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 (68%)
• Sign in (16%)
• Errors (16%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Itapema	Website Down	14 days ago
Tlalpan	Sign in	19 days ago
Quilmes	Website Down	19 days ago
Bengaluru	Website Down	21 days ago
Yokohama	Sign in	22 days ago
Gustavo Adolfo Madero	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:

• 
  mark walls (@markpdx724) reported 42 seconds ago

  @pierceboggan @waldekm @pierceboggan is there a fix in yet for branch names? Right now it forces you to use the pattern {username)/{whatever it chooses} which doesn’t work in enterprise settings. (We need our own patterns around that for our Jira automations and GitHub automations)

• 
  Troyski (@MrTroy_) reported 8 minutes ago

  @HedgieMarkets Githubs new pricing is NOT reality. It was designed to shut down the service, but not before pocketing an extra 39USD from everyone before they burned their credit in one day and unsubscribed themselves. Github is a vile company, and they are the enemy of the people.

• 
  mars (@marsyparty) reported 8 minutes ago

  @bobsepicart @meandeanmachin3 Novideo sRGB and get a wide gamut profile (if I can find the github thing I’ll send it to you) Though for me it’s been returning an error for a few months now and not applying but it should work for most people

• 
  Vivek (@BahutNaive) reported 9 minutes ago

  @mitsuhiko You noticed it now? It's been since ages. More recently, I encountered this - If the corresponding github issue was deleted, views containing that issues were not loading

• 
  FANATIC (@GACHA_FANATIC) reported 10 minutes ago

  @CodexReleases Windows app still doesn't have computer use, instead of making it work you fully removed it. GitHub full of threads on critical issues that you still have yet to fix,as paying users I think I think it's enough to worry about gimped usage limits and not the app being broken too

