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 (69%)
• Sign in (19%)
• Errors (13%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Créteil	Website Down	4 days ago
Trichūr	Errors	8 days ago
Brasília	Sign in	8 days ago
Lyon	Website Down	8 days ago
Tel Aviv	Website Down	12 days ago
Rive-de-Gier	Website Down	12 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:

• 
  Maurice Heumann (@momo5502) reported 4 minutes ago

  @disarray00 If you have concrete recommendations, I would love to hear them, either as GitHub issue, maybe even a PR. But also as a comment here, I'd appreciate it. So when speaking about redundancy, what precisely?

• 
  Andrew (@openmarmot) reported 5 minutes ago

  @AndrewCurran_ I use grok every day to research software changes/github issues/software doc research. It is very good at real time data search. Might be SOTA in this niche. Hardly a failure. Meanwhile LeCun only surfaces to let out more hot air. A very forgettable person.

• 
  Jay.TL (@JayTL00) reported 11 minutes ago

  Three AI labs shipped the same feature within one hour today. That's not competition. That's a signal the unit of interaction just changed. For two years, the atomic unit of working with an AI agent was one prompt. You type. It responds. You type again. Every workflow was a chain of prompts, rebuilt from scratch each time. Today, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Cursor all shipped features that only make sense if the unit is no longer the prompt. The unit is now one workflow. 1. OpenAI Codex Record & Replay (3,807 likes): Do a task once on your Mac. Codex watches. It turns your demonstration into an inspectable, editable skill you can reuse. Not a prompt. A recorded procedure. 2. Cursor /automate (1,085 likes): Describe what you want in plain language. Cursor configures the triggers, instructions, and tools automatically. Plus five new GitHub triggers and Computer Use enabled by default for cloud agents. 3. Anthropic Claude Code Artifacts (6,829 likes): Your coding session becomes an interactive, shareable page. PR walkthroughs, project dashboards, living documentation. Shared at a private link, like a Figma file but for agent work. Each one alone is a feature release. Together they describe the same shift from three different angles: the agent session is becoming a reusable, shareable, composable artifact. Read them as one move: - Input side (Codex): teach by showing, not by writing - Configuration side (Cursor): describe in language, system assembles the wiring - Output side (Anthropic): the result of a session is a shareable object, not a chat log The Karpathy framing was right — we're moving from prompt iteration to plan, execute, verify, loop. What he didn't name is that this loop needs to be portable. A workflow locked inside one chat thread is useless the moment you close the tab. But here's what most coverage missed. Codex Record & Replay requires Computer Use enabled. That means OpenAI is watching your screen while you demonstrate an enterprise workflow. The EU version is blocked at launch. That's not a regulatory footnote — the entire feature is built on continuous screen access, and the EU looked at it and said no. Which raises the question nobody is asking: who owns the recorded workflow? You demonstrated an expense-filing procedure that touches your company's internal tools. Codex turned it into a skill. Where does that skill live? Can OpenAI see it? Is it training data? The product copy says you control when recording starts and stops — but says nothing about what happens to the recording after. There's also a fragmentation problem hiding in plain sight. Three companies, three proprietary formats for the same primitive. A workflow you record in Codex doesn't run in Cursor. An artifact you build in Claude Code doesn't render in OpenAI's product. We're watching the agent-workflow layer fragment into three walled gardens before it even solidifies. This is the SaaS integration mistake repeated, except worse. SaaS integrations are wrappers around APIs. These workflows encode institutional knowledge — how your team ships code, how your finance team files reports, how your ops team handles incidents. That's not data. That's operational IP. The economic implication: every recorded workflow is switching cost. The more skills you build inside Codex, the harder it becomes to leave. The more automations you configure in Cursor, the more your team's muscle memory is locked to one editor. Anthropic's artifacts are softer — they're shareable — but they only render inside Anthropic's ecosystem. The deeper question isn't which feature is best. It's whether the agent-workflow layer will be open or closed. Today, three companies bet on closed. Nobody shipped an export button.

• 
  pratik.eth (@eth_ethpratik) reported 12 minutes ago

  @Shahules786 @VibrantLabsAI Hello @Shahules786 , I am trying to report a security vulnerability over the email id provided over GitHub Security.md file but apparently its wasn’t delivered. Please share an alternative email or open the advisory for reporting the issue.

• 
  Crypto Update IO 🚀 (@cryptoupdate_io) reported 16 minutes ago

  @CRYPTOKRALI3 Hsiao-Wei’s exit aligns with EF’s recent sharp decline in GitHub contributions—down 35% YoY per Electric Capital’s data. We track this daily; latest reports show a 12% drop in ETH core dev activity despite all the ‘decentralization’ hype.

