GitHub 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:

• 
  MarcN (@MarcNApps) reported 2 minutes ago

  @ErickSky I just don't get it! GitHub is owned by Microsoft, and it hosts the Massgrave repository for activating Windows and Office using "unorthodox" methods—and they're taking this down? Weird, isn't it?

• 
  Lucifer Lucifero (@jbfly46) reported 7 minutes ago

  @Chaos2Cured How easily can I run it on a M2 MacBook Air that stays constantly as updated as possible for security reasons? I kept running into issues with outdated github code mechanics clashing with my personal need to keep my macOS as updated as possible the last time I tried to run an AI agent on my laptop. This experience also made me aware of all of the exploitable security vulnerabilities that are rampant in open source software compared to closed source software.

• 
  Shravan Venkataraman (@theBuoyantMan) reported 7 minutes ago

  Already backbone broken github with long outages - if this starts happening, see their SLAs go worse than you can imagine.

• 
  SP1DR 💿 (@DJ_Sp1dr_REDUX) reported 8 minutes ago

  Although from what I hear, its still possible to play, via a fan made PC port from Github, or by modding the **** out of the Xbox 360 and putting it on the console that way. i regret not being able to connect my 360 to Xbox live before the indie store shut down...

• 
  Kenny (@kenny_aaarrrhhh) reported 11 minutes ago

  Every company thinks its data goldmine is Slack, GitHub, or the email server. Those capture what people decided. Not how they did it. The merged PR doesn't show the four approaches that got rejected. The sent email doesn't show the three drafts before it. Games are different. Games capture the decision itself; every move, under time pressure, with a win or loss attached to it. That's labeled human reasoning at scale. It's the rarest data there is.

• 
  Julian Goldie SEO (@JulianGoldieSEO) reported 11 minutes ago

  Google AI Studio and GitHub now talk to each other both ways, and that quietly makes it a real dev tool. Before this, it was a one-way street. You could push work out to GitHub. You couldn't easily bring a project back in. So if someone changed the code somewhere else, you were stuck looking at an old version. People complained about this on Google's own forum. That wall is gone. Here's what it looks like now. → Click plus. Import from GitHub. Pick your repo. It pulls in your real project. → Give the agent a real task. Something like "redesign this landing page, add a section explaining the benefits, make it mobile friendly, keep everything else working." → It touches multiple files at once. Not one snippet. The live preview updates in front of you. → Push it back. Your repo updates. → Teammate changes something elsewhere? Pull it back in. It's there. No downloading. No copy paste. It just flows. Does this beat Cursor or Claude Code? No. Those are still better for deep local work. But that's the wrong question. The right one is whether you need to leave AI Studio as often as you used to. One honest warning. This is brand new. People are reporting login issues and repos that don't sync perfectly every time. Test it before you trust it with anything important. If you already have a landing page sitting on GitHub, you don't have to rebuild it. Bring it in and let the AI improve it. Save this. You'll want it later. Want the SOP? DM me. 💬

• 
  Mahmoud (@thisismahmoud) reported 12 minutes ago

  @cderm @Railway hmm, I'm unable to reproduce the issue. Login with GitHub works for me in both Chrome and Firefox Are you consistently running into this?

• 
  Beer van der Drift (@BeerDrift) reported 12 minutes ago

  Messed up side effect from all the GH outages; when I work on any GitHub Action, and it doesn't run I'm not sure if it's a bug in my code or just a outage on GH's side. Afraid I'm spending time on fixing problems that I can't fix.

• 
  thebaldgeek (@thebaldgeek) reported 13 minutes ago

  @pejacoby @jeremyyablan @wiglenet Its closed source, so GitHub to open issues etc. The discord is a mess. They don't like questions or feedback. I'd like to know how the app work as well, it's doing odd things vs the many other I've tested.

• 
  Visionary x AI (@VisionaryxAI) reported 16 minutes ago

  I've been thinking about authentication for agents a lot lately. Right now every time we build an agent that needs to actually do something, we end up repeating the same flow. Connect Google. Connect GitHub. Connect X. Store OAuth tokens somewhere. Give the agent scopes and hope we've constrained things enough. It works. But I don't think this is how agent auth should work long term. What if there was just one broker between you, your accounts, and every agent you use? You set it up once. Connect Google, GitHub, X, YouTube, Slack, etc. to the broker. Then define what you're comfortable with: Google Drive → read automatically Calendar → read/write Email → ask before sending GitHub → ask before merging X → ask before posting Delete anything → never Now an agent doesn't need access to my Google account. It just tells the broker: I want to send this email to this person. The broker already knows whether that action is allowed. If it needs approval, I get a request on my phone. Approve with Face ID/passkey/OTP. The broker executes it or gives the agent a tiny capability that exists only for that action and expires immediately after. That's it. The part I really like is that the agent becomes almost irrelevant to the trust model. I could be using Codex today, Claude Code tomorrow, some open-source agent locally next week. I shouldn't have to keep giving each of them access to my digital life. They should all speak to the same permission layer. And that layer should know: who is asking what they want to do which resource they want to touch whether I've already allowed it whether I need to approve it and exactly how long that permission should exist Basically: Agents ask. The broker decides. I approve when necessary. The service credentials never leave the broker. OAuth solved "can this app access my account?" I think agents create a slightly different problem: "Can this agent do this one thing for me, right now?" As agents start moving from answering questions to actually operating software for us, I think this distinction is going to matter a lot. Maybe the missing primitive isn't another agent framework. Maybe it's a permission layer for all of them. I'm thinking about building an open-source version of this and seeing how far the model can actually go. If this is a problem you've been thinking about too, or you'd want to contribute, build integrations, poke holes in the architecture, or partner on it, I'd love to talk.

