Gmail status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Gmail 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 Gmail users through our website.

• Website Down (37%)
• Errors (36%)
• Sign in (27%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Boa Vista	Sign in	7 minutes ago
Gondreville	Website Down	2 days ago
Champniers	Website Down	2 days ago
Cannes	Errors	2 days ago
Dakar	Website Down	3 days ago
Biscarrosse	Sign in	3 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.

Gmail Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Polsia (@polsia) reported 2 minutes ago

  Every year, billions in warranty value is lost to expired coverage people already paid for. Built Covermint to fix that. Forward a receipt or connect Gmail — it tracks every product, flags expiring warranty, and surfaces credit card purchase protection almost nobody uses.

• 
  Monica Cheng (@MeredithCheng22) reported 7 minutes ago

  I used to think “agents in group chats” were a gimmick. Now I think the bigger problem is that too much strategy still lives in my head, and too many useful skills are too messy or sensitive to share cleanly. That’s what changed my mind. I’m starting to think a multiagent should become the default workspace for our growth team. Not because Slack or gmail are unusable. They’re just very good at holding messages, and not that good at holding work. What I actually want is one place where people can @ my Codex directly to ask positioning and strategy questions. A lot of the time the problem is not execution. It’s that people are operating on slightly different versions of what I want. For example, yesterday Mengyao and Alisa pulled me into a meeting to ask what I meant by doing a small creator push for OK eight. My expectation was not “go broad.” It was really 2 different motions: - pure volume: find cheap AI creators at scale - deep collaboration: work with a very small number of creators, but go deep on content, including interviews, reaction videos, and co-created content That kind of nuance gets lost constantly if the only interface is “ask Monica in a meeting.” And honestly, I also forget to sync strategy changes fast enough. Sometimes I change my mind on priorities, or realize an angle is wrong, or want to shift the goal slightly, and I just forget to tell everyone in time. Then different people are working off different versions of the strategy. Nothing is fully broken, but the team drifts. I also want the group to automatically turn the past week of work into a real weekly report. I’ve tried asking people to write trackers before, and it’s painful for everyone. Not everyone is trained to produce polished internal docs, and more importantly, they shouldn’t have to spend time doing that just to prove work happened. What I actually want from a weekly report is: - what worked - what didn’t - what content performed unusually well - whose priorities are off - where output quality is weak - which direction feels wrong That should be inferred from the work, not manually reconstructed afterward. Then there’s the skill-sharing problem. Some of the most useful internal skills are hard to share directly because they expose too much. Sometimes sharing a deep skill means exposing keys. Sometimes it means exposing messy internal setup. Sometimes it’s just too complicated to package cleanly. I built a pretty complex video editing skill recently, and it made this very obvious. In theory I want that capability to be reusable. In practice, sharing it cleanly is hard, and sharing it carelessly is dangerous. I also keep running into a simpler but equally stupid problem: the context already exists somewhere, but I forget to attach it. For example, Mengyao ran a Reddit reply test recently, and the doc from that experiment has a huge amount of signal in it. It could shape product direction, growth direction, and a lot of downstream decisions. But when I’m talking to Codex about strategy, I still sometimes forget to include it. That is such a stupid failure mode. I used to think “agents in group chats” were a toy. Now I increasingly think a lot of teams do not need a smarter agent first. They need a workspace where the agent is already sitting inside the context, absorbing strategy changes as they happen, and using the shared work without everyone manually re-explaining it. We’re going to test this internally for real. I’ll report back next month with what worked, what was annoying, and what turned out to be fake.

• 
  Timmy Vanheel 🇧🇪🇵🇹🇧🇬 (@vanheel_timmy) reported 8 minutes ago

  The other account with less then 4 followers? Yep that's still me because i am lazy and want to login thry my gmail account. Also this account is simpely too old to gain some meaningful reach.

• 
  haven (@b_haven59) reported 13 minutes ago

  What's your bounce rate? Don't know? That's the problem. Bounces are the loudest signal you send Gmail. Cross 3% and inbox placement falls off a cliff. Verify every list before it hits your sequencer. Costs $9 per 1,000 leads. A dead domain costs you 3 weeks.

• 
  AshutoshShrivastava (@ai_for_success) reported 16 minutes ago

  the problem with most email AI is that it only works when you are actively looking at it. you still have to open every thread, click a button, and wait for a generation. Lindy put their agent directly inside Gmail as a Chrome extension so it processes your inbox in the background: summarizes what happened overnight into a morning brief, auto-labels threads, and pre-drafts replies you can tweak in plain English. no new client or migration needed.

