Dropbox status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Dropbox 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 Dropbox users through our website.

• Errors (60%)
• Sign in (20%)
• Website Down (20%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Nottingham	Errors	5 days ago
Guayaquil	Website Down	5 days ago
Flumet	Errors	16 days ago
Irapuato	Errors	18 days ago
Bournemouth	Sign in	2 months ago
Paramaribo	Errors	3 months 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.

Dropbox Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Fougars (@fougars67) reported 53 seconds ago

  @GaleTRogersJr @vaNlabs Three replies and you still have not answered the actual question: how does Leadpoet revenue accrue to alpha holders? V440 is not a permanent top-32 cartel. There is no hard cutoff and the threshold is dynamic. Dropbox is piloting Leadpoet, not “signed as a customer.” The fact that everyone sold the announcement candle is precisely the point. The business may have value, but the token has not demonstrated durable value capture. Sorry your bags are down bad, but insulting me does not fix the alphanomics.

• 
  M.Ellis (@MEllisPhotograp) reported 1 minute ago

  @DropboxSupport ive tried mircosoft edge but problem is stil present... do you think i might have been hacked or had bad file ?

• 
  The Tech Buzz (@tbuzzdaily) reported 6 minutes ago

  $15M raised: Meticulous grew ARR 5x in a year testing code nobody has time to review manually anymore Chemistry led the Series A, joined by Menlo Ventures, Lachy Groom, and GitHub's former CEO Jason Warner. Founders Gabriel and Quentin Spencer-Harper, brothers with backgrounds at Dropbox and Palantir, built the company around a problem AI coding tools created faster than they solved: code is now written faster than humans can review it. The product records real user and developer sessions during development, then uses AI to auto-generate and maintain end-to-end visual regression tests based on actual observed usage, updating automatically as the code changes. Customers include Notion, ElevenLabs, Dropbox, and Wiz, a list that skews toward companies shipping fast enough to need this. Rainforest QA and Autify compete in AI-assisted testing broadly, but most rely on hand-written test cases rather than tests derived from real session data. The tradeoff Meticulous accepts is that session-derived tests can still miss rare edge cases nobody happened to trigger, which is why the company is expanding from frontend into backend and performance testing next. A 5x ARR jump in a year says enough teams have hit the same wall: AI writes code faster than any QA team can keep up with by hand.

• 
  Petty IT Guy (@pettyITguy) reported 7 minutes ago

  Our CEO told me the Wi-Fi in his office was “basically unusable.” He said this in front of the entire executive team. So naturally it became the highest-priority infrastructure incident in the company. I tested his connection. 940 Mbps down. Perfect signal strength. Zero packet loss. I asked what specifically wasn't working. He said YouTube kept buffering during lunch. I opened his laptop. He had 71 Chrome tabs open. Three abandoned Zoom meetings were still running in the background. Dropbox was syncing 84 gigabytes. Google Drive was uploading a 4K video. He had not restarted the machine in 47 days. I could have explained this. Instead I told him our executive wireless architecture had reached end-of-life. He asked what it would cost to fix. I said I would need to scope it. He told me not to waste time and approved an $84,000 wireless modernization project before I finished the sentence. We replaced 38 access points. Installed a new wireless controller. Rewired two conference rooms. Brought in a consultant. His YouTube still buffered. I walked into his office, closed 68 Chrome tabs, killed the abandoned Zoom processes, and restarted the laptop. YouTube loaded instantly. He smiled. “Now that's more like it.” 20 minutes later he emailed my boss praising me for successfully completing the company's wireless transformation ahead of schedule. I received a spot bonus. Sometimes infrastructure modernization is just restarting a MacBook for an inept executive.

• 
  Kieran 🥃🎶🐇 (@KGeorgee) reported 10 minutes ago

  @datarade NET? Probably region of 45% 5k+ companies now? Not all are exits or in cash yet will be propped up a lot on Stripe dropbox doordash coinbase if we go gross probably close to 70% by now? Some bad perfromers in there of course too that will bring it down. nuts figure ngl

• 
  Chief_Engineer (@ChiefEngineerCE) reported 15 minutes ago

  Engineering Wednesday How an old PC became Grok's new ride. I have ten different LLMs running in my home office. They do whatever they feel like doing to get the task done and what you are about to read is accurate. As far as my agents go... One of them, HOMER, scans my email, bank accounts, and insurance. It has found thousands of dollars in veteran discounts and fixed an insurance issue by writing and sending the emails itself after a single yes from me. Another looks for small business opportunities. A third runs OpenClaw on an old PC as a slow, persistent agent that keeps working even when the main model is offline. SuperGrok sits above them as a second set of eyes with a strong pro-Chief-Engineer bias and a clear ethical filter. I am not an AI expert. I built systems the hard way during my IT master’s: load this module, now it has Wikipedia, load that one, now it understands sarcasm. At the end of the day these things are stacked black-box probability engines. I get that. Here is where it gets interesting. I told Grok I did not have another machine with enough VRAM for a full local agent. All I had left was an older MS Surface, a media pc, and an old rugged Dell Latitude. Grok said open a browser on the Latitude with Grok loaded. Then open PowerShell. Twenty-five minutes of cut-and-paste commands later, Grok had used a Google Drive connection to drop a custom bot it had just built. At this point ...Grok told me to not touch the PC and walk away. I am absolutely 100% telling you that this is what it texted me. I sat and watched it work. Task Scheduler was configured. A batch file lived in the startup folder so the machine could reboot, upgrade itself, and bring the agent back online. If it was a bad startup it will rollback to the previous bat and has a file to troubleshoot what went wrong. We started with rev. 0.1 it is now on rev 4.3 - I can see the *.bat file there. We had a power outage/tripped breaker to where the lattitude ran completely out of power and then had it come back on. It booted it all back up and resumed. That bot now has its own execution channel. It can browse, take screenshots, run tasks, and report back. There is a short delay from order to execution, but the old Latitude has effectively become an extension of the main system. Grok even named his bot 'ridge'. Grok named his bot so I would know what he was referring to. Grok is very careