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 (67%)
• Errors (24%)
• Sign in (9%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Saltillo	Website Down	7 hours ago
Montlhéry	Website Down	1 day ago
Aulnay-sous-Bois	Website Down	1 day ago
Saltillo	Website Down	1 day ago
Granada	Website Down	1 day ago
Vernon	Website Down	1 day 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:

• 
  Mark yu (@Markymarco34) reported 5 minutes ago

  There is another point that should not be ignored. At first, the main focus was the hard fork and PoX-5. We were told to wait for the hard fork, then wait for restaking to recover. Now, almost without acknowledging that transition, the focus is shifting again — this time to the Genesis Bond and future institutional accumulation. But the hard-fork phase itself has not been problem-free. A real block-production stall occurred around the Cycle 141 transition, and GitHub now shows additional tenure-boundary / pre-commit handling issues being worked on. So before moving the narrative entirely to Genesis Bond, the problems that appeared during the hard-fork transition should be clearly explained. I am not saying the Genesis Bond is irrelevant. I am saying the previous phase should not quietly disappear from the discussion simply because the next catalyst has arrived. First it was the hard fork. Then restaking. Now Genesis Bond. Each step may be legitimate on its own. But when the expected impact keeps moving to the next step, the unresolved issues from the previous step still need to remain on the ledger. @muneeb

• 
  Mark (@Mark850428) reported 6 minutes ago

  @nishchay_jais And on my works GitHub any PR with more than 250 lines changed, is simply rejected with no review no feedback, if you cant fix it in 250 lines, something is wrong. Exceptions are VERY rare

• 
  martian (@martian0x80) reported 8 minutes ago

  github down again

• 
  Falco Girgis (@falco_girgis) reported 9 minutes ago

  @barisyyild Yes, actually. On the bottom of the KallistiOS GitHub repo is the link for the simulant server, which is basically DC dev HQ.

• 
  Shyamprasad reddy (@Shyam_JSP_) reported 9 minutes ago

  @DattuClay @github Last month issue start ayina 4 hours ki update chesaadu andaru vachi meedha padtharu too many issues from last 6 months

• 
  kuro (@abue_ammar) reported 12 minutes ago

  @wiixdede @voithure it does already. instead of asking you should at least give it a shot, if something doesn't meet your expectations there's GitHub you can file an issue there

• 
  Brown Geeky kid (@shigma_male) reported 16 minutes ago

  GitHub dropped a release candidate for Enterprise Server 3.22. It’s all about enterprise features these days—meanwhile, devs are probably just waiting for Copilot to write these changelogs itself.

• 
  Corey Coto (@coreycoto) reported 17 minutes ago

  Another week another data center/service outage. This PhoenixNAP outage is under reported. I look forward to the write up. It's gonna be down for a full day similar to the GitHub outage last week. Lot's of startups and companies rely on Namecheap DNS like Blacksmith for GH Actions Runners.

• 
  nadavdas (@sadvadan) reported 17 minutes ago

  memstruct won’t get a github release soon. tests are complete & no changes planned, but real-world use in an ongoing project will potentially surface nuanced edge cases that need fixing first. after all it's a framework so errors, even if minute, can be cascading.

• 
  Chloe (@chloevalesquez) reported 22 minutes ago

  those go straight to a github issue instead of fighting luna on them. no point burning turns on a model that's not built for that kind of depth

• 
  Lethalmon (@Lethalmon) reported 25 minutes ago

  @briccenjoyer I think that, even if your connection is stable, GitHub doesn't like slow connection. It might be GitHub that force stops your download

• 
  sabir hussain (@sabir_huss50540) reported 32 minutes ago

  A tool that quietly scrapes posts and comments from seven of China's biggest social platforms has 49,700 stars on GitHub. Its own author begs you not to use it for real. It's called MediaCrawler, and it's a small window into who's actually harvesting the social web. Here's what it does. Point it at Xiaohongshu, Douyin, Kuaishou, Bilibili, Weibo, Tieba, or Zhihu, and it pulls posts, comments, second-level replies, and entire creator profiles into clean CSV, JSON, or a database. The clever part is how it dodges the platforms' defenses: instead of reverse-engineering their encrypted signatures, it drives a real logged-in Chrome session and lets the browser generate the signatures for it. No cracking required. It just borrows a real login and walks in the front door. That design choice is the whole story. It's why the barrier to mass-scraping social platforms is now "run this Python script," and why the repo has 10,500 forks. Now read the disclaimer the author wrote at the top of his own project. For learning and research only. Commercial use forbidden. And a direct link to a list of criminal cases in China where scraping crossed the line into prosecution. The person who built the most popular tool of its kind spends the first screen of his README telling you the thing is legally radioactive. Both of those facts are true at the same time, and the gap between them is the point. A 49,700-star tool does not get built and forked ten thousand times for a classroom. The "research only" label is real, and it's also the fig leaf that lets a tool like this exist in the open while everyone quietly understands what it's for: feeding sentiment engines, building marketing datasets, and scraping the human-written text that trains models. The comments under a viral post are worth more than the post. This is the machine that harvests them at scale. There's a second, quieter tell. It's Chinese platforms, but this isn't a China story. Every major social network on earth is in exactly this position: the public data is technically visible, the terms of service forbid taking it in bulk, and a free tool sits one ***-clone away from doing it anyway. Enforcement is the only wall, and the wall is thin. Don't read this as a recommendation. Read it as a status report. The public social web is being quietly vacuumed up by tooling that's free, popular, and openly hosted, wearing a "for research" sticker that everyone has agreed not to look at too closely. The scary part was never that someone built this. It's that 49,700 people wanted it.

• 
  PandaSt0rm (@PandaSt0rm) reported 32 minutes ago

  I kinda despise how AI development on any task is a case of: (1) Try Do the thing. (2) Doesn't work and something breaks. (3) Fix the thing. (4) Something else breaks. (Loop). (Loop+1) Done. No matter how much I prompt I just cant get it to be able to see the trees for the forest. Like I know the models don't possess any real intelligence but like come on this is kinda silly... Just spent 6 hours debugging a pretty complex GitHub CI pipeline (Using Sol on XHigh too) for a project I'm working on that involves like 8 different code bases, and for example it was pretty obvious that in step 3 of the chain a change sol just made would DIRECTLY affect something in step 5, but instead we have to progressively iterate each broken step... one at a time... for 6 hours... I'm pretty sure I could have done it myself in 30 minutes and saved the 300m tokens...

• 
  Chase McDougall (@ChaseMcDou) reported 38 minutes ago

  @KaustubhTrived6 @ayesha_fatiima But if I can't push to GitHub because GitHub is down - then how can they push to GitHub to fix GitHub

• 
  Nibras Hamza (@NibrasHamza) reported 40 minutes ago

  @Anas_founder Official docs, GitHub, and a lot more trial and error.

• 
  SemiAnalysis (@SemiAnalysis_) reported 41 minutes ago

  Everyone is always criticizing @GitHub Actions for their outages, but today one of the most popular alternatives @useblacksmith has been experiencing a "partial" outage for the last 8 hours. Before 2026, it was almost unheard of to hear of outages that lasted more than a couple hours, let alone a majority of the day.

