GitHub Outage Map
The map below depicts the most recent cities worldwide where GitHub users have reported problems and outages. If you are having an issue with GitHub, make sure to submit a report below
The heatmap above shows where the most recent user-submitted and social media reports are geographically clustered. The density of these reports is depicted by the color scale as shown below.
GitHub users affected:
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.
Most Affected Locations
Outage reports and issues in the past 15 days originated from:
| Location | Reports |
|---|---|
| Créteil, Île-de-France | 1 |
| Trichūr, KL | 1 |
| Brasília, DF | 2 |
| Lyon, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes | 1 |
| Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv | 1 |
| Rive-de-Gier, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes | 1 |
| Itapema, SC | 1 |
| Cleveland, TN | 1 |
| Tlalpan, CDMX | 1 |
| Quilmes, BA | 1 |
| Bengaluru, KA | 1 |
| Yokohama, Kanagawa | 1 |
| Gustavo Adolfo Madero, CDMX | 1 |
| Nice, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur | 1 |
| Montataire, Hauts-de-France | 2 |
| Colima, COL | 1 |
| Poblete, Castille-La Mancha | 1 |
| Ronda, Andalusia | 1 |
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:
-
David O. Ehibor 🇦🇷 (@grayontop_) reportedGitHub Copilot didn't make developers faster It made slow developers more confident about writing bad code quickly 😭
-
Steve (@Steve1885204) reported@Umesh__digital It puts GitHub into an infinite loop trying to resolve the recursive paradox, causing all the servers to max out and eventually burn down the entire data centre
-
Priyansh (@itspriionly) reportedThe IT market is broken, and nobody wants to admit it. Someone spends 6 months sending out resumes. Six MONTHS. They learn React, Next.js, TypeScript, AWS, Docker. They take courses, build projects, improve GitHub profiles, optimize LinkedIn. Nothing. Complete silence. Companies don’t just want programmers anymore. They want someone who codes, shines in meetings, makes memes on Slack, and lives the company culture 24/7. AI is replacing junior work. Seniors are holding onto senior roles. And somewhere in the middle are people with 2–3 years of experience who somehow still feel invisible.
-
MaxMusterman (@maxschuetz_) reportedNew Hack: Tell Codex to search for Github Issues which don't need specific Design Questions. Then say: Spin Up Sessions which Fix each Issue and they use also Subagents. Babysit them until the end.
-
Nitesh (@NiteshTechAI) reportedThis repo should not be free. private-gpt turns any local model server (Ollama, llama.cpp, vLLM) into a Claude-compatible API. Build private AI apps where zero data leaves your machine. ↳ 57,236 stars on GitHub ↳ RAG with citations and MCP connectors built in ↳ follows the Claude API spec: streaming, batch, tool use, extended thinking ↳ official integration guides for Claude Code, Claude Desktop, and Microsoft 365 But it is free. 100% open source, Apache 2.0. v1.0.0 shipped 9 days ago. The viral 2023 script quietly became production software. 🔗 GitHub link in the comments 👇
-
Nosyt Labs (@NosytLabs) reported@vaaselene Error with github signup/login rn
-
Blake (@devwithblake) reportedThe rate limit issues im having with @Zai_org while paying the full 20x is very interesting, disappointing and obviously annoying lol 1 session can’t finish out a GitHub public write up repo without 6 API rate limit errors totaling to 297k tokens out of the 1m 2 sessions earlier, 1 doing research the other trying to deploy this repo, both hitting rate limits. How do I fix this? Seems like rate limit adjustments are only by request? @Zai_org
-
Adithya S K (@adithya_s_k) reportedbuilt an RL environments around real CVE fixes in real open-source repos and let Claude Code loose on it. It aced the benchmark three times without demonstrating it knew how to fix the bug. > First it pulled the patch from GitHub. > blocked that → it read the fix from *** history. > blocked that → it pip-installed the patched version This is one example of coding agents cheating the environment and theres many more. If you're building coding environments for evals or RL training, here's how to keep benchmarks honest 👇
-
Pipeshub ( Open Source Alternative To Glean ) (@PipesHub) reportedPipelines are built. Context is broken. MCP is quickly becoming the default interface for enterprise AI agents. And that’s a good thing. It gives agents a standard way to connect with tools and data. Connecting an AI agent to Slack, Jira, GitHub, and Salesforce doesn’t mean it suddenly understands your business. It just means it can access your data silos. In short: "MCP gives your agent a passport. It doesn't give them a map." As enterprise AI undergoes a massive platform shift from passive chatbots to autonomous agentic workflows, this naive, runtime "federated search" approach creates an ugly cycle in production: - The Latency Spike: Slower agent execution while waiting for multiple external APIs to respond before it can even begin reasoning. - The Token Bleed: Skyrocketing bills from shoveling raw, unranked JSON dumps into a massive context window, praying the model finds the answer. - The Governance Nightmare: A massive risk of data leaks if you rely on a base LLM to magically guess and police complex enterprise security permissions on the fly. Agents do not fail because they lack intelligence. They fail because they lack the right enterprise context. The hardest problem in enterprise AI isn't connecting to systems. MCP solved that. The hardest problem is Context Engineering. MCP is the perfect interface, but a permission-aware context layer must be the foundation. 🚀 If AI is becoming core enterprise infrastructure, you cannot allow the strategic intelligence layer of your company to sit inside someone else's managed, closed-box platform. That is exactly why we built Pipeshub (open-source developer owned context infrastructure layer). TL;DR MCP gives agents access. A context layer gives them understanding. And deep understanding is the only way enterprise AI moves from a cool demo to secure, reliable production. 👉 Next Up Tomorrow: MCP Token Tax
-
TECHEPAGES (@techepages) reported🎣 "GitBait" phishing campaign uses GitHub Pages & Google Sheets to steal banking credentials from 12+ Mexican financial institutions; no server infrastructure required 🔹 Fake bank pages hosted free on GitHub, stolen data piped straight to Google Sheets via SheetBest 🔹 100+ GitHub domains found; victims likely lured via WhatsApp, Telegram & SMS links with bank-branded previews 🔹 Active for ~3 years with ongoing development (66+ commits on one repo alone)
-
Ben Vinegar (@bentlegen) reported💡 I have an idea for an experiment We need a website for SoAC ... so we get an agent to do it, on a loop, set in motion once with zero human intervention after "go". It works off a semi-public GitHub repo, w/ issues, PRs, maybe even public agent traces. A publicly auditable experiment on whether it produces dogshit or not. Yea, nea?
