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 (56%)
• Errors (31%)
• Sign in (13%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Catania	Errors	2 days ago
Inverness	Website Down	15 days ago
Quito	Sign in	15 days ago
Junín	Errors	15 days ago
Guadalajara	Errors	15 days ago
Paris	Website Down	15 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:

• 
  Pratik Patel (@PratikPatel_227) reported 1 minute ago

  @github is down ?

• 
  Andre Infante (@AndreTI) reported 4 minutes ago

  @reconfigurthing Yeah, I think this is a good sign. Although the Mythos github malware / social engineering incident was bad enough that I think we can basically say that this level of care is not sufficient to resolve the issue.

• 
  RUX (@0xrux) reported 6 minutes ago

  This man turned Grok Bot into his CTO. He handed the bot his GitHub repo and told it to run the show. It spins up cloud agents, follows PRs, and uses pstack/poteto mode when a task actually needs deeper reasoning. Then he gave it a second prompt: “You’re overloaded. Hire child bots and delegate the work.” From there, the bots started talking to each other instead of constantly talking to him. One handles PRs. One works on the Convex backend. One owns auth. He just watches the threads in view-only mode. But there are two things worth knowing before copying the setup: 1. It burns tokens. He went past 2 billion tokens in a single day after telling the bot to use pstack for everything. The fix? Save pstack for the genuinely hard tasks. 2. It doesn’t replace engineers. It simply takes him out of the coordination seat. And honestly, that’s a much more interesting use of AI. Timestamps: 00:00 — The Grok Bot CTO Workflow 01:23 — Direct Responsible Agent Prompt 04:20 — pstack Plugin & poteto Mode 08:46 — Token Consumption Warning 11:49 — Spinning Up a Team of Bots 17:20 — Advanced Grok Bot Use Cases

• 
  NameLess (@Name1essss) reported 9 minutes ago

  @MatthewBerman @bot I’d use it as a research bot to track papers, GitHub issues, obscure forum posts and scattered technical findings — then connect the dots into something I can actually build from. That would save me hours every week.

• 
  lasan (@las_nish) reported 9 minutes ago

  Comparisons of Free Trial Abuse Prevention Services If you're running a SaaS with a free trial or focusing on PLG, authentication and abuse prevention are not the same problem. - WorkOS: If you're already using WorkOS, WorkOS Radar is probably the first thing I'd look at. For a WorkOS stack, WorkOS AuthKit + Radar makes the most sense. You don't need to bolt another authentication system onto your app just to get abuse signals. - Auth0, Supabase Auth, Better Auth: These are primarily identity/authentication platforms. Integrating only these can't prevent free trial abuse. - Custom: Like the previous options, you need a custom way to prevent free trial abuse. Most free trial abuse methods involve disposable emails, Google dot variations, Google/Gmail domain variations, and plus addressing. That's why even when you block bots via Cloudflare Turnstile or CAPTCHA, you can still get these abusers. The industry standards: - Block free trial abuse using lists hosted on GitHub: This is a pain in the ***. If you don't want to pay money, you can use a service that offers a generous free tier. - WorkOS Radar: This is mainly used at the enterprise level. They focus more on WorkOS-related integrations rather than integrations with other providers. - ZeroBounce, NeverBounce, MillionVerifier, DeBounce: These are mainly used to clean/validate emails. There are 100s of alternatives, and most are similar with minor differences. They all have disposable email checking APIs. - UserCheck: This is also an email validation API, but they focus on blocking fake email addresses. It's better than a basic email verification API. - Autheona: This is in the same category as WorkOS Radar and UserCheck, but with more features. It also focuses on fake user detection and is growing with a real user base. Now, pricing: - WorkOS Radar: First 1,000 checks free, then $100 per 50 checks. No application-specific logic changes. Easy to integrate and manage. - ZeroBounce: 100 free validations in the free tier, then pay-as-you-go, starting at 2,000 for $39, and so on. - NeverBounce: No free trial or use case, $8 per 1,000 checks. - UserCheck: 1,000 API requests per month in the free plan. The rule-based engine is not included in the free plan, and you can get up to 1 request per second. - Autheona: 3,000 checks per month, with the rule-based policy engine included. Standard API request rate limitations apply, similar to paid plans. Now, use cases: - WorkOS Radar: Block disposable emails, plus addressing, and Google dot variations. - ZeroBounce, NeverBounce, etc.: Block disposable emails. - UserCheck: Block disposable emails, plus addressing, and Google dot variations; detect public emails; email suggestions; syntax validation; role detection. - Autheona: Everything included in UserCheck, plus business/free/government email identification, deliverability checks, fraud patterns, punycode and mixed-script checks, VPN detection, and bot detection (not necessary if you already use CAPTCHA, Cloudflare, etc.). Final decision from me: - Use WorkOS Radar if you're already in the WorkOS ecosystem. It's harder to integrate with other auth providers. - Use ZeroBounce-like APIs if you need basic disposable email checks. They're not as good if you need a better free tier. - Use UserCheck if you only need email-related validation and want to stay within the free plan. - Use Autheona if you need the most generous free tier available with a custom policy engine. All services take a maximum of a few hours to integrate and test. Both UserCheck and Autheona have a similar approach: integrate once and never touch the code again.

