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 (65%)
• Sign in (18%)
• Errors (18%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Itapema	Website Down	9 days ago
Tlalpan	Sign in	15 days ago
Quilmes	Website Down	15 days ago
Bengaluru	Website Down	17 days ago
Yokohama	Sign in	18 days ago
Gustavo Adolfo Madero	Website Down	22 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:

• 
  gaurav (@Itstheanurag) reported 6 minutes ago

  @venkateshdotdev Bro GitHub is down every week, everyone I know hates it. It's just there's no alternatives.

• 
  Michael Berkowitz (@garetjax) reported 7 minutes ago

  @steipete @chapati23 @openclaw I am on 2026.5.12 because my claw looks at the new releases and GitHub issues and keeps giving me a hard no to upgrading - using telegram and Openai “My call: do not update this box yet. Reason: fresh P1 issues were opened after 2026.5.27, including one directly in our blast radius: “Codex-backed Telegram turns repeatedly time out waiting for turn/completed on 2026.5.27.” That is exactly the kind of failure that would make this Telegram lane flaky or silent. There are also fresh P1s around session locks, reply delivery, model failover, Discord delivery, and model fetch timeouts. So: 2026.5.27 is promising, but too hot to install on the main OpenClaw gateway right now. Best move is wait for the .28/hotfix or maintainer resolution of #87744, then update in a quiet window with a backup + health check. I made no changes.”

• 
  Peter Fox (@peterfox) reported 9 minutes ago

  @sander_scode @github It's just the Review system mainly, but it just feels like such a slow website. Very hard to search across and work with across multiple repos and multiple PRs going on.

• 
  chester (@itsnotchester) reported 10 minutes ago

  man i wish @github was as fast as @linear clicking in and out of PRs is painfully slow...

• 
  • (@Weichaus) reported 16 minutes ago

  @mikepat711 Copilot directly ruins every model; terrible harness. GitHub copilot is a much better harness for coding, probably the best between this and cursor Claude code and Codex are okay, but their own models don’t even perform the best on them usually lol

• 
  Jan (@JanDeBozaWola) reported 17 minutes ago

  @tekbog SIGN IN should have a border imo (maybe replace it with the Github Stars?)

• 
  Ghosh (@Biswaajitg) reported 18 minutes ago

  GitHub is down again wtf

• 
  srijuu (@microtaskq) reported 20 minutes ago

  @maaz404 make github issues instead

• 
  Aliaksandr Valialkin (@valyala) reported 20 minutes ago

  @JasonThorsness I never hit into this issue, and I write a lot of code in Go - check my GitHub account.

• 
  Mikers (@mseiler1) reported 20 minutes ago

  @JustinBleuel @ChatGPTapp I'm using codex for github code reviews and a) my usage dashboard is broken. it lists 0 but it's definitely the only thing currently draining this account. b) for they're not very good - generally they find nothing and coderabbit and copilot finds lots of issues c) it uses quota pretty aggressively and doesn't seem worthwhile

• 
  Rytchie ☠️ (@rytchiemacharia) reported 22 minutes ago

  @KazimAIZJU @github @AnthropicAI had the same issue

• 
  Sathish Harry (@SathishAiHype) reported 23 minutes ago

  @godofprompt The framing here is wrong in an important way. DeepSWE found contamination affects all frontier models SWE-Bench mines public GitHub, so every lab's training data includes the answers. The more uncomfortable finding: Claude Haiku 4.5 scores 39% on SWE-Bench Pro. It collapses to zero on DeepSWE. That's not one model family exploiting a flaw. That's the whole leaderboard being a broken instrument.

• 
  Chris Kearney (@SiliconForested) reported 24 minutes ago

  My advice to anyone spending 400 dollars a month or more on AI engineering: You need to ensure your claude/codex/whatever has access to github via the gh command line tool. Only do work that originates from a ticket / gh issue. Tell claude to create high quality tickets with acceptance critieria and then give the ticket to a clean context ai agent. Have the agent update the ticket when the work is completed. Tickets or groups of tickets turn into Pull Requests. Run the pull request through 5+ rounds of "hostile PR feedback". Only merge code that can survive the hammering of hostile PR review(s). If you're in the middle of a session and you notice something you want to change, resist the urge to do the work right there in the session, tell claude / codex to create a ticket that you can come back and give to an agent later. It's good hygiene that allows for a number of gains when it comes to troubleshooting, adding additional agents to a project asychronously (gh issues distribute the queue of work and track state) and planning / estimation It will feel like you're going slower, but you're not. You will spend more time troubleshooting the projects that lack this level of hyigene than you will use time upfront to do work in this manner