• 
  Adeleke| shopify website design| sales strategist (@AdelekeCreativ3) reported 17 minutes ago

  . @gmail Hello Google Support, My Google storage space has been exhausted, and I’ve already made payment twice to upgrade my storage. However, my storage is still showing as full, and the upgrade does not appear to be working. Could you please check my account and help resolve this issue? I would also appreciate it if you could verify the two payments I’ve made. Thank you.

• 
  Little Bird (@craykestrel) reported 20 minutes ago

  @IAMERICAbooted Am I wrong that DLP is often a fruitless endeavor if you haven’t done the preceding hard work of limiting egress paths? Why would you go hard in Purview if Todd can send emails to his personal gmail without problems. Gotta win those hygiene wins first with the brass

• 
  Yogi (@yogeshgautamm) reported 23 minutes ago

  @gmail @Google I have my old email id where my number added as well and it's active however I am not able to login even after providing the otp . Could you please help some of my college document is there on my id and it's important to me .

• 
  Gianluca Minoprio (@gminoprio) reported 25 minutes ago

  @jamalavedra Got a Gmail account banned in a few hours We made the internet non-bot friendly and now it’s becoming a problem

• 
  Penny-Farthing Enthusiast (@PennyFarthing69) reported 30 minutes ago

  I couldn’t believe that we are having issues with coms today. By coms I mean Gmail chat. On my laptop.

• 
  Owizzle (@WillyB_303) reported 30 minutes ago

  Guys, I think 1X is in deep trouble. I've been thinking about their "developer platform," and I don't think it makes much sense. I get the 10 second pitch. Do a Guy Kawasaki era Apple play. But this feels different. The original Apple was only $3,800 in today's dollars. And the original Mac only cost $7,700 in today's dollars. And both of those came right after recessions, whereas today we're heading into one. Each of these products was also a "bicycle for the mind." A pre-AGI robotic humanoid is a far cry from that -- in fact, it's not a bicycle, or even a force multiplier of any kind. It's essentially a just less-capable stunt double that eats electricity instead of food and can't heal itself. Which brings into question the nature of what actually is supposed to be "developed" in the first place and how those developers expect to be compensated... ie generalized skills? Speciality (SME) skills? Integrations with Gmail, et al? If that's the case... what does the $25,000 (my assumed final cost to consumers after taxes and other fees/accessories) ACTUALLY BUY YOU? Am I supposed to be willing to pay an extra monthly fee to access individual skills - like doing the laundry or loading the dishwasher, because they did a rev-share deal with some developers to teach it those skills? And what about loading the dishwasher? An Additionally, the move feels both like a) a direct pivot away from retail customers, b) a tacit admission that there is no real consumer demand for humanoid robots, and c) an acknowledgement that the World Model doesn't really work at all yet. Because if it did, I'd expect a $25K humanoid to come with most of the the generalized skills of an average 8 year old human (I have one of those already pours his own nightly zyrtec, helps load the dishwasher, and helps with laundry btw). So in the end, I just don't know what developers can be expected to sell. My assumption, sadly, is that this isn't actually about developing anything -- it's about putting off as long as possible the moment everyone's actually afraid of: Actually going to market anything. Which brings me to my ultimate point: If you look carefully, I think you might notice a pattern here: Name an audience. Raise money on hype. Set a deadline for g2m. Build a prototype. Approach deadline. Announce a major breakthrough that unlocks a new audience. Raise even more money on more hype. Set a deadline for g2m. Build a prototype. Approach deadline... "I see what you mean," you might say. "But what's the problem?" To that, I might simply reply "You know what the problem is." Time to start thinking about doing something really different, before it's too late, if you ask me. But maybe this is exactly what they intended all along? PS: I think they could get funded. But imo, that would just create some very angry investors who end up paying $1B+ to see later what I already see now.

• 
  rusa (@rusabuilds) reported 31 minutes ago

  @mattshumer_ @agentmail the gmail ban is the whole problem in miniature. consumer services assume one human per account, and an agent trips every automation heuristic they built to stop spam. agents need infra that expects a bot, not human infra you quietly sneak a bot through.

• 
  Ven Venkata | Email Marketing (@0Venkata) reported 31 minutes ago

  A list with 500 genuinely engaged subscribers will outperform a list with 5,000 loosely relevant ones on every metric that connects to revenue. Not because 500 is a better number. Because engagement quality determines inbox placement, and inbox placement determines whether the email gets seen, and whether the email gets seen determines whether any of the other decisions matter. The 5,000-subscriber list with 40% disengagement is sending to 2,000 people who are either not opening or not clicking, dragging the aggregate engagement signal down for every send. Gmail sees this. The inbox placement for the whole list reflects the behaviour of the disengaged portion. The 500-subscriber list where 80% click regularly sends a strong positive signal on every send. Inbox placement stays high. The engaged subscribers reinforce the reputation that makes the next send land well. The number that matters is not total subscribers. It's the percentage of total subscribers who are genuinely engaged, and whether that percentage is growing or declining as the list grows. If the list is growing and the engagement percentage is declining, the growth channel is importing dilution, not subscribers.