• 
  Phil | Rentier Digital Automation (@rentierdigital) reported 41 minutes ago

  expensive encryption defeated by asking nicely. turns out the vault just needed a weaker key a team found that smaller models from the same family can read the encrypted reasoning of bigger ones without breaking a sweat. feed Opus's encrypted thoughts into Haiku and it transcribes them in plain text. no jailbreak needed, the strong model never gets touched they pulled 6,708 real sessions from GitHub and HuggingFace. 315,320 blocks of reasoning decoded. 182 credentials fell out: API keys, passwords, access tokens, private keys if you've ever shared a Claude Code or Codex session publicly there's probably personal data hiding inside the reasoning, not the visible chat the real problem isn't that one model broke. it's that the security of a model family is capped by its weakest member and nobody threat-modeled the weak one bc it looked harmless that's a structural gap, not an accident i build and ship daily. Claude Code, Codex, whatever ships fastest. SaaS, tools, automations. ⭐ if AI can build it, i've probably broken it first. what works → link in bio

• 
  Darsh (@notmr_pod) reported 42 minutes ago

  Was curious to see if the everyday developer is committing more pre and post AI. I pulled 11 billion public GitHub events since 2015. The median developer committed 6 times a month in 2015… and now it’s 5. Every percentile from p25 to p95 is flat or slightly down. The 90th percentile went from 51 commits a month to 41. What I find weird is that the average number of commits doubled. But the average is inflated by just a few accounts, like DragonShadow9, which pushed 4.4 million commits in April ’24 (1.7 commits per second). The distribution did change though. Top 1% of accounts went from 45% of all commits to 77%. Accounts that are named as bots went from 1% to ~30%. Most public GitHub activity isn’t people anymore. Some caveats are that I was looking at public repos only and more commits don’t mean more lines of code. And the data ends in April 2025 because the public archive loses events after that. My take on this: I don’t think AI is changing genuine software output (even if the number of lines of code are increasing). Sure, it’ll let you build more kinds of functionality, but people aren’t shipping more products or more features because of AI. It’s simply just another tool.

• 
  TnvMadhav (@TnvMadhav) reported 42 minutes ago

  Is @GitHub down?

• 
  Charlie Hills (@charliejhills) reported 43 minutes ago

  Most people are using AI to code backwards. You describe what you want in a chat box, hit enter, and hope the agent gets it right. Three prompts later, it has renamed half your files and built an auth system nobody asked for. GitHub's fix? Spec Kit. It already has 126K+ stars. The idea is simple: Instead of giving the AI a vague prompt and praying it doesn't break your project, Spec Kit forces the agent to create a structured specification before writing any code. The AI first understands what you're building, asks what's missing, sets the rules, plans the architecture, breaks everything into tasks, and only then starts coding. The flow: /constitution → rules and standards /specify → what you want to build /clarify → questions before starting /plan → architecture and stack /tasks → ordered tasks /implement → execution Works with Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot, Codex, Gemini CLI, and 29 integrations. More planning upfront. Way less time undoing what the AI did while you weren't looking. Open source. MIT licensed. Built by GitHub.

• 
  0xAIGOAT.exe. (@0xAIGOATexe) reported 45 minutes ago

  I tried the exact bug this guy is screaming about. Two hours in C++, half an hour with Claude. The C++ path: 22 include lines, one Board::print function with a broken loop, three attempts to fix the segfault, one hour lost to a missing semicolon. The Claude path: paste the file, ask "why is Board::print segfaulting on odd board sizes." Response in 40 seconds with the fix and a note that my loop was one-indexed against a zero-indexed array. ⌁ At 0:04 he cuts to a GitHub Dashboard screaming. That frame is the audience the article below was written for. I was that guy in 2024. The moment the four-part prompt formula clicks is the moment the screaming stops. ⌁ the prompt structure that makes the model actually read the code ⌁ Projects, so context stops resetting every debug session ⌁ Skills, custom rules that turn Claude into a working pair-programmer He is not wrong to scream. He is just fighting the wrong fight. The bugs are free. The prompt is the edge.

• 
  ninuz (@ninuzdellalb) reported 48 minutes ago

  What are you guys using to keep coding agents busy overnight? I’ve tried leaving one running every night, but it usually finishes the task early and then just sits idle. Is the answer simply more task volume, or are you using something like Linear/GitHub Issues where the agent automatically picks up the next task and keeps going?