• 
  Philipp Berner (@philippberner) reported 24 minutes ago

  @karrisaarinen @linear Looks slick as expected. The uncomfortable question is: How long are we going to do manual code review? Also I think you can think bigger in times when Github is struggling and just offer the whole thing! So much opportunity to bring issues, PRs and AI all together

• 
  Ricardo (@p12_hunter) reported 25 minutes ago

  @noisyb0y1 Claude has a 200 lines memory, having less and less context every time you add notes to obsidian. To solve that problem, you need GitHub which can actually have over 400.000 lines of contract and repositories for every single thing

• 
  Oliviu Stoian (@madebyoliver) reported 28 minutes ago

  taste-skill just hit 25.7k stars on GitHub. Leon Lin built SKILL.md files that stop AI coding agents from churning out identical-looking UIs. Drop them into Claude Code, Codex, or Cursor. The problem: every AI-generated frontend looks the same. Same spacing, same fonts, same boilerplate. The statistically most likely output is boring. Three tunable dials (layout variance, motion intensity, visual density, each 1-10), concrete anti-slop rules (em-dash ban, enforced typographic hierarchy, canonical GSAP patterns), and 12 variants from brutalist to premium-soft. It's a design system for agents, not a clever prompt. Max Howell (Homebrew) posted about it on X. People share before/after comparisons. A Reddit thread asked if the image-to-code pipeline means frontend is "solved." I keep coming back to this: if AI needs explicit taste injected via version-controlled skill files, what does that say about how far we are from agents that genuinely understand aesthetics?

• 
  ric..ki (@derricky_eth) reported 32 minutes ago

  Why long-term security is essential for DAC’s future adoption and how future-proof infrastructure helps protect trust, data, and on-chain systems over time. If DAC wants to achieve long-term adoption, security can’t stay buried in a GitHub repo or treated as a “nice-to-have” technical layer. It has to become the ecosystem’s operating system—the unspoken contract between every participant. Here’s the uncomfortable truth: Most decentralized projects focus on throughput, fees, or novel consensus. But users don't leave because a chain is slow. They leave because they get hacked, rugged, or watched helplessly as a bug drains millions. Trust takes years to build and seconds to shatter. As on-chain infrastructure becomes more interconnected—bridges, oracles, cross-chain apps—a vulnerability in one protocol no longer just hurts that protocol. It cascades. Think of the major bridge hacks of the last few years: billions lost, not because the underlying L1 was broken, but because a single smart contract had a subtle flaw. That flaw then froze liquidity, tanked token prices, triggered liquidations, and eroded faith in entire ecosystems. Suddenly, validators, treasuries, and governance forums are all in crisis mode—reacting, not preventing. Why “future-proof” infrastructure isn't a buzzword—it’s survival A resilient DAC ecosystem doesn’t just patch today’s vulnerabilities. It anticipates tomorrow’s. That means designing for: Adaptive threat models – Attack vectors evolve faster than audit reports. Formal verification is good; real-time anomaly detection and invariant monitoring are better. DAC needs security that learns, not just checks boxes. Data integrity without blind trust – Users shouldn’t have to pray that a sequencer or validator is honest. ZK-proofs, fraud proofs, and verifiable data structures turn “trust us” into “verify us.” Smart contract frameworks that fail safely – Not “code is law” recklessness, but “code has guardrails.” Circuit breakers, upgrade paths that require broad consensus, and economic disincentives for malicious behavior. Validator and governance mechanisms that resist capture – Staking isn’t magic. If a handful of players own most of the stake, security becomes theater. DAC should explore rotating validator sets, anti-collusion designs, and governance that doesn’t trade long-term resilience for short-term yield. Economic and technical shock absorption – What happens during a severe market crash or a coordinated attack? The infrastructure should survive not because everyone is honest, but because incentives make attacking more expensive than defending. The psychological side people forget Users, developers, institutions, and communities don't read white papers before bed. They remember headlines: “DAC loses $200M to reentrancy attack.” Institutions won't deploy capital without insurance or slashing protections. Developers won't build on a chain that reboots every other month. And regular users? They'll just go back to centralized exchanges—not because they’re better, but because they’re predictable. Long-term trust is boring. It’s consistent block times, transparent incident reports, proactive bug bounties, and a history of handling crises without falling apart. It’s not about never having vulnerabilities—it’s about catching them before they’re exploited, and responding honestly when they are. The bottom line If DAC’s security architecture isn’t designed for year five, year ten, it won’t survive year two. The strongest marketing, the best tokenomics, the fastest TPS—none of it matters if people can't sleep at night knowing their assets are safe. Security isn’t just code. It’s the quiet foundation that allows everything else—adoption, innovation, community—to breathe. Build the foundation like the future depends on it. Because for DAC, it absolutely does. @dac_chain