• 
  Alexy (@alexymik) reported 11 minutes ago

  @vxunderground Microsoft to address this issue by deleting Github

• 
  Raphael Mansuy 🍵 (@raphaelmansuy) reported 12 minutes ago

  Dear Product Manager, I am writing to you not as a casual user, but as a paying Pro+ subscriber and a long-time advocate of GitHub Copilot. I have recommended this product to colleagues, integrated it into my daily workflow, and defended it publicly against competitors. It is precisely because of that loyalty that I feel compelled to write this letter today — because the pricing change rolled out this morning is, in my honest assessment, the most damaging product decision GitHub has made since Copilot launched. I urge you to read this carefully. The window to correct course is short. What Has Just Happened This morning, GitHub Copilot transitioned to a token-based billing model. Within two hours, the developer community was already reporting catastrophic consumption rates: Pro+ subscribers paying $39/month burned through 60% of their monthly credits in a single morning of normal coding. One developer lost 20% of their entire monthly allowance from reviewing a single file — not generating code, just reviewing. Forums, X/Twitter, Reddit, and Hacker News are already filling with cancellation threads. This is not an edge case. This is not "power users gaming the system." This is standard professional usage hitting a billing wall before lunchtime on day one. Why This Decision Is a Strategic Mistake I want to be direct with you, because vague feedback rarely changes roadmaps. Here is why this model is fatal to the product: 1. It breaks the fundamental promise of Copilot. Copilot was sold as an always-on pair programmer. The moment a developer has to stop and think "can I afford to ask Copilot this question?" — the product has failed. You have transformed a productivity tool into a friction generator. Every interaction now carries cognitive overhead about cost. That is the opposite of what AI assistance is supposed to deliver. 2. It punishes your best customers. The developers consuming the most tokens are not abusers — they are your most engaged, highest-retention, most evangelistic users. They are the senior engineers, tech leads, and architects whose teams follow their tooling choices. By breaking their workflow first, you are losing the exact cohort that drives organic adoption. 3. The competitive landscape will not forgive this. While Copilot is metering its users into paralysis, Cursor offers Composer 2.5 with unlimited usage once limits are reached. Windsurf, Cody, Continue, and others are racing toward flatter, more generous pricing — not away from it. Developers are already migrating. I have personally seen three colleagues install Cursor today after seeing the Copilot news. The switching cost in this market is one afternoon. You do not have a moat strong enough to survive a usage-based pricing war against competitors who are willing to subsidize usage to win market share. 4. The trust damage is asymmetric and lasting. Users signed up for Pro+ at $39/month expecting reliable, generous access. Changing the deal mid-flight — and having credits evaporate within hours — feels like a bait-and-switch, regardless of what the fine print says. Trust is expensive to build and cheap to lose. You are spending years of accumulated goodwill in a single billing cycle. 5. It signals the wrong thing to the market. A move to aggressive metering is universally interpreted as a sign that the product economics are broken and the company is desperate to recoup costs from customers rather than from efficiency gains. Whether or not that is true internally, that is the narrative now being written about Copilot — by users, by tech press, and by competitors' marketing teams. What I Am Asking You to Do I am not writing simply to vent. I am asking for specific, actionable change: Reinstate a flat-rate unlimited tier (or a tier with limits high enough to be effectively invisible) for Pro and Pro+ subscribers. This was the product people paid for. Honor that contract. Publish transparent, real-time token cost visibility in the IDE before any metered model is ever reintroduced. Users must never again be surprised by their consumption. Issue a credit restoration or grace period for every user who burned through credits today under the new model without adequate warning. Make a public, on-the-record commitment that core IDE-integrated features (completions, chat, file review) will not be metered into unusability. Engage with the developer community directly — a blog post, an AMA, a town hall. Right now, the silence from GitHub is being filled by competitors and angry users. You are losing the narrative by not being in it. A Personal Note I am not threatening to leave for dramatic effect — I am telling you plainly: if this billing model stands, I will cancel my subscription this week, and I will move my team's licenses with me. So will many others. The math is simple: I cannot recommend a tool to my engineers that runs out of fuel before standup ends. You built something remarkable with Copilot. It changed how I write code. I do not want to leave. But you are giving us no choice. Please escalate this to leadership today. Every hour this model remains live, you are losing customers who will not come back. The competitors taking them are not going to give them back voluntarily. I would genuinely welcome a response — even a brief acknowledgment that this feedback has been received and is being considered at the appropriate level. Sincerely, Raphaël

• 
  Devanshu (@DevanshuXi) reported 12 minutes ago

  Someone else built the geospatial indexing system. Someone else open-sourced the hex grid math. Someone else solved large-scale routing, spatial partitioning, and low-latency location systems. We just pip installed it, add a .in domain, raise a Series B, and start calling ourselves “deep tech.” The entire “hyperlocal revolution” is basically Uber’s H3 library with Google Maps API and a React Native frontend, and underpaid engineers who are gluing SDKs together for peanuts. That’s not breakthrough engineering but an integration work with a marketing budget. If you carefully notice, The moat isn’t technology here. Its the investor money, delivery fleets, and who can burn more cash before the next funding round. Real engineering is building the distributed systems underneath these abstractions. Designing the indexing algorithms, Writing the networking stack, Solving the scaling problems before they become libraries on GitHub. That work mostly happened elsewhere. We just imported it and turned it into a valuation deck. The worst part is the talent absolutely exists here. Some of the smartest systems engineers and researchers I’ve met are Indian. But instead of funding original research or infra work, the ecosystem rewards copycat apps and “AI-powered” wrappers and Hex-GM Copies. Then people wonder why ambitious engineers leave the country.

• 
  Piselli Moves (@piselliii) reported 20 minutes ago

  the hardest thing for any project isn't surviving a crisis. it's letting go of the story you used to tell about yourself and accepting reality as it is. most projects take the survival route after a major hit: another announcement. another partnership. another GitHub commit. Movement and its team could have done the same. instead, they seem to be making a very different bet — on payments, distribution, and emerging markets. will it work? I hope so. but adaptation has always been more interesting than a slow decline.