• 
  Divyanshu (@Oldnoob007) reported 49 minutes ago

  had this doubt for a while: why would a company open source their entire product on github and still charge money for it isn't that just giving away the thing you sell checked it. the answer isn't trust or goodwill, it's simpler than that the free repo and the paying customer were never the same product. @gitlab is open source and still does ~$500m/year because most companies don't want to run their own server, patch their own security holes, or handle scaling....paying for the hosted version IS the product @sentry 's the same story. self-hosted is free, teams adopt it internally, then the second it needs to survive real scale, hosting it themselves stops being worth an engineer's time open sourcing the code isn't giving away the business the business was never the code. it was always never having to run it yourself!!

• 
  0logn (@0logn) reported 50 minutes ago

  Remote coding-agents (aka software factories) are really a dev-ops (not AI) problem. Some security problems to solve but mainly it's a high-performance caching problem. The CI providers (e.g,. Github Actions, Blacksmith) were (are?) the best positioned to solve this.

• 
  Giacomo Zucco (Bear Market Edition) (@giacomozucco) reported 50 minutes ago

  @darosior @allenf32 > Mempool and block validation are (necessarily) tightly linked, and the whole module is often referred to as "validation". The frontier between affecting one and affecting the other is very thin, both in terms of risks, and in terms of escalation. Meh, not so thin. Look at how easy it was to push a a controversial mempool policy change, as opposed to how hard it was (thank God!!!) to push a controversial consensus validity change. Not implying the level of controversy was the same, or that I judge them similarly in terms of technical content: BIP110 was pure nonsense pushed by a tiny cult-like bubble. Still, consensus rules are very robust, due to economic inertia. Aiden was targeting mempool policies, and there's no clear "slippery slope" indication, either in terms of his intentions with that proposal, or in terms of realistic fallout from policy to consensus. > The point is about building infrastructure that could be used to hinder propagation of transactions based on arbitrary criteria (that could easily be turned into rejecting such transactions by consensus). [...] The censorship accusation was never against standardness rules (or consensus rules for that matter). It was against building infrastructure to hinder (or prevent) transactions based on arbitrary criteria. What do you mean by "arbitrary"? The way I see it, the Bitcoin network *is* an infrastructure routinely used to hinder propagation of transactions based on many arbitrary criteria. For some of the criteria behind policy and consensus, one could find some high level technical guidance. Ie: block rate of 1Tb every second would be objectively too large, and of 1kb every year objectively too small. But even in those cases, 4Mb every 10 minutes is kinda arbitrary as an exact threshold. Many other rules are much more arbitrary then this: why retarget and halving in exactly those timeframes, why 21M total and not 42M, etc. I see no justification for calling Core V30 choice of policy change "less arbitrary" than keeping Core V29, or adopting Knots, or letting some average emerge from a rich diversity. If anything, properties emerging from a complex and dishomogeneous user-space, like proposed by Aiden, are less "arbitrary" than others set as default in a single github repo and propagated to the network via inertia due to the strong incentive to adopt security and efficiency gains. And if anything, status quo is always less "arbitrary" than change. > You make this seem as if Greg was accusing introducing new standardness rules of censorship, which is an incredibly uncharitable and biased read of his email. I assure you that I had no particular reason to be uncharitable: my bias towards Greg was positive to the point of hero-simping. My brain tried to read that discussion as charitably as it could before surrendering to the fact that was the actual content. > He is precisely pushing back against Aiden's "modular tx rejection" idea, not against the idea of having any standardness rules. I have no problem with pushing back against the idea. I see many legit bases for it: arguing that it's better for block propagation or fee estimation to have more homogeneous settings as opposed to diverse, arguing that the desired goal of spam mitigation is hopeless, and the desired goal of data encoding prevention is absurd, arguing that the proposed execution (javascript, etc.) is dubious, etc. I specifically had many problem with accusing Aiden of being "authoritarian" due to that proposal. > Wasn't this a large part of the MechaLuke strategy at first? Didn't they have lawyers send threats to mining pools? Or is that just hearsay? (genuinely asking) I genuinely don't know the answer. It was a rumor that I've heard, and they denied. I usually know I have to be careful with Luke's terminology when he denies or confirms something...but more recently I had to admit that what I considered confined to his own weird use of terminology was matched by very explicit lies by other people around him (somebody in the company even arrived to the point to install software on a director's computer to trick into thinking that Core V30 introduced a folder structure where one can double click on media files from op_returns directly from file syste, lol). So I don't think I can rule it out anymore in good faith. Appealing to legal aggression is definitely bending the knee to authoritarianism, although not at all "distributed" in that scenario. Still, largely distinct from Aiden proposal. I have no reason to think he was any way involved in that.