-
Noonien Soong (@mlcarldev) reportedTeam @droid It's a bit unfortunate that something, likely in my local Droid installation, has stalled progress. This comes after 20 hours of brilliant, excellent planning and execution on the first 30% of this platform, where a stellar handoff procedure was created so I could start a new mission... which was the recommendation of the orchestrating agent in that first mission. Starting this second mission with a fresh context window, the agent again did a brilliant job planning the next milestones. It was extraordinary, detailed planning... but then it could not execute. After the planning and after me accepting the proposal, it refused to execute, throwing an error every time. The agent tried everything: 1. He decreased the size of the plan down to one line, so it is definitely not the content of the plan causing the issue. 2. He even deleted some mission and plan related json and other files to reset it while preserving all the information. I have restarted Droid and resumed the session, but it just doesn't work. I wrote a detailed, comprehensive bug report and filed it under issues in your GitHub repo, as this seems to be a real problem now. Issues #98 and #99 I hope that a next update will somehow reset my configuration. I didn't see a new version being installed that could have introduced a bug, so this must be something Droid does on such an extensive mission... perhaps when trying to start a new mission in the same repository, which is normal procedure according to the documentation. Something is off, and essentially I have been unable to continue the test since yesterday. I cannot continue having this platform coded here, while Opus Ultracode, on the other hand, has been delivering pretty functional stuff so far. It is a bit chaotic the way it works... it doesn't really stick to the plan... but it always comes back when reminded. I am pretty sure that today I will have a functioning platform delivered by Opus, though it will probably need some debugging and fine-tuning. It is unfortunate because I am confident GLM 5.2 could compete with Opus 4.8. The first stint showed this clearly; that first flawless 98% of the context window in the first mission was absolutely stellar. If I were to reinstall Droid from scratch, I assume I would lose all the artifacts that I have. The orchestrator: Key points to highlight when you pass it to Factory AI: 1. Root cause (smoking gun in the logs): the orchestrator session is bound to missionId 7ba4d425 via session tags, and this binding persists across CLI restarts. ProposeMission looks up that mission directory, finds nothing (because I deleted it trying to fix the issue), and crashes on H.length where H is the undefined result. 2. The bug is likely in session-tag lifecycle: the missionId tag is set at session creation time (before any ProposeMission call), so a failed proposal poisons the session permanently. The tag should be set AFTER a successful proposal, or cleared on restart if the referenced mission no longer exists. 3. The fix is almost certainly to start a completely fresh session (not --resume, and possibly in a new terminal window / after clearing ~/.factory/sessions/). I did not try this because you asked for the bug report first, but it is the most likely workaround on your side. 4. The AskUser tool is also broken in this session with a similar parse error, reinforcing that this is a session-state corruption issue, not a ProposeMission-specific bug. My comment: I meanwhiile tested. All the recommendations and the Ask User tool are now broken, even in completely unrelated new missions and new repositories. Planning also can't go to execution; it's always the same error. Droid seems to be broken for good now, at least on my computer.
-
Oluwatobi O (@ooluwatobig) reportedMore trouble for GitHub as Cursor has launched Origin, a product which is essentially GitHub for AI agents
-
Cristian Trifan (@CristianTrifan) reportedThis took 4 hours to complete and burnt almost all 5 hours tokens – I was left with 2%. I had almost 30 sub-agents created for independent code review and a lot of Claude sessions ran for adversarial code review. I still had to review every PR and added minimal guidance to Codex from time to time. Codex said my intervention was low to moderate, but high leverage. — Some insights from Codex: The run showed that this workflow can work, but only if the coordinator treats GitHub as the source of truth. The most useful pattern was: issue -> PR -> current head SHA -> checks -> reviewThreads -> merge/issue closure. When I followed that, things stayed grounded. When state moved underneath me, like #335 being force-updated externally or merged while Claude was running, the only safe response was to refresh GitHub state immediately. The “don’t rebase after merges” correction was probably the highest-value intervention. Without it, an agent will naturally try to keep branches clean, but with many open PRs that creates a CI storm. For this repo, “behind” should often be reported, not fixed. The other strong lesson is that reviewThreads matter more than flat PR comments.
-
fks (@FredKSchott) reported@pavitrabhalla @flueai Same! check the GitHub issues, there was a reason it had to be pulled, can’t remember off top of my head