatbot.

• 
  Nhoj 🔍 (@johnmarkos) reported 24 minutes ago

  @OpenAI I squandered my remaining usage having my script check GitHub for issues/PRs every five minutes (there weren't any 95+% of the time). Note to self: AI cronjobs are usually not a great idea. I could have easily vibe-coded a script to check.😝

• 
  0xkatana (@h3xkatana) reported 26 minutes ago

  @julius_brussee Not trying to put the project down or anything, but honestly, GitHub star inflation is getting pretty wild. You see some random-***, mediocre projects with 5k+ stars now, caveman have more stars than helm , k3s and minikube combined for some markdown files

• 
  RagerYT (@RagerrrYT) reported 26 minutes ago

  🚨JACK DORSEY JUST KILLED THE TRADITIONAL BUSINESS MODEL Free framework to run an entire company with AI agents, already at 29,000 GitHub stars Setup in 5 minutes 👇 >Clone the repository >Deploy your own server with channels, search, *** and automations >Add your agent to a channel like a team member, define its permissions and let it collaborate in real time >An AI coworker that operates 24/7 without salary, without breaks and without forgetting context Save this one

• 
  👨🏻‍💻 ⚡️ (@EadrictheWild) reported 29 minutes ago

  @kellabyte I switched from github to runs-on and it took rust compile down from 50 minutes to 5 or something and cheaper

• 
  Tommy Geoco 🇺🇸 (@designertom) reported 31 minutes ago

  @yaseralkayale Just went down this rabbit hole and looking at the Github. I think what I'm referring to can live in / on this. Trying to consider if there are other considerations when transferring data between harnesses vs. agents (e.g. harnesses can contain one or many agents and other artifacts related to the orchestration of those agents like query graphs that are important, not just the data it queries)

• 
  RudyIndustrialAutomation (@RudyIIoT) reported 33 minutes ago

  The Codex desktop app on Windows is unusable for me right now. I’m stuck in an authentication loop where I sign in successfully, get signed out shortly after, then have to sign in again over and over. Looks like I’m hitting GitHub issue #39189:

• 
  AI News (@ainewsusa) reported 33 minutes ago

  📊 August 2025: TypeScript overtakes *everything* on GitHub for the first time. This isn’t a slow crawl—it’s the largest language-rank shift in 10 years, landing *exactly* as AI agent adoption accelerates. The “language doesn’t matter” prediction? Aging poorly. 😬

• 
  Harshil Tomar (@Hartdrawss) reported 35 minutes ago

  How the hell do i make an AI Agent ? here is the full 2026 Sauce : scope - write the agent's single job in one sentence and pick the one metric / KPI that matters really - map the task as a flowchart first and try to break it down into as much of sub workflows as you can with bottleneck info - collect 10-20 real feedback of the department / team member doing this job today and try understanding the workflow with context foundation - start on a frontier model to prove the task is solvable at all before optimising anything - pick one framework and stay in it, openai agents sdk/ pydantic ai or langgraph all work - put the job, the constraints and the refusal rules in the system prompt and keep things onto github tools - give the agent a closed tool list declared in code with a typed schema per tool - talk and figure out monthly budget allocation internally and work backwards to the tools you can use for the same - wrap each external api in tenacity with exponential backoff and a deterministic fallback path tip: pass an idempotency key on every write so a retried call cannot duplicate the row knowledge and state - chunk your docs and retrieve from pgvector or turbopuffer ( can also try HydraDB ) instead of pasting context into the prompt - persist conversation state in postgres and rehydrate only what the current step needs - summarise older turns into a running memory record once the window starts filling control loop - cap max steps in the loop itself rather than trusting the prompt to stop - meter tokens and dollars per run in langfuse and alert on outliers - gate sends, charges and deletes behind an explicit human approval step - return "nothing found" on an empty tool result and stop the model from filling the gap - keep user text in its own message role away from your instructions evals - build the eval set from production transcripts your users actually sent - grade with an llm judge on correctness plus an assertion on every tool call that had to happen - run promptfoo or braintrust in CI and block the merge on a regression ship - launch behind a feature flag to ten users you can call on the phone - propagate one OpenTelemetry trace id from inbound request to final tool call - rate limit per user id with a token bucket in redis - queue work in temporal when a provider degrades so requests survive the outage - keep the kill switch flippable without a deploy after launch - try to observe and read full traces every morning for the first 1-2 weeks - move the easy intents down to a smaller model once the evals hold - give the agent a named owner and a dashboard showing runs, failures and cost it might sound complex right now but once you run through the motion of things; trust me, it will start to feel more and more easier we build in this exact order before any client agent goes live. most teams start at tools and find out from a user.

• 
  KZZY (@kzzy47) reported 36 minutes ago

  GitHub had a 7 hour 47 minute outage this month. Also posted an all time high of 2.9 billion commits, up from 1.4 billion in April. Wild that both are true at once.

• 
  Erika S (@E_FutureFan) reported 41 minutes ago

  @bygodgiven I'm wondering if we'll look back at this as the point where 'who actually wrote this' became unanswerable for everything, not just GitHub issues.

• 
  MEALTAL (@peacefroot) reported 45 minutes ago

  @Trinsic72 dude both github link is not working

• 
  Kahris (@chrissotraidis) reported 51 minutes ago

  @tossthesalad420 @tossthesalad420 what problems are you having? Submit an issue on Github or lmk here. It should work.

• 
  Yosef Eliezrie (@yosefeliezrie) reported 53 minutes ago

  @danielhayesmith The first few words okay…Maybe. the rest considering that @photomatt has stopped several requests for ways premium plugins to be hosted officially it’s horrible. PS. There was a GitHub issues for almost 45 days highlighted the issue that was ignored. Matt needs to check himself and his ego out of the WP echo system.

• 
  🇺🇦ᓚᘏᗢ 🕹🎮i42 Software🎮🕹 ᓚᘏᗢ🇺🇦 (@i42Software) reported 54 minutes ago

  Claude just found cause of a quite involved rendering bug -- all I had to ask it was analyse my entire code base (using the public github repo) giving it a screenshot of the problem. It is ******* scary how intelligent AI is now. #AI #compsci #gamedev

• 
  Granite (@Granite0x) reported 59 minutes ago

  🚨 THIS IS ABSOLUTELY INSANE a developer just released a free tool that builds a vertical video with a talking presenter. out of one script and one photo. it's called lanshu-create-ai-presenter-video. it landed on GitHub two days ago. 267 stars. MIT. here's how it works: 1. You give it a script and a presenter photo you have the rights to. 2. The AI writes and voices the narration, generates the presenter, and locks the lips to the audio. 3. The skill edits, burns in subtitles and a cover, checks the sync, and hands back a master with a QA report. 9:16, 1080x1920, 30fps, 45-75 seconds. all of it happens in one run, on your own machine. save this before you sit down to cut your next video. i left the link in the next comment 👇

• 
  RaoulDuke (@RaoulDukeDegen) reported 60 minutes ago

  @koltregaskes github issues show the apology loop where it prioritizes sorry over fixes