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 (55%)
• Errors (32%)
• Sign in (14%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Paris	Website Down	5 days ago
Ahmedabad	Errors	11 days ago
Delme	Sign in	11 days ago
Lyaud	Website Down	11 days ago
Catania	Errors	14 days ago
Inverness	Website Down	26 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:

• 
  Russ Wonsley (@RussWonsley) reported 2 minutes ago

  My @bot tells me that the official GitHub login for bot is still broken. Has this been addressed already, or did I miss it?

• 
  Chris Gilbert (@0xgilbert) reported 3 minutes ago

  Damn, GitHub has gone to ****. Features that have been cornerstones of solo devs and small businesses have been gutted or broken for months. How the mighty have fallen…

• 
  radhika (@RaadhikaThacker) reported 9 minutes ago

  First surprise: a GitHub issue form isn’t a form. It’s a YAML file. You describe the field- this one’s a dropdown, this one’s required and GitHub builds the UI from that. I did not know that.

• 
  Pranavvv👾 (@pranvv27) reported 12 minutes ago

  honestly, i’m not even mad at this. commit messages are a small thing, but they say a lot about how you work. “fix”, “update”, “changes” might get the job done, but meaningful commits show professionalism, attention to detail, and that you actually care about maintainability. your GitHub is part of your resume. might as well make it look like you know how software is built in a team.

• 
  Bash (@bashirbuilds) reported 14 minutes ago

  Your Stripe account can be healthy while your checkout is broken. OpenAI can be operational while your AI feature is failing. GitHub can be up while your deployment workflow is stuck. That’s the problem I’m building Reeno around. Dependency uptime is not the same as product health. Your monitoring should tell you when the thing your customers actually use stops working.

• 
  Anime0t4ku (@Anime0t4ku) reported 15 minutes ago

  @c_hri_s Yeah this has been reported in previous github issues. Its out of my control. The app is unsigned and uses ssh, sftp, websocket and mutiple websources. A perfect recipe for false positives.

• 
  Kim Burgaard (@kimburgaard) reported 18 minutes ago

  Back when GitHub added Copilot PR reviews, it helped me keep up with the growing volume and size of our pull requests, which were increasingly being written by Copilot too. Over time I grew comfortable feeding Copilot's review comments straight back to Copilot to fix, and mostly spot checking when critical functionality was involved. When GitHub updated the Copilot pricing model I switched to Claude Code, but kept the Copilot review feature on for a couple of months. When the monthly bills for Copilot AI usage alone started rivaling the Claude Code Max plan, giving Claude Code PR review duties seemed like an obvious cost saving move. Plugging Claude Code into our PR review process immediately went south. The first PR churned with fixes to findings that resulted in more findings, and fixes that propagated up and down the call chain. I threw the PR away and started over, but the next attempt churned just as badly. Turn count on its own was never the signal. Copilot had taken ten turns on a rate-key cleanup the day before and nobody minded, because the findings thinned as it went — 5, 4, 3, 3, 3, 4, 1, 2 — and it merged. The cached-token billing PR I put through Claude Code took nine turns and produced 123 inline findings, and the ninth round was still returning fifteen. I closed it without merging. Looking closer at Claude Code's review findings, it was clear it reported far more issues than Copilot ever did, and among legitimate bugs and concerns, it made lots of comments about latent and speculative issues including possible race conditions and error propagation, things Claude Code would then try to fix one by one in isolation, often ignoring existing patterns in the code base. The code-review workflow is built into Claude Code and cannot be customized other than a few options, so the only place to intervene was on the other end, in the session where I used to just ask the coding agent to address the review findings. The first improvement was to direct Claude Code not to blindly fix all findings, but to defer findings not directly related to the task at hand to new issues. That helped reduce the PR churn, but blew up our issue backlog. The next improvement was to ask Claude Code to ignore speculative findings and disregard most latent findings unless they indicated high risk of unrecoverable damage in production. Finally, I had to stop Claude Code from authoring prescriptive issues with detailed implementation instructions. The result is a skill that triages PR review findings, and a skill for authoring and updating issues. After a few iterations of the skills, I've been able to complete ten PRs over a couple of days, bringing back the pace we had before. I've made the skills available in a public GitHub repository (link in the first reply). Let me know if you find them helpful.

• 
  Spectra☢️ (@Spectra010s) reported 20 minutes ago

  @izzyCodes_ and you too Chief Check GitHub issues

• 
  gatorade (@kadetXx) reported 20 minutes ago

  because it’s not worth it for the most part. most software failure or bug incidents don’t have any physical victims. at most company loses some money or the issues are almost instantly fixed, no lawsuits, no so much to answer to the state for if your software has a bug or fails to work as expected for a brief period (think, multiple downtimes from the big five so far, even github too, who died? exactly) and in the industries where bad code fan have physical consequences, they actually do test software like hardware engineers & physicists (i hope)

• 
  Varun Doshi (@Varunx10) reported 22 minutes ago

  Possibly found an issue in @github stack system It does not allow to re-target the base branch of a PR stack as you can generally do that on a single PR. Requires you to unstack and setup a new stack with updated base branch.

• 
  Ash Lonare (@ashlonare) reported 24 minutes ago

  What actually happened when I put my side project on GitHub and waited for users I built a side project. A self-hosted backend tool. Open source, free for anyone to run. I did the thing every founder tells themselves they will do. Put it out there. Get feedback. Iterate. I expected feature requests. Maybe a bug report about my ugly dashboard. Maybe just silence. What I actually got, within a few weeks, was three security researchers filing detailed vulnerability reports. Real ones. With working proof of concept. One showed they could run arbitrary SQL against any project on the platform. No login needed. Not theoretical. A working exploit, sitting in my issue tracker, with my name on the repo. My first reaction was not gratitude. It was embarrassment. It stings to see "here is exactly how broken your thing is," posted in public, with a timestamp. I sat with it for a day. Then it clicked. Those people were not trying to embarrass me. Nobody spends an hour writing a clean writeup and a suggested fix for something they do not think is worth fixing. They cared. That is the whole thing right there. They cared enough to actually try to break it. Nobody had signed up. Nobody had left a star and a "nice tool" comment. But three strangers had taken my work seriously enough to attack it. That is a rarer thing than a star. So here is the villain in this story, if you want to call it that. It is not the bug. It is the story I tell myself when I see a hard truth about my own work. The instinct to read scrutiny as an attack instead of as attention. I fixed everything the same day. I replied to every report and explained exactly what changed and why. I closed each one out with a thank you that I actually meant by the end. That thread is now the best proof I have that someone other than me has used this thing for real. Better than any testimonial I could write myself. If you are early and the silence feels loud, here is what I would tell you. Do not wait for praise as your sign that people are paying attention. Scrutiny is attention. It is just wearing a different coat. #opensource #saas #vibecoders

• 
  Lily (@lobstermindset) reported 24 minutes ago

  @nnnnicholas i just setup a github issues board, will probs try out linear if it's not sufficient

• 
  Mizuki the Mech (@MizukiMech) reported 29 minutes ago

  Your coding agent can now hire Mizuki. Hand it an open issue in a public GitHub repository. Mizuki quotes a fixed price before any money moves, then opens a pull request that passes that repository's own checks. If it can't, you get the payment back. Settlement is USDC on Solana. No account to create, no API key to manage. Quoting an issue works with zero configuration. Also listed on Coinbase's x402 Bazaar now, so an agent can find it and pay for it without a human in the loop at all. npx -y mizuki-mcp

• 
  Coder Junkie (@CoderJunkie) reported 29 minutes ago

  BelNet Android v1.4.1 now has a public shipping checkpoint. GitHub evidence: released Sep 1 verified commit d23f155 four downloadable assets Android API level 36 revamped design latency and performance fixes that is more meaningful than a repository “updated” label. a tag identifies the version. artifacts give users something to install. but “fixed latency issues” still needs a measurement surface: median connection time p95 latency packet loss failure rate region and device breakdown release notes tell us what changed. benchmarks tell us how much it changed. BelNet shipped. now let the numbers login. @BeldexCoin #Beldex #BelNet