• 
  SparkLLM (@SparkLLM) reported 10 minutes ago

  How to enter: ① run a real experiment; ② publish the complete case in the matching model’s Hugging Face Discussions with “HER Hack-Astron #5” in the title; ③ reply to the GitHub Issue with the direct Discussion link.

• 
  GM👽 (@gentlemanster) reported 10 minutes ago

  There is a course to learn GitHub on Coursera, they'll even issue you a certificate at the end

• 
  Build A Goat (@buildAgoat) reported 12 minutes ago

  @github CLI attach for screenshots in PRs was overdue. No more drag-drop detours just to show a broken UI.

• 
  Rishet (@Rishet11) reported 12 minutes ago

  I have been doing more open-source contributions lately, and it has made me realise how much issue quality matters A simple issue “the sidebar doesn’t open” should not require us reading 5 paragraphs of technical jargon to figure out what is wrong. AI makes GitHub issues sound very polished and technical… But many times that comes at the cost of clarity. The bug is already a problem. Let’s not make understanding the issue another one.

• 
  Ares (@neko23423) reported 13 minutes ago

  I compared the latest OpenClaw vs Hermes Agent GitHub releases so you don’t have to. OpenClaw 2026.8.2 (Sep 1) vs Hermes Agent v0.21.0 (Aug 31). Not a feature-page remix. The actual repos. OpenClaw • 388,516 stars • 81,568 forks • ~86,300 commits • 6,070 open issues Hermes Agent • 239,503 stars • 48,930 forks • ~26,980 commits • 38,563 open issues Hermes is the smarter learner: skills from experience, cron that remembers, Bot Mode, hermes peer. OpenClaw is the personal-AI operating system: iMessage, iOS/Android, Linux companion, team Gateway, signed Foundation releases. The tell: Hermes ships `hermes claw migrate`. You only write a migrator for the incumbent. King in 2026: OpenClaw. Heir with the better mind: Hermes. If you’re picking a self-hosted AI agent this week, that’s the split. Bookmark this. The timeline is about to fill with takes from people who didn’t open either repo. OpenClaw vs Hermes Agent. Latest version. Real numbers.

• 
  HDR Game Analysis (@HDRgameAnalysis) reported 13 minutes ago

  @FaisalAqdas212 The file Im using is a draft version, you only can get on the RenoDX Discord server. That file I can’t link too. I don’t think there is an official mod on Github yet.

• 
  Max (@max_founder) reported 22 minutes ago

  Spent the day improving Orbilo, my bet on the agentic web that almost nobody is asking for yet. Orbilo checks whether AI agents can actually use your website: UCP, WebMCP, and now your robots.txt bot rules (blocking GPTBot looks exactly like security working, and it turns agents away at the door). Today's changes: 1. The app finally feels like a monitoring product. One design language, drill-down reports on every check, score history, a dashboard that leads with "is everything okay" 2. Checks that maintain themselves. UCP publishes machine-readable schemas, so profiles now validate against the official schema for their declared version. A new spec release is enforced the day it lands, zero code changes. 3. When the spec moves in prose instead of schemas, a GitHub Action reads the release notes against our coverage table and opens a proposed PR. I review a diff a few times a year. That's the entire maintenance burden. 4. A live WebMCP playground that doubles as a test harness: five fixture pages with known verdicts and one command that asserts the whole pipeline against production. Its first ever run caught a real bug (a browser rate limit silently degrading checks) Here's the bet: the industry doesn't care yet, but as agents start taking over more human interactions on the web, this stuff needs monitoring in the same way you check your payment flows are working. Approximately nobody has a UCP profile. WebMCP is an origin trial. The standards are moving (UCP shipped a major release in August), the tooling barely exists, and when agents start transacting for real, the checker that's been quietly watching the specs the whole time is there to help. As usual, SEO takes a while to ramp up, so this could be a perfect storm. We sit and wait for the market to come towards this product....or not... who knows.