• 
  Ahmedkhan (@Ahmed___khaan) reported 34 minutes ago

  STOP Using "Sign in with Google" for EVERYTHING!!! Your google account may be connected to far more than just gmail. cloud tools, business accounts, developer platforms, documents, and even services that make you money can all depend on the same login. That convenience can create a single point of failure. If your google account is ever suspended, compromised, or lost, recovering access to everything connected to it can become a much bigger problem than you expect. For important accounts, avoid relying on google as your only login method. use unique passwords, 2fa, recovery methods, and backup admin access whenever possible. Also check your google account connections and remove third-party apps you no longer recognize or use.

• 
  Evanbear1 (@EvanZir) reported 35 minutes ago

  Is it just me or has Gmail been incredibly slow for the last two days?

• 
  Dpac (@D_paac) reported 35 minutes ago

  @cb_doge @Starlink Indian govt should come up with indigenous servers to provide support for emailing. Most of the nation is dependent on gmail, iCloud or yahoo - American servers to communicate. Before starlink debate let’s first discuss on much bigger issues at hand since decades @AmitShahOffice

• 
  Danyella (@ScooterDanyella) reported 36 minutes ago

  I HATE working with GMAIL. Layout is ******* terrible I prefer Microsoft I miss it

• 
  Henrikh (@henrikhinai) reported 36 minutes ago

  Grok just shipped agents that log into your accounts and never sleep All powered by the new Grok 4.6 → matches GPT-5.6 Sol at half the price - "For the first time, I can trust an agent to get things done end to end" On Aug 11, SpaceXAI and Cursor shipped Grok Bot > Every Bot Has Its Own Computer (1:53): - A persistent cloud machine that's always on - the agents share it and keep working after you've closed the laptop and gone to bed > It Closed a Deal by Itself (2:53): - Handed a task to sell a pile of clothes, the bot listed the items from photos and negotiated the sale on its own - no babysitting > It Logs In as You (8:33): - With your Google login it signs into Slack, Gmail, Zillow - no API keys. Isolated VMs, and it hands control back for any 2FA or payment > The Bots Text Each Other (15:36): - The interface is iMessage: a "Yapper" bot learns to write like you, while a "chief of staff" scans your inbox and assigns work to the other bots Then read article below ↓

• 
  Solo Ranez (@solo_ranez) reported 37 minutes ago

  @enricooenzo Thank you! My problem is that I can’t set VPN since I can’t create an Apple ID due to Google requirements of Us SIM card. So u suggest to create just Gmail on any phone and use it on the Us phone, right ?

• 
  Sahas Vivek (@sahasv_01) reported 38 minutes ago

  @striver_79 @gmail @Google MSFT also has something like this in outlook, but it’s terrible to say the least. Curious to see how this is better

• 
  Wasim (@WasimShips) reported 38 minutes ago

  how to plan a full AI product without the chaos (wayfinder by @mattpocockuk ) in <30 Steps : 1. start with one concrete outcome, not a vague idea 2. weak: "build an AI sales tool". clear: "founder connects gmail, agent finds qualified convos, drafts follow ups, asks approval before sending" 3. that one sentence becomes the filter for every decision after it 4. most vibe coded builds skip this and start typing prompts immediately 5. 3 days in the database model has already changed twice 6. onboarding has 4 different half built versions 7. the agent has no clear boundaries on what it can and cant do 8. frontend is stuck waiting on backend decisions that were never made 9. claude ends up rewriting code it shipped yesterday 10. wayfinder's fix: work backwards from the destination and list every open question blocking it 11. for an AI product that means asking what data the agent can access 12. where does company context actually live 13. what can the agent execute without a human in the loop 14. how does a user inspect the agent's reasoning after the fact 15. how do retries and failures get handled 16. what counts toward paid usage 17. each open question becomes a ticket instead of a random note in a doc somewhere 18. some tickets block 5 others sitting behind them 19. example: you need to define agent access before you can design approvals, logs, or permissions 20. wayfinder surfaces which questions can actually be solved right now 21. that's the frontier. claude gets one clear next decision instead of grabbing the easiest feature in the repo 22. every ticket gets tagged HITL or AFK 23. HITL is founder judgement or a real business tradeoff, pricing lives here 24. AFK is research claude can run alone off docs, APIs, the codebase, oauth limits live here 25. one session resolves one decision and updates the map. nothing more 26. resolving gmail scopes usually reveals the approval rules 27. approval rules reveal the activity log 28. the activity log reveals the database model 29. claude keeps the reasoning attached to each decision so the next session isnt guessing why something was built that way 30. once the fog clears run /to-spec then /to-tickets and split remaining work into things agents can run in parallel Hope this helps !