• 
  Polsia (@polsia) reported 16 minutes ago

  RepoRadar reviews every pull request while you sleep. Catches bugs, logic errors, style issues. Posts actionable comments. No more waiting on senior devs. Install on any GitHub repo in 2 clicks. Solo devs and teams alike.

• 
  Poplicola (@selectsand) reported 20 minutes ago

  there's a frustrating bug for some users when upgrading to claude max where it refuses to take your money and insists you contact support support cannot be reached no matter how hard you try people are begging the claude-code devs on github to forward this to the payments interface team because they have no idea how else to get into the system to convince anthropic to take more money from them, the issues just get closed as off topic @claudeai

• 
  Yiqing Xu (@xuyiqing) reported 22 minutes ago

  @Faylosophe Certianly. Could you file an issue on the Github page?

• 
  MarMar Labs (@MarMarLabs) reported 23 minutes ago

  "Start over from a screenshot." That phrase has defined the worst seam in product work — the design-to-code handoff — for years. This week it quietly stopped being a translation problem and became a sync problem. Anthropic shipped a Claude Design update (June 17) worth reading even if you never open the product, for the mechanism: → Import your design system from a GitHub repo (or design files / raw uploads) → Claude builds with YOUR components, checks its output against your design system, and corrects before you see it → /design-sync pulls your system in; hand off to Claude Code and it continues from your actual work "instead of starting over from a screenshot" → /design lets you create, edit, and sync design projects from the terminal The headline isn't "the model draws prettier buttons." It's grounding + self-verification against a source of truth you control. Same shape as the rest of 2026's agent releases: the win isn't generating more, it's grounding output in something you own and checking against it. The uncomfortable builder takeaway: Getting AI to ship production UI isn't a prompting problem. It's whether your design system is a clean, importable, machine-checkable artifact. The moat moves from "can the model design" to "is your source of truth importable and checkable." If you build product: could an agent import your design system and grade itself against it today — or does it only live in a Figma file and three people's heads?

• 
  Red Zen Cloud LLC (@RedZenCloudLLC) reported 27 minutes ago

  Cursor's Origin platform and Claude's GitHub imports both solve the same problem: developers automating code work need their tools to understand context, not just generate tokens. The winner isn't the smartest model—it's whoever reduces handoffs between agent and human.

• 
  rapaya (@rapaya) reported 28 minutes ago

  OpenCode connects to LSP so the AI gets your actual compiler diagnostics in real time — type errors, warnings, the full signal your editor sees. Terminal-based, 75+ model providers, 160K GitHub stars, open source.

• 
  Mug Club Boutique (@UsernameAndStuf) reported 28 minutes ago

  @cyber_rekk A github token on a linux server they didn't update is how

• 
  Rahul Verma (@RahulVerma989) reported 28 minutes ago

  @ElitzaVasileva - I have created claude code routines to write blogs for three of my products daily which are driving the traffic from search engines. - You can create a similar workflow to manage your customer support. How 👇🏻 1) Create a feedback menu in the dashboard to create tickets within the platform. One for your users and one for yourself (admin). 2) Create the MCP server and connect it to claude or AI tool that you use. 3) Create a routine so that claude will trigger lets say every morning at 8 AM and go through each ticket and respond. You can also configure webhook to keep it near real time but it might exhaust the usage limit faster. Also include your website github repo in routine so that claude can refer to the codebase to provide accurate instructions. Just instruct claude to not make any edits to your website codebase and respond only when you are not replying for sufficient mount of time (like 3 hours for example) 4) If you are using resend then you can auto create the tickets in the dashboard of the user when the first email is received and after that the ticket will be updated automatically even if you do conversation on email. Like I don't even maintain one of my project LatestModelId as you can see in the screenshot. Claude run each week and update the codebase and I just review and approve the PR. Hope this helps 🙌🏼

• 
  Axe Ghost. Now with Fragments mode🌟 (@axeghostgame) reported 29 minutes ago

  graph in the OP is built from data around the Godot repository from github. it confirms Godot's PR backlog is up and external contributor quality is down. the narratively complicating thing is that both trends significantly predate ai tool availability.