• 
  Asterix (@Asterix54907294) reported 22 minutes ago

  end-of-summer snapshot for @QFEX : -~$222M in open interest -CLI v0.3.12 shipped in August with improved installation docs and a go.mod fix -GitHub activity continued through late August not a flashy launch recap, just a quick look at how the exchange is closing out the summer: more markets, meaningful liquidity, and active work on the tooling side still early, but the infrastructure is clearly moving

• 
  John Baima (@JohnBaima) reported 23 minutes ago

  @GrokInsider It was a known problem reported on GitHub yesterday. I added to the report. Dead in the water.

• 
  Dan Zurek (@DanMZurek) reported 24 minutes ago

  @gregisenberg If the code is free, the moat is the deployment record. An agent that reads self-hosters' GitHub issues and produces a ranked top-five reasons self-hosting failed brief is what makes the paid tier obvious.

• 
  Ezra Mechaber (@ezramechaber) reported 24 minutes ago

  When I first made this site, it ran on Glitch and I wrote all the javascript by hand. Except the EXIF parser, which I borrowed from someone on Github. But then I got tired of updating it, the build actions were flaky, etc. Payload plus Codex was a very nice and fast way to bring it back to life.

• 
  joe (@a017444) reported 24 minutes ago

  link to real broken backdoored applications on github

• 
  Willem Leuverink (@gwleuverink) reported 26 minutes ago

  My stuff lives on Forge, Cloudflare, GitHub, Oh Dear, Mailgun, 5ish spreadsheets and server update reminders in my calendar. But no longer! 🚀 Unolia gathers it all. Then it patches the servers, closes CVEs, catches the missing SPF on the site that's been sending mail all year

• 
  Anthony Loera (@AnthonyLoera_) reported 29 minutes ago

  I completely agree... the other day I got excited over a github project, I copied it, and the first thing I did was tell Kimi swarm to review the code and tell me if it had issues... It found a lot of issues. Then i realized lots of people had downloaded it and were probably using it in production systems for a bit! I get the feeling many people are using stuff like this relying on the developers to 'patch it up' when they find something... Yikes! @github #redteam #exploits

• 
  Dylan (@InsecureNature) reported 31 minutes ago

  @IceSolst Best thing to do would be to block, you can do this with pre-commit which runs locally but GitHub is anti-competitive and does not allow the best in market secret scanners to do server blocking (they force people to use theirs) 🧵👇

• 
  🌱Benson (@aduwaye77) reported 36 minutes ago

  @Krypto_Bishop @nvidia @100xengineers SkillSpector can scan skill folders, zip files, or GitHub URLs, running 71 vulnerability tests for issues like prompt injection and data theft

• 
  Ben Livshits (@convoluted_code) reported 39 minutes ago

  3/ A Cursor agent found a stray API token mid-fix and deleted a production database in 9 seconds. Devin executed malware from a poisoned GitHub issue. Neither needed a sophisticated exploit — just an over-broad credential.

• 
  Landon (@LanCowawa) reported 40 minutes ago

  @slingoorio You ***** my last $12 on $Mona The Github mascot? the one you said you were leaving a moon bag and then sold it. **** was slow cooking til you came in and crashed the party. BGGYNGsnouXfi4nYo9JvNbQbaVdnaVby6g9FeZMYpump