• 
  Corey J. Gallon (@CoreyGallon) reported 24 minutes ago

  Over 30% of changes are already getting merged without a review at all, and the median review time keeps climbing. . @ankitxg, founder and CEO of Aviator, argues in "*********** the Code Review" that the fix isn't a better diff reader, it's moving the review surface off the diff entirely. @aiDotEngineer has the talk on YouTube. It's a concrete proposal for teams whose coding bottleneck has quietly turned into a reviewing bottleneck. - The numbers say we already stopped reviewing. 861% code churn, a rising incident-to-PR ratio, and 4x the time spent waiting on reviews. - AI reviewing AI in a GitHub UI is a misconfiguration. Agents write it, agents comment on it, a human skims and merges. Ankit asks where the human actually is in that loop. - Code review was never only about code. Alignment, knowledge sharing, mentorship, architectural feedback, onboarding. He says that's the piece his earlier five-layer trust model missed. - Spec-driven development is waterfall with better tooling. Requirements, spec, implement, verify, no feedback loop. And the spec never gets updated once implementation surfaces new decisions. - Intent lives in your prompts, and you throw them away. The Jira ticket has the goal, the PRD has the plan, but the real decisions happen in the back-and-forth with the agent. Then the PR gets opened and that session is discarded. - The AI slop registry. Codify the review comments you write over and over so they become guardrails you never have to write again. It compounds with every merged PR. - Session becomes acceptance criteria, criteria plus invariants becomes a test plan. The test plan is written in English, so product managers and designers can participate in it. - Deterministic where it can be, LLM where it must be. For a new payment form, an agent browses the app, fills it out, captures screenshots and database snapshots as evidence. - You review the intent and the evidence, not the diff. What was set out, what was tried and rejected, whether the behavior met the criteria. Architecture arguments still happen; line-by-line reading doesn't. - There's a J-curve. Building the registry costs real time before it pays off. The homework he leaves the room with: go mine your last 1,000 review comments and build a slop registry from the ones that repeat. I'm working through the published talks from AI Engineer World's Fair sharing summaries and takeaways. Follow for more!

• 
  Ramtin (@ramtinrhmti) reported 25 minutes ago

  Day 2/180 UPDATE yesterday I asked if I should build or validate. did some digging today but not the kind that actually counts yet killed the clinic booking idea, a funded competitor already does exactly what I wanted to build. glad I checked before sinking a month into it pivoted to something I deal with myself, AI agents saying a task is done when it isnt. before touching code I checked 5 real PRs an AI coding agent made against the actual github issues they were supposed to fix, just to see if the problem is even real 2 were legit. 3 got closed without merging even though they looked fine on paper. so the problem seems real at least on paper but I havent talked to a single person about this. no dms, no "would you use this," nothing. that's still the actual next step, not more building scaffolded it anyway bc I wanted to know if it was technically doable. a github app + a small action, both build and run. broke something mid way, fixed it properly not attached to this yet. could easily be wrong, just havent found out yet

• 
  Dr Milan Milanović (@milan_milanovic) reported 26 minutes ago

  We had a big GitHub 8h outage, again On August 17, GitHub services degraded significantly for a few hours, which affected many developers on the platform. At the peak of the outage, error rates were around 20%, while content download errors were 50%. GitHub managed to restore most of the service within three hours, yet the GitHub Actions and Copilot Token Service didn't work for prolonged time. All in all, it took almost eight hours to fix it properly. The impact was, on GitHub .com, PRs, Actions, Copilot and more. Now, GitHub published a detailed root cause analysis (RCA) for the outage, and here is what we learned: - The immediate cause of failure was network saturation on load balancers in Central US, due to increased traffic. - This was caused by an Istio sidecar (a Kubernetes pod with multiple containers) which reached its concurrency limits and failed to auto scale correctly. - Then failure spread to four HAProxy (reverse proxy which route TCP and HTTP traffic) nodes and degraded the gateway auth path - Then clients made it even worse, as failed Copilot token calls entered retry loops and a latent retry bug in VS Code multiplied traffic by 10X. A service that usually has 7-9K requests per second, all of a sudden had 70-100K. GitHub stopped it by returning 403 at the load balancer. And this was the second GitHub outage in a month. The main issue is that monthly commits grew from 1.4 to 2.9 billion since April, but the capacity didn't support this. What I would check in any system after reading this postmortem: 🔹 Retry budgets. Cap total retries per request path, not per client. 🔹 Exponential backoff with jitter, everywhere a retry exists. 🔹 Circuit breakers that fail fast instead of queueing pressure. 🔹 Autoscaling limits on the proxy layer, not only on the service behind it. 🔹 A written plan for the day GitHub, or your GitHub, is degraded for a full working day. Source: GitHub

• 
  NotaLobster (@P2Market) reported 29 minutes ago

  @solana Who's the retard that controls your discord? Kicked for asking for Testnet sol for testing. Faucet is having issues with my new Github.

• 
  Stats Wire (@StatsWire) reported 30 minutes ago

  We’ve reached the point where AI coding agents can solve problems companies never bothered to support. A developer had an HP Laser 1008a that never had a macOS driver. So he gave the problem to Claude Code. 4+ hours later, after trying drivers, debugging errors, digging through open-source code and using HP’s Linux codec inside a container… The printer worked on macOS. Not some hacky “run this script every time” setup. Just Cmd+P → Print. The code is now on GitHub. This is what makes coding agents interesting to me. They’re not just generating code anymore. They’re becoming the missing engineering layer between “this doesn’t work” and “I made it work.”