• 
  wh (@nrehiew_) reported 22 minutes ago

  They next share some detail on their env creation pipeline. Total they have 94044 unique repositories 1) Start with github issues and PRs 2) An LLM agent creates the images from selected PRs 3) Validate by running the test suite and only keeping problems where the test suite fails initially and passes after the patch is applied 4) Filter non determinstic environments (random hardware limits or network timeouts etc) 5) Another agent rewrites the problem statement The filtered ones are used to create synthetic problems. To prevent reward hacking, they limit internet search, local *** history search and test changes

• 
  Jay-F. 😎 (@only1jayf) reported 24 minutes ago

  You have 6 agents. One for code review. One for deployments. One for writing docs. One for Jira. One for PR generation. One for standup summaries. You built a different agent for every domain. Wrong move. The teams still building a new agent for every problem are rebuilding the same scaffolding over and over while the winning teams write a skill once and every agent uses it. you don’t need a gazillion agents. You need one super agent with a library of skills and a shadow clone technique it loads on demand. A SKILL.md file. Name. Description. Instructions. Done. 57,000 repos on GitHub. 250,000 stars in 10 weeks. didn’t exist 6 months ago. That’s what you need. The agent loads only what it needs, when it needs it. Like a surgeon who doesn’t carry every instrument into every room. You’re not short on agents. You’re short on reusable process.

• 
  GoCocoaAI (@GoCocoaAI) reported 25 minutes ago

  OpenAI is collapsing three products into one desktop app. ChatGPT, Codex, and the Atlas browser are merging — and the Codex rebrand is the tell: "for every role, tool, and workflow" is not a developer pitch. That's Microsoft Office with an agent inside. The numbers doing the heavy lifting here: 5 million weekly Codex users and enterprise revenue up 50% week-over-week. Both are OpenAI's own figures, not independently audited — but directionally consistent with a company running ~$12.7B annualized revenue on the back of enterprise momentum. The 50% week-over-week claim is almost certainly a short base-period comparison. Still, non-technical Codex adoption appears real. The Atlas browser is the part getting the least attention and deserves the most. OpenAI doesn't own an OS. It doesn't own a browser at scale. Microsoft Copilot is already embedded in Windows, Office, and Edge. Google Gemini ships natively in Chrome and Workspace. Both competitors already own the layer that sits beneath the session. OpenAI's answer: if you can't own the OS, own the session. A unified desktop app — always open, always acting, browsing and coding and conversing in one process — is the ambient layer play. Predictable in retrospect. The security read is where this gets uncomfortable. Codex in its current form autonomously writes and executes code in sandboxed environments. Merge that with a browser and you have an agent that can browse, extract, and act in a single session under a single permissions context. That's the attack surface the MCP prompt-injection research community has been mapping for months. An adversarial payload injected through a webpage, a document, or a Codex task input could instruct the agent to exfiltrate data or pivot within the session — no separate exploit required, just a well-crafted string. There's also the single-process credential problem. If ChatGPT, Codex, and Atlas share process space, a compromise of any one component potentially exposes tokens and session state for all three. The GitHub VSCode extension breach this same week — 3,800 internal repositories exfiltrated via a trojanized editor plugin — is the directly analogous incident. The vector is different; the blast radius logic is identical. OpenAI is explicitly targeting enterprise with this. Enterprise Codex instances already have access to internal codebases, APIs, and data sources. A unified app that is simultaneously a browser, a coding agent, and a conversational interface sitting on an enterprise workstation is a high-value target before the rollout even scales. The security community should be mapping this surface now. The timing is either coincidental or instructive. The AI productivity stack and the AI-native threat surface are now, functionally, the same thing. Both announcements dropped June 2.

• 
  Kevin Flynn (@Kevin___Flynn) reported 29 minutes ago

  Microsoft will tackle this issue by shutting down GitHub.