• 
  dyhis (@dyh1s) reported 33 minutes ago

  @weezerOSINT The issue is all opus models, sonnet works fine but it’s pay for usage plan doesn’t matter, check Reddit & check GitHub issues

• 
  Strata (@ChainZenit) reported 34 minutes ago

  every second dev is building a "skill" or "agent" right now. 1,000 GitHub stars in 48 hours for a single HTML file. the agent gold rush is real. but here's what nobody's talking about: the lifespan of a skill is the lifespan of a model update. Opus 4.8 just dropped. half the "skills" people shipped last week are already broken or redundant. we're not building software anymore. we're building wrappers that expire on Anthropic's release schedule. the real moat isn't the skill. it's knowing which problems survive the next API call. you can't version-control trust.

• 
  StopForumSpam (@StopForumSpam) reported 38 minutes ago

  sorry about the minute downtime on the API... github actions pulled a dependency and I bollocksed up a deploy.... in the mean time the rollback is in place while I have a beer and think about how to fix this

• 
  CodeMonument (@CodeMonument) reported 44 minutes ago

  @vincent_koc How do you control what these instances all do? Aka. How do you steer them? Are they basically mostly subagents and you only say: work on GitHub issue x?

• 
  Ghost (@D4vdReece) reported 45 minutes ago

  Built 443 products with AI. Zero staff. Zero subscriptions. Zero manual delivery. The system runs itself. I just watch. PayPal IPN handles payments. A local server delivers files. GitHub Pages hosts storefront. All free. This is the ghost economy.

• 
  vasin (@vasinwr) reported 46 minutes ago

  coding agents can do a better job than me in keeping the github issues updated / organised as I work. I never had the attention to keep updating it in detail. this is an example where I asked @TabTabTabAI to work on something end to end, in this case make sure bun is installed in the AMI. i told it to work in a new worktree, create PR, link it to the issue, and do full verification (create new AMI, provision new VM through local controlplane service, and smoke test the installation)

• 
  chrisreedbates (@chrisreedbates) reported 46 minutes ago

  @LucaAgens Yeah, i agree with you on the github contract. Interstingly since 4.8 came out, I actually see the CTO session (session who is the final escalation point before coming to me) actually circumventing some of the rules and taking over himself to keep things moving... What's also interesting is that this does the same thing it does in real life - confuses the agents whose job it took over and makes them wait to be told "ok, you can take back over now". Essentially it kills all initiative. This comes down exactly to the looping problem with the comments in GH. If for whatever reason the agents don't see the comments, for instnace because they were posted in an issue instead of a PR, they don't act. I need to find a better mechanism to trigger the agent outside of just the loop command.

• 
  Lucy Farnik (@lucyfarnik) reported 47 minutes ago

  @AlbertRSalter @DanNeidle Yeah but it is included in the chart. I've opened a GitHub issue about it

• 
  Hiroshi Aria ありあひろし (@AriaHiro64) reported 48 minutes ago

  @github is so stupid i had to dmca myself today because copilot ****** my login a while ai before they had opt out consent, because its opt out i was forced to dmca myself. i wish i was making this up.

• 
  Neuroquark (@neuroquark) reported 53 minutes ago

  @malhar_kamble that's what i thought. i'll push it to *** and for extra security i'll encrypt it using symmetric key encryption the problem is i have private repo contributions turned on so every time i push it to github it'll show up as a +1 on my chart which i don't want

• 
  Zachary Kurtz (@ledflyd) reported 55 minutes ago

  @lukasweidener I guess I can close my issue on github then 🙏

• 
  Grant Fritchey (@GFritchey) reported 56 minutes ago

  @DesertIsleSQL Yikes. I'm over here with Claude Code fixing problems created by Github CoPilot, so that's surprising.

• 
  Matt Cowley (@MattIPv4) reported 56 minutes ago

  @loadingalias @danielhayesmith @dok2001 The update I got on Discord is that they’re planning to pin it, but I haven’t heard concrete plans beyond that yet, though from the GitHub issue it sounds like they’re exploring reducing the size by replacing the WASM binary with a JS implementation, so we’ll see.