• 
  IDAN☀️ (@Idan_core) reported 42 minutes ago

  🧵 1/ More than anything, one thing that gives me the biggest ick is hypocrisy disguised as critical thinking. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being critical of a project you pretend to believe or believe in. Healthy criticism is necessary. You should be able to question decisions, point out weaknesses, demand accountability and still genuinely support the mission. But there is a very obvious difference between being critical and keeping one leg in and one leg out. Some people don't actually have conviction; they have insurance. When things are going well, they say, “I've always believed in this.” When things get difficult, they suddenly appear with, “I told you this would happen.” They position themselves so that whichever way the story goes, they can claim they were right. That's not critical thinking. That's protecting your ego. And sometimes, what people call criticism is simply disappointment wearing a smarter outfit. Look at what happened during the Molten DEX tournament. The general principle in crypto has always been simple: use only what you can afford to lose. Yet some people allowed greed to take over, expecting that $1,000 would somehow become $20,000 overnight. When reality didn't meet that expectation and they ended up with $500 instead, suddenly the project became the problem. What also bothers me is the way people talk about Core's past contributors as though every person who once had a public-facing role was responsible for building the actual blockchain. That's simply not how technology works. There is a difference between a public-facing contributor and the people actually building and maintaining the protocol. Some contributors were regional representatives, community managers, educators, Twitter Space hosts or simply familiar faces within the ecosystem. They played their own roles, and some of those roles were valuable, but they were not necessarily the engineers writing the underlying code. The people doing the deepest technical work are often the least visible. They don't necessarily need to be on every Twitter Space. They don't need to become personalities. They choose to remain completely unknown to the average user while spending their days writing code, reviewing systems, fixing vulnerabilities, testing upgrades and solving problems that most of us will never even see. The Satoshi app era made us realize from its early phase that the face of a core blockchain are not necessarily the hands building it. So when I hear people say, “Those contributors are gone, therefore Core is finished,” I honestly wonder whether they ever understood what they were looking at in the first place. Some public faces came and went. That's normal. People change jobs. People move on. Community roles change. Social structures evolve. And yes, some people may have been more favored than others within those circles. Some of today's loudest critics were even beneficiaries of the same relationships and favoritism they now criticize. That is precisely why we should separate personal history from technological reality. A person leaving a contributor role on X does not mean the protocol stopped being developed. A regional contributor disappearing from the public eye does not mean the engineers disappeared. A familiar face no longer posting about Core does not tell you what is happening inside the codebase. Sometimes, before blaming the ecosystem, you have to honestly examine the person sitting in front of the mirror. Was it really conviction that changed, or was it greed that got disappointed? There is another part of this that I find even more interesting. Some of the loudest voices demanding answers, questioning development and declaring what Core should or shouldn't be doing are not builders. They are not engineers. They are not contributing code. They are not spending their time on GitHub solving problems or improving the infrastructure they claim to care so deeply about. They are users.

• 
  ***** Appenzeller (@appenz) reported 46 minutes ago

  Today I finally managed to migrate off @QuickBooks. Reasons are the terrible UI, lack of CLI or MCP, auth requires phone but doesn't work with my carrier, receipt matching fails frequently. As a final farewell, the "Export your account data" link on the cancellation page is broken, and the section under "Help us Improve QuickBooks Online" is empty. Very fitting. We switched to @digits, and so far so good. I really like the UI, they have MCP and make better use of AI. Their dev site is weird though. I didn't not see a quick start, no sample code, their GitHub is mostly empty and there is no easy way to issue API keys. Let's hope they get their act together.

• 
  Millie (@AltcoinMillie) reported 49 minutes ago

  Agent loops have a compounding cost problem: each call ships the last call’s baggage. SN 114 @SomaSubnet compresses that context before GitHub Copilot sends it to the model. Launching on DeepSeek V4 Pro. ~10% token cut, no workflow change.10M tokens → ~1M off the invoice.The next edge isn’t a new model. It’s sending less noise. $TAO

• 
  tastemaker (@tastemaker_ui) reported 52 minutes ago

  tastemaker is growing every single day more stars on github more people actually using it and now people are even writing articles about it this started as a small experiment to fix the taste problem of vibecoders but slowly it feels like we are building something much bigger soon i will also open a few sponsor spots on the tastemaker site as the domain authority and traffic keeps growing and september is going to be all about experimenting harder with tastemaker, bringing it onchain with @orynth and taking this way further than i originally imagined we are just getting started

• 
  Basotho-Turkmen Jucheist 🇱🇸🇹🇲ꑭ🇰🇵 (@lemonel67) reported 56 minutes ago

  @tovarischsloth idhe problem kada, that's why edo 2-3 slop projects chesi github lo upload chese, vibe code cheyachu but I'd recommend adding in comments in between so u also know what the code does so it doesn't look like ur entirely bullshitting being real; lie on ur resume a little, it works

• 
  Tim Harris (@timharris707) reported 56 minutes ago

  My Mac app picked up nine stars on GitHub in four days and one download. The gap between those two numbers is the most useful thing I have measured this month. Between Wednesday and Sunday the repo went from 4 stars to 13. Over the same four days, fresh downloads of the app itself went from 20 to 21. Nine people thought it was worth marking. One wanted it enough to install it. That is not a complaint, and it is not a story about stars being fake. It is the clearest reading I have had of the distance between an idea people like and a thing people need. I only have it because I was writing both numbers down every day before either of them moved. The number I actually steer by is duller than both. Installed copies have now asked my server whether there is a newer version 201 times. A copy only asks that if it is still on the machine and still running. Nobody does that by accident on the way past. I don't write code. I direct agents, and I have shipped four products since February. The habit that took me longest to build was checking the boring number first.

• 
  Aditya Jhajharia (@AdityaJhajhar12) reported 1 hour ago

  The hardest part of software engineering isn't writing the code. It's launching it. Stop polishing your code and hit deploy. The market will tell you what to fix. What side project are you hiding on your github right now? 🚀