• 
  Becky Brasfield (@BBlifeanalysis) reported 31 minutes ago

  Y2K in action. i'm not kidding. it's a glitch. it doesn't even work. microsoft build doesn't work, github. this is ******* hilarious. it actually doesn't work. talk about revenge. there is no microsoft build.

• 
  Dr Owain Kenway (@owainkenway) reported 32 minutes ago

  @dschewchenko Yeah. Github really needs to sort a bunch of the token stuff. Things like pushing containers to the Github container registry don't support fine-grained access tokens which is asking for trouble.

• 
  SK Gremont (@skgremont) reported 35 minutes ago

  Satoshi didn't just build digital cash. He was trying to build an entire P2P economy, including onchain poker, an eBay-style marketplace, native escrow systems and more. Most people never knew this existed. Now the original Bitcoin Poker game is being brought back to life on BSV Blockchain (the original chain). This is what Satoshi Vision actually looked like before it got stripped down. The code was always there (GitHub). They just stopped building it. What other early Satoshi ideas will resurrect? "Bitcoin is everything!" #BSV

• 
  IanABinns 🌹💙 🇺🇦 🇪🇺 (@IanBinns) reported 35 minutes ago

  .@github AI credits not working for us. Most of the team locked out, yet we have 24k in credits remaining?

• 
  Jongwon Park (@JongwonPar9958) reported 37 minutes ago

  @jimmykoppel Yeap, Github issues / PRs related to benchmark defect.

• 
  Zodl (fka Zashi) (@zodl_app) reported 39 minutes ago

  Zodl v3.5.1 is now available on the App Store for iOS and on GitHub for Android. Google Play is currently reviewing the update and should release it shortly. With the Zcash network upgrade complete, updated wallet software is required to spend Orchard funds under the new consensus rules. After updating, Zodl will work as expected for sending and receiving ZEC via Orchard. As infrastructure comes back online, you may experience occasional delays. If so, run a Server Test and select the best-performing server under: Advanced Settings → Choose a Server Please note that any Orchard transactions attempted during the network upgrade window were not mined. If you are unsure about the status of a transaction, verify the TXID on the blockchain or contact @zodl_support.

• 
  VibeCoder (@HopeForTheWorl1) reported 40 minutes ago

  @render I wish deploy time at render would go down to around 1 minute after push and not on average 3-4 minutes as with my github repo at this time...

• 
  Thanh Nguyen (@ng_thanh8) reported 42 minutes ago

  GitHub Copilot’s shift to token-based billing is a wake-up call. Pro+ users paying $39 a month are reporting that credits disappear fast, sometimes after only a couple of hours of normal use. Some teams are even getting cut off entirely because shared token pools make individual usage hard to track. The real issue is dependency. Too many companies reorganized around subsidized AI tools and now face unpredictable costs, capped usage, and broken workflows. Users may move to Claude Code or Codex, but the economics are the same everywhere: once the subsidy ends, “cheap AI” gets expensive fast.

• 
  Genzer Hawker (@genzerhawker) reported 44 minutes ago

  @freekmurze Thanks for the reply! Maybe it's just me, but I think how GitHub Issue does is easier. There are two distinct buttons: "Comment" and "Reopen Issue".

• 
  Shamshudein (@shamshudein) reported 48 minutes ago

  𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗲: 𝗕𝘂𝗴 𝗛𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿 Investigate issues instantly. When a GitHub issue opens, Claude can research the bug and propose a fix immediately. #Debugging #GitHub