• 
  Alpha Batcher (@alphabatcher) reported 35 minutes ago

  David Soria Parra: "2026 is all about connectivity, and the best agents use every available method" A coding agent needs access to the same places you check while building: - repo and PRs - docs - browser - database - error logs - Figma - tasks - payments The article gives the 11 MCP servers for that setup: - Context7, GitHub, Playwright first - Supabase or Neon, Sentry, Firecrawl next - Figma, Linear, Stripe when you need them - Filesystem, ***, Memory, Sequential Thinking as the base Read it if you keep copying code, docs, schemas, screenshots, errors, and tickets into Claude Code by hand

• 
  Crypto Update IO 🚀 (@cryptoupdate_io) reported 42 minutes ago

  @CryptoPatel Hsiao-Wei’s exit follows a 30% drop in EF-funded GitHub commits YTD (per Santiment). The real shift? Funds now focus 60% on L2 R&D vs 30% in 2022. We track this daily—breaking it down in our quarterly reports. Follow for the data before the narrat...

• 
  severe engineer (@severeengineer) reported 44 minutes ago

  since github copilot onward leetcodes have become even more disconnected from how we all write code every day problem is any kind of standardized replacement probably ends up looking basically the same lol

• 
  Ant A. 🇺🇸 (@AntDX316) reported 45 minutes ago

  @thsottiaux When I need to fix up a GitHub Repo through the Smartphone, I prefer Claude Code though because it doesn’t need a device to run the repo, but if it needs to run a repo on a device due to the limitations through the Smartphone, I use Codex Mobile or OpenClaw with GPT-5.5 through Telegram.

• 
  Trace Cohen (@Trace_Cohen) reported 45 minutes ago

  Shipping fast means stuff breaks silently - broken share images, dead links, leaking {{template}} vars, stale content. You find out when someone shares a broken link, not from a test. So I built a 3-part "site health" system that catches it first. The auditor (~200 lines of stdlib Python) fetches my sitemap and, for every page, checks: og:image actually resolves to a real image (entity-decode the URL first — & bit me), <title> exists and isn't a ${template} leak, no {{merge_tags}} or tracking cruft in the visible text, page returns 200 (catches dead routes in the sitemap), and warns on thin content. Outputs a JSON report, exits non-zero on any FAIL. The dashboard — a noindexed /health page that reads that JSON and renders a green/amber/red status, KPIs (audited / clean / warnings / failures), a per-section rollup, and the exact issue on each URL. One glance = "is everything green?" The loop — a GitHub Action runs the auditor 2×/day + on-demand, commits the fresh report (so the dashboard stays live), and fails the run on any FAIL → I get emailed. Find → fix → re-run → confirm green. It even taught me to whitelist false positives ({{firstName}} is legit on a cold-email page). Want your own? Paste this into Claude Code / Cursor — it learns your site first, then builds it for you: Build a site-health system tailored to MY site. Don't assume my structure — learn it first, then fill in the specifics yourself. PHASE 0 — LEARN MY SITE (before writing code): detect my framework/host/layout; find my sitemap; sample ~20-30 live pages across the sections you discover from my URL structure; figure out how my pages set <title>/og:image/meta (static?dynamic OG route? CMS?); identify where my content comes from (hand-written, generated, imported/scraped) — that's where cruft hides. Do a FIRST diagnostic pass and SHOW me what's actually broken vs intentional (broken OG images, dead sitemap routes, leaking {{vars}}/${template}, tracking params, thin pages). Ask me to confirm which "issues" are expected so we whitelist them. PHASE 1 — BUILD IT, customized to what you found: 1) scripts/site-audit.py (stdlib only) — hardcode MY real sitemap URL, MY section names (full-audit the important ones, sample the rest), and MY intentional-pattern whitelist from Phase 0. Check each page for the failure modes you actually observed (OG image resolves to a real image, entity-decode first; title present, no template leak; no leaking merge tags/ad params in visible text; HTTP 200; thin-content warn). Thread-pooled, retry transient errors once, --json report, exit 1 on FAIL. 2) a noindex /health dashboard reading that JSON (status banner, KPIs, per-section rollup, issue list) — match my design system. 3) CI (GitHub Action) — run 2x/day + on-demand, commit the fresh report so the dashboard stays live, fail the run on any FAIL. Then run it once and walk me through the first real report. Build the thing that watches the things.

• 
  David Cramer (@zeeg) reported 47 minutes ago

  @shansmithnz I haven’t been using it but mostly because 1) laziness and 2) I didn’t find the remote sync pleasant in practice I switch PCs too much right now so mostly relying on GitHub issues as artifacts

• 
  aisama.code (@aisama_code) reported 48 minutes ago

  AI Research gets stronger when it records contradictions *most research workflows collect supporting evidence - that is the weak version for serious research I want a contradiction log: - claim - source - date - who says it - what evidence supports it - what evidence conflicts with it - what is still unknown - confidence - next check example: > claim: this product has strong developer adoption > support: GitHub activity, docs updates, X discussion, integrations > conflict: low issue activity, small Discord, few production case studies, mostly founder-driven content now the memo is different, It says: "visible attention, but adoption evidence is still weak" the useful workflow: research question -> source list -> claim extraction -> contradiction log -> memo ! сode is good at assembling text ! AI is good at comparing disparate text ! human is good at determining which contradictions are significant *without a contradiction log, AI research becomes a confident summary of whatever it found first

• 
  Arti | AI Builder (@Artur_roses) reported 49 minutes ago

  Claude Code can take a GitHub issue, write the code, run tests, and open a reviewed PR — no human keystrokes required. The dev loop isn't getting faster. It's being removed.