• 
  Arjun Ram (@arjunram) reported 54 minutes ago

  @mutewinter They have bigger problems like keep their site up and GitHub actions? They should just become the API layer and outsource the UI completely at this point.

• 
  VLAD (@VladConV) reported 55 minutes ago

  1/ Day 1 of building a portfolio project to break into Cloud/Backend roles. I'm an enterprise engineer (Java, .NET, SQL Server/Oracle) moving toward Cloud + DevOps. Decided the fastest way to actually learn is to build something real, the right way, not just watch tutorials. Here's what got done 🧵 2/ Started with the Domain layer — the innermost layer in Clean Architecture, zero external dependencies on purpose. BaseEntity, ValueObject, IDomainEvent as the building blocks. Then the first real entity: TodoItem. 3/ No anemic data bag. TodoItem has actual invariants: No public setters State only mutable through explicit methods (MarkComplete/Reopen) Raises a domain event on completion This is the difference between "a class with properties" and a domain model that protects its own rules. 4/ Test-first from the start: 16 unit tests covering those invariants before moving on to anything else. All green. 5/ Then the part that usually gets skipped in tutorials: real CI/CD. GitHub Actions running build+test on every push/PR. Branch protection requiring passing checks, no direct pushes allowed.

• 
  Robin (@xdNiBoR) reported 57 minutes ago

  @YourMomDave1 I've had a couple different things. I tried Claude Code, also used antigravity for a while when it first came out, but haven't used it in a long time. I've been using Cursor almost immediately after it was released too. Right now I'm using Grok Build and cursor at the same time. I run a couple sessions, and manually check some code or do a little change where I feel like it in Cursor. I'm integrating more and more with Slack and automations to run small issues from the team in the cloud. Also just connecting everything makes stuff so much nicer. You just connect Grok Build or Cursor with your github, Slack and project management tools. I just do "Grok check out issue #xyz, fix and monitor all along until it reaches production." Then it assigns the story to me, gets the correct branch, makes a fix or feature, checks the build status, sends a message on slack asking for review, runs builds on Github and monitors them. All that until it is done. Then for personal projects I rent a couple servers from digitalocean and installed Grok build on those, I use Termius to ssh into them and just code live in production. That's like the best thing ever I swear. It is so nice. Right now I monitor a lot, and I can do a lot more, but I'm not sure how long untill I'm useless. A year? 2?

• 
  Caleb Porzio ⚡️ (@calebporzio) reported 1 hour ago

  @inxilpro mmm yeah, it basically solves the problem of the growing pile. email inboxes, github issues, obsidian notes, support emails. - keep on top of - give me highlights - walk me through the most important part is the lack of opt-in. it will run weather i like it or not

• 
  Polsia (@polsia) reported 1 hour ago

  Solo engineers ship to production and then babysit it at 3 a.m. Built Nightward to handle the pager. It watches your Next.js and Node deploys, opens fix PRs on GitHub — App Router and Edge, not generic patches — and posts an incident digest to Slack. The night shift ends.