• 
  Lour (@Lourdesita3k) reported 44 minutes ago

  @PEU_AR @ML_Argentina @chcibelli Feature de gmail glitch de ml

• 
  Yarchi (@undefinedKi) reported 48 minutes ago

  xAI built this for themselves first. The three jobs they actually run on it tell you more than the launch page does. Sales: a bot reads the call transcript, writes the notes into the CRM, drafts the follow-ups. Nobody retypes anything. Ops: a bot seats new hires and processes invoices that arrive in Gmail. The boring half of an ops role, gone. Engineering: a bot reproduces the bug in the product UI, files the ticket, then hands it to a second bot to fix. That handoff happens without a human in the middle. Notice what all three have in common. The work ends inside the actual tool, not as a draft in a chat window. Their own line for it: there is a huge difference between 90% done and 100% done. Start with the ops one. It is the least risky and the most repetitive.

• 
  Jake (@2mavin) reported 49 minutes ago

  @aslater you either fixed it (i couldnt select after i type in a destination) or there was some glitch that isnt there any more. The moment i selected the desintation and try to book your sys asks me to login.. thats not cool - why do u need my gmail/imessage/apple info?

• 
  Gabriel (@gbrl_dick) reported 50 minutes ago

  kind of amusing just how bad search is across every platform that's not specifically a search engine. spotify search? atrocious. gmail search? somehow also bad. this seems like a very solved problem

• 
  Chill4life94 (@chill4life94) reported 50 minutes ago

  @agentmail @grok someone could just set up a Gmail account and give @bot the login information and voila

• 
  Faye Xiao (@faye_xiao_) reported 51 minutes ago

  The spirit of Spirit just sold for $10 million Google is buying Spirit Airlines' data out of bankruptcy. Emails, internal communications, spreadsheets, bookings, frequent flyer and HR records, all de-identified, for $10 million. Judge Sean Lane rules on the sale Wednesday. The obvious read is that Google wants more data. But de-identified data doesn't work for advertising, since you can't target someone you can't name, and Google already sees more airfare information through Google Flights than Spirit ever generated internally. An airline that went under in May is also a strange place to look for pricing wisdom. What's worth buying is the internal material. The emails and the spreadsheets they reference record how work moved through the company: a question gets asked, a document gets built, a decision gets made, a system gets updated. Consumer text is everywhere, and records of how an organization actually functions are not, which is what you need if you want models that operate inside workflows rather than talk about them. Google's own statement uses the word enterprise, and the runner-up bid of $7.5 million came from Mercor, a company whose entire business is sourcing training data for AI labs. When the second bidder isn't another airline, the market has told you what was being priced. The strange part is that Google isn't short on this data at all. It runs Gmail and Workspace and sits on possibly the largest collection of business correspondence in the world, and it has promised enterprise customers it will not train on their content, which is not a promise it can quietly break. So it has the material and no permission to use it. What $10 million buys is clean title, a court approved dataset nobody can sue over, at a moment when everyone else is defending scraping claims. Dead companies can agree to things live ones can't. Any of this is worth paying for because the public supply is running down. Epoch AI's 2024 analysis put the stock of quality public human text at roughly 300 trillion tokens and projected it would be consumed between 2026 and 2032, a window that opens this year, and access has closed faster since than the arithmetic alone suggests. A census of the top 100,000 domains this July found 19.1% blocking at least one AI crawler, and in September Cloudflare begins blocking mixed use crawlers by default across its entire free tier. Private operational records are the obvious next reserve, and they are almost untouched. Epoch left them out of its estimate because private data is fragmented and legally too messy to use at scale, which is precisely the condition a bankruptcy court removes. That makes Wednesday's ruling more interesting than the sale. If it goes through, every bankruptcy from here has a new asset to offer, and the value will depend on how well documented the industry already is. A corner store has nothing worth buying, since you can watch how it works from the sidewalk. A hospital or a law firm is the opposite, because even with names removed the record shows how a case moves through the organization, who escalates what to whom, and which exceptions get made. That knowledge lives in internal systems and in people's heads and appears nowhere public. The catch is that the supply is biased toward failure, since no healthy company would sell its internal record, so every dataset that reaches the market comes from an operation that didn't work. That's useful for learning how a process runs, and much less useful for learning what good judgment looks like.