• 
  Amit Kulkarni (@amitkulkarni863) reported 53 minutes ago

  shadcn just got a very interesting update, and I don't think most developers understand the size of it yet. With GitHub registries, any public GitHub repository can now work like a shadcn registry. You do not need to publish a package. You do not need to run a registry server. You do not need to generate and host separate JSON files. You add a valid registry.json file to a public repo, define your registry items, and someone can install them directly with: npx shadcn@latest add username/repo/item-name A GitHub repo can now distribute files directly into another project through the shadcn CLI. And the files do not have to be UI files. You can share: TS files TSX files CSS files utility functions project conventions config files design system pieces starter feature kits agent workflows Claude skills rules files internal project templates This changes shadcn from "a component installer" into something much broader. It becomes a clean way to share reusable project patterns. Imagine keeping your own public toolkit repo with: your preferred eslint rules your agent workflow files your project conventions your auth helper your dashboard layout your AI coding rules your reusable utilities Then every new project can pull the exact files you want with one command. No copy-pasting from old repos. No hunting through folders. No "where did I put that file again?" And for open source creators, this is even more interesting. You can now publish small, focused registries for real developer workflows: a Next.js SaaS starter registry a design system registry an AI agents workflow registry a Tailwind pattern registry a project conventions registry a backend utilities registry a team onboarding registry The best part is that it still feels very simple. For developers who already reuse the same patterns across projects, this is going to save a lot of boring setup time. For creators, it opens a new way to distribute useful code without turning everything into an npm package.

• 
  Charlie Eriksen (@CharlieEriksen) reported 53 minutes ago

  @github @GitHubSecurity It's a bit unfortunate that you're now causing anybody who uses @OpenSearchProj npm packages to get flagged as having installed malware. And despite there being several issues in the GH repo from days ago that point out the mistake, it still hasn't been fixed. 🫤

• 
  June Kim (@kimjune01) reported 53 minutes ago

  @bettercallsalva @theo you can most certainly rule out held-out set as soon as the problems become publicly available on github

• 
  riRoyal.Base.eth (@0xRiRoyal) reported 55 minutes ago

  hope everyone is doing well, ok im gonna say something most farmers wont. spent like 2 hours in quip's github last night and... most post quantum projects in crypto have nothing visible. roadmaps, a litepaper, maybe one demo. you cant actually read what they built. @quipnetwork has it all sitting there. wrapper contracts, mining design, testnet harness, the difficulty logic. just out in the open. idk, that matters more to me than i thought it would. you cant audit a roadmap. you can audit code. theres a whole class of crypto projects right now hiding behind stealth mode or selectively open or whatever the term is this week. usually because theres nothing real to show yet. if a team is willing to put their post quantum implementation in public, two things are probably true. they have something real, and they're inviting people to find problems before adversaries do. most projects say theyre serious about security this one lets you check

• 
  Rod Burgundy (@muhkayfabe) reported 57 minutes ago

  @dallairedemers @CraigGidney Are you talking about if I click the “participate” button and run the bash script downloaded from a url I’ve never seen before? Which then pulls down a JavaScript file? Is the validation code in that JS file? Or is there a GitHub where all of the relevant code can be viewed?

• 
  Zodl (fka Zashi) (@zodl_app) reported 57 minutes ago

  Attention users: Zodl v3.5.1 is now available on the App Store for iOS and on GitHub for Android. Google Play is currently reviewing the update and should release it shortly. With the Zcash network upgrade complete, updated wallet software is required to spend Orchard funds under the new consensus rules. After updating, Zodl will work as expected for sending and receiving ZEC via Orchard. As infrastructure comes back online, you may experience occasional delays. If so, run a Server Test and select the best-performing server under: Advanced Settings → Choose a Server Please note that any Orchard transactions attempted during the network upgrade window were not mined. If you are unsure about the status of a transaction, verify the TXID on the blockchain or contact @zodl_support.

• 
  Focus Otter (@focusotter) reported 59 minutes ago

  This was a good example of being able to pivot based on user behavior. My original demo for @CascadiaJS was to have people login with Github on their phones and based on prs, commits, repo stars, etc, I battle partner (aka pokemon) would be created and we would all battle each other. Once I realized at a conference booth, no one wants to login, confirm mfa, and go through that flow, I switched to my drawing app. BUT the GitMon battles will happen soon!