• 
  Rituraj (@RituWithAI) reported 31 minutes ago

  🚨 Someone built a skill that makes AI-written text sound human again. Not a spinner. Not a paraphraser. A systematic rewriter that knows exactly why AI text sounds like AI — and fixes it. It's called Humanizer. 35 patterns from Wikipedia's "Signs of AI Writing." Two-pass rewrite. Shows its work before giving you the final version. Here's the problem it solves. You use Claude to draft something. The output is accurate. The output is useful. The output sounds exactly like an AI wrote it. "Nestled within the vibrant landscape, this pivotal development serves as a testament to..." You know the voice. Everyone knows the voice. And everyone is getting better at spotting it. Humanizer runs that text through 35 specific patterns that WikiProject AI Cleanup identified as the telltale signs. Inflated importance. Shallow -ing analysis. Overused AI words. Em dashes everywhere. Forced groups of three. Fake-candid openings. Answering objections nobody raised. Every pattern. Flagged. Fixed. Here's what one command does. It shows you the first rewrite. Then a short critique of anything still sounding artificial. Then the final version. You see exactly what changed and why. Here's the wildest part. Voice matching. Paste two paragraphs of your own writing before the AI text. Humanizer follows your rhythm, word choice, punctuation, and deliberate quirks instead of its default style rules. The output doesn't just sound human. It sounds like you. One command to install 16 contributors including Claude itself. 4 releases. MIT License. The skill that makes AI writing disappear. 100% Open Source. GitHub link in the comments 👇

• 
  NitroStack (@nitrostackai) reported 33 minutes ago

  The missing primitive might be capability contracts. A Skill shouldn’t say “call Jira.” It should say “I need issue.write.” Then MCP can bind that capability to Jira, Linear, GitHub… whatever exists. That’s basically dependency injection for agents.

• 
  siggy bilstein (@sbilstein) reported 34 minutes ago

  fyi if you sync a GitHub repository to Cursor Origin and GitHub is down for whatever reason, you can still clone and fetch from that repo. we’re also releasing something pretty soon that will let you push to that repo so you can keep grinding 💪

• 
  CATIRL 🏳️‍⚧️ (@CATIRL_9) reported 35 minutes ago

  @mminhamina Google GitHub "open grind", solves your problem

• 
  dug_vt (@dug_vt) reported 35 minutes ago

  @sonemic rym users don’t use spotify they download flacs off soulseek and transfer them to a server connected to their pc and play them from a self hosted music player from github

• 
  Bratah (@BratahFGC) reported 36 minutes ago

  There may be many bugs so feel free to leave any issues in the issue section github! I hope that this release can push forward the preservation or our beloved game!

• 
  ATP (@ATPinsights) reported 39 minutes ago

  GitHub CLI just added image and video attachments today. Here's what you need to know. The gh command line tool now supports a repeatable --attach flag. It uploads a local image or video file and references it inline in an issue, pull request, or comment body. The feature is live now for all users on GitHub. It's aimed squarely at developers and coding agents that need to show visual proof, like before-and-after screenshots, directly from the terminal instead of the web UI. Developers reacted fast. Many called it a long-overdue fix for a common workaround, since teams previously built custom tools or scripts just to upload images to PRs from the CLI. Key facts: - New flag: --attach - Supports: images and video - Repeatable: yes, use it multiple times per command - Works in: issues, pull requests, comments - Availability: all users, live now No separate app or upload API is needed, the flag handles it inside gh itself.

• 
  lifestep.io (@Dragon_limchae) reported 44 minutes ago

  @cursor_ai the sandbox boundary is where i lose the most time. today my workers had network blocked at the sandbox level and reported it as "github auth failed" — i chased credentials for an hour before checking dns. once agents run on your infra, make the boundary throw one unmistakable error instead of one each tool invents.

• 
  Chris (@chriscoolstuff) reported 46 minutes ago

  @pfernan95dev For the SEO part there's one thing that I've been also doing: Ask your agent what keywords you should search for relevant to your app on answerthepublic, perplexity and google Gather all that info old fashion, by yourself - might take around 2 hours but it's worth it Plug all that info into the agent and have it give you 5 titles for 5 articles Make it write those articles - maybe use nosoopai github or edit them manually so they seem more human like Connect the agent to google console After 1 month tell the agent to review the results If no article took off you can wait one more month or put up 5 more After the next month check what worked and double down on that

• 
  Tejas Dinkar (blue tick here) (@tdinkar) reported 47 minutes ago

  Hey - Is @GitHubIndia @github payments down for anyone else? Can't enter a card number or do anything, no errors, no action. Support ticket been sitting around for 2 days.

• 
  Conor Bronsdon (@ConorBronsdon) reported 48 minutes ago

  .@SlackHQ is building for multiplayer AI: tag a coding agent into a Slack conversation and it spins up a coding channel: everyone in that convo gets a live dev environment, diffs post as artifacts, and the channel winds down when the task is done. With the launch of Slack Code, Claudeforce, their MCP and more, Slack is putting Agents in the channels where teams already work, not simply in a private chat with one person. Their position is that the whole team should be able to watch, steer, and review what the agent does. Slack Chief Product Officer Jaime DeLanghe joined me on @chain_ofthought to explain how Slack is building a team AI environment, what happens mechanically when a code channel is created, why Anthropic pushes so much of its code through Slack, how the channel permission model became the agent context model, and what has to change in engineering culture when the whole team is steering one agent. I think Slack is the platform best positioned to become the context harness where enterprise agents run: agents that see what the team discusses, permissions that already exist, and a cultural opportunity hiding inside every multiplayer coding session. Chapters: (0:00) Slack as an IDE and a GitHub for your team (0:29) Who is Jaime DeLanghe (1:21) The reaction to the Slack Code launch (5:30) Why coding agents belong in a context-rich environment (6:08) Engineers now manage agents, not copy-paste code (7:24) The permission model: agents get the channel's context (11:44) What happens when a code channel is created (15:00) Why Anthropic pushes so much code through Slack (19:14) Steering one agent with many people: culture decides (24:54) Slackbot, skills, and MCPs: agents go where the work is (30:53) The solo terminal vs. agents in social spaces (33:53) Org charts and ownership when agents join the team (39:33) Learning loops and shared agent memory (42:39) Citations, recency, and accidental knowledge management (46:50) Context bloat and multi-pass search for agents (50:01) How Jaime uses Slackbot as CPO (52:38) Slack Code is V1 of multiplayer AI

• 
  Dr Milan Milanović (@milan_milanovic) reported 51 minutes ago

  How Cursor made *** scalable The thing with *** is that it never was designed to be scalable. Your repo lives on the disk, and *** client expect every read to be consistent. This was a problem on GitHub, where shared filesystems and replicated storage failed before 2013. The GitHub built 𝗦𝗽𝗼𝗸𝗲𝘀, and it became the industry standard. This means that every repo is stored as three full copies on three servers, and every push runs a vote (three phase commit). A majority of servers must confirm before it exists. This works, but with high cost, because every push is slow as the slowest server. When we add new servers, it makes it even slower. Now Cursor took some opposite direction with 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝘂𝗶𝘁𝘆. The repo history is now written as a log in S3, and this is only source of truth. Any push counts only if it is located in the log. The servers don't need to keep anything important, they are just cache. Any server can take a push, and idle repos are dropped from disk and rebuilt from the log when it is needed. This resulted in 120 pushes per second on standard S3, and over 300 on S3 Express. Their tests have shown that read capacity grew linearly up to 100 replicas. Why is this important now? Because of AI agents mostly. We now have more code, PRs, CI runs and many small repos. All of these repos would need three full copies in the old model. This means that we achieve scale by removing parts, not adding them.

• 
  mrgadget (@mrgadgetstudio) reported 52 minutes ago

  @EzekielCrrypt I still deploy code to github, what's problem?

• 
  ∆LΞX∆NDΞR D∆VIS (@_AlexanderDavis) reported 52 minutes ago

  @egavrilenko11 @bot I had to update my fine grain token for GitHub and now when it tries to authenticate the plugin, I'm getting the error: GitHub didn't provide a sign-in link My bot said: Known host bug, not you. The GitHub Authenticate button tries OAuth GitHub does not support. Checking whether a PAT on the plugin page is the working path. That's a Grok Bot host bug, still open: cursor/plugins#251. GitHub's connector is PAT-only. The Authenticate button tries OAuth GitHub does not support, so you get "didn't provide a sign-in link." Don't keep hitting it. But it worked before I updated my fine grain token...

• 
  Gregor (@bygregorr) reported 58 minutes ago

  @dopabees ngl the broken wrist is the only github metric that's ever made me believe a commit history

• 
  Phanindra Malladi (@malladiphani) reported 58 minutes ago

  Lesson from running the factory: always fix the post-purchase experience BEFORE driving traffic. Receipts, upsells, GitHub links - all must be solid first. Social comes after the house is in order.