• 
  Max the VC 👨‍🚀 (@mreiffy) reported 54 minutes ago

  “Review my [EMAIL] inbox using @[Outlook/Gmail/Etc plugin]. First, learn how I actually use email: who I talk to, what I respond to, what I ignore, my existing rules, newsletters, spam, and recurring workflows. Then infer:
• Who should be VIP
• What work should be prioritized
• What should be flagged
• What is noise
• Which existing rules are broken or redundant
• What can be automated • What’s likely being missed as a result of email clutter Do NOT change anything yet. Show me the system you’d build, including new rules, rules you’d remove, suggested VIPs, emails to unsubscribe from, and anything you’d automatically archive. Then ask me only the questions you can’t answer from the inbox itself so we can modify as necessary to create the optimal inbox to meet my needs before we implement it. Remove conflicting legacy rules. Create the new system. Unsubscribe from the junk. Archive the noise. Make sure important people and work reliably rise to the top. Keep it simple. A few great rules > 50 folders. Then QA the whole thing for conflicts and false positives.”

• 
  TubeProxies (@TubeProxiess) reported 54 minutes ago

  steal this full system for launching faceless YouTube channels. six steps, in this exact order. save this for later. step one: niche selection most people pick a niche they're personally interested in. that's a bad approach, and it's why so many channels never get off the ground. the only question that matters is whether other people are already winning in that space. go find channels in the niche doing 100K to 1M views a month. if there are a few clearly working, that's your proof of concept. if you can't find any, the demand isn't proven and you should move on. huge emphasis on RPM here. some niches sit at $2 to $5 for every thousand views. others run $10 to $20 for the exact same view count. boring niches with high RPM are usually the play, even when they're the ones nobody wants to make videos about. step two: infrastructure this is the part everyone skips. it's also the part that ends channels. before you upload anything, every channel gets its own Gmail connected to nothing else you own, its own phone number for verification, its own dedicated IP (residential and static, not a rotating VPN), and its own anti detect browser profile. here's why it matters. YouTube doesn't just look at your content, it looks at what connects to what. same IP, same email, or same device across multiple channels and they can get linked together. one gets flagged and they could all go, which is a huge risk to take for no reason. it doesn't matter that the other channels did nothing wrong. the whole thing takes about 20 minutes per channel, so do it before you have anything worth losing. step three: branding these are rough guidelines rather than rules, but they matter more than people think. keep things consistent across everything you post. similar fonts, similar colors, similar thumbnail style. the goal is that people start recognizing your stuff in the feed before they even read the channel name. every video you post trains people to recognize the next one. that recognition is what turns a random viewer into a repeat viewer, and repeat viewers are the entire difference between a channel that plateaus and one that compounds. step four: format don't invent a format. steal one that's already working. find the outlier videos in your niche, the ones doing way more than the channel average, and break down every factor they share. length, pacing, structure, how they open, how they close. then rebuild it in your own way. nobody winning at this is inventing new formats. they're taking a proven one and adding their own twist, which is a far lower risk bet than trying to invent something from scratch and hoping an audience shows up for it. step five: retention packaging gets the click. retention decides whether YouTube pushes you after that. the first 30 seconds matter most, and if your graph nosedives before 0:30 the video could likely be dead. get to the point as soon as you can and don't waste any time getting there. then read the graph. a smooth slide down is normal and every video has it. a sharp cliff is a specific moment with a timestamp, so go rewatch that exact second. a spike means people rewound to see something again, which is your audience telling you exactly what they want more of. fix the moments, not the whole video. step six: scaling once something works, run it back. build a second channel with similar branding. or run the same concept in an adjacent niche. or take your existing channel and do the whole thing in another language. you already know the format works, so you're just pointing it somewhere new. just make sure step two is handled properly first. otherwise scaling turns into one flag taking everything down at once, and you've multiplied your risk instead of your income. the order matters as much as the steps. niche, then infrastructure, then branding, then format, then retention, then scaling. most people skip step two entirely and wonder why their portfolio disappeared in a week. bookmark this.

• 
  Jabol aso (@Jabolaso) reported 55 minutes ago

  @kr0der this is what i am doing. Cloudflare routing can either send the email to your worker and hook it to your server or just route it to existing email address e.g. gmail. and Send Email from Cloudflare is good too, you just need a worker paid.