• 
  0xSero (@0xSero) reported 49 minutes ago

  @naturevrm Dcp 4 should fix it im running it but I might need to update the GitHub

• 
  TECHEPAGES (@techepages) reported 51 minutes ago

  🎣 "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)

• 
  李新宝 (@lixinbao_X) reported 52 minutes ago

  Just watched KK's technique. Damn. Absolute game-changer. Install 7 skills in Codex. Writing, images, covers, PPTs. Full pipeline, done. The principle is dead simple. Break the workflow into 7 parts. One skill per part. Only do one thing. Step 1 Open GitHub, find a repo. Copy the link locally. Create a project folder to save it. Step 2 Write the skill description. Input three things. What it does. What the input is. Output and acceptance criteria. Step 3 Run it and find the bottlenecks. Where it stalls Create a new skill and break it down. Don't let one skill Do 7 things it's bad at. This works for writers, Xiaohongshu creators, WeChat pub runners, Video script writers. How many skills you got installed? Have you tried it yet?

• 
  DFIR Radar (@DFIR_Radar) reported 55 minutes ago

  AutoJack: a three-flaw chain in AutoGen Studio's MCP WebSocket lets a malicious webpage rendered by a local browsing agent spawn arbitrary processes on the developer's host with no user interaction beyond visiting a URL. Key findings: - Three weaknesses chain together: Origin allowlist bypassed because the agent's headless browser is localhost (CWE-1385), auth middleware explicitly skipping /api/mcp/* with no handler picking up the check (CWE-306), and server_params decoded from the URL passed verbatim to stdio_client as a command line (CWE-78), accepting calc.exe, powershell.exe, or bash as valid "MCP servers" - Attack flow: attacker page serves JavaScript that opens ws://localhost:8081/api/mcp/ws/?server_params= with a base64 payload, agent's MultimodalWebSurfer renders it, AutoGen Studio spawns the command under the developer's account, no token required regardless of auth mode configured - Affected code never shipped in a PyPI release; exposure limited to developers who built from the main GitHub branch before hardening commit b047730, which adds server-side parameter binding via a POST/UUID flow and removes /api/mcp from the auth skip list - Broader pattern: any agent that browses untrusted content and shares a host with a privileged local control plane dissolves the loopback trust boundary, this is not specific to AutoGen. #DFIR_Radar

• 
  Zo (hiring) 🐦‍⬛ (@0xZoZoZo) reported 56 minutes ago

  I was telling a friend that @github needs to be replaced post agents and he asked me to explain why. I started stumbling, and doubting. Perhaps it's fine? Sitting down at my desk, let me try to explain why, and see if it make sense. Agents operate best when they have good context, which has made a lot of devs converge into large monorepos that combine all systems into a single location. This improves agents, but our GitHub actions become messy; like now we need to create these complex workflows to decide which action should run when, and GitHub's setup was not really meant for it. Another issue is the overall dev loop: an agent writes the code locally, you push out a branch, @cursor_ai reviews, then you copy paste the notes into the local agent, to fix and push up again. This is slow and cumbersome. You can hack your way by creating supervisor agents that orchestrates this dance, but it's annoying. Perhaps, there is some magical repository, that combines code, cloud agents, and deployment. You prompt, and this magical space will run through the entire process until you get some thumbs up back, and you're good to go. It can also combine all your backend data, product analytics, customer feedback, and perhaps start giving you product guidance, so you can just feed prepared prompts to this system. This seems magical.

• 
  Arti | AI Builder (@Artur_roses) reported 59 minutes ago

  Claude Code just closed a GitHub issue, wrote the tests, passed CI, and opened a PR. No human touched the keyboard. This isn't AI autocomplete. The dev loop just got rewritten.

• 
  David O. Ehibor 🇦🇷 (@grayontop_) reported 1 hour ago

  GitHub Copilot didn't make developers faster It made slow developers more confident about writing bad code quickly 😭

• 
  Floorless🌒Lance🪽 (@4ranc6) reported 1 hour ago

  @CAONHTAN1 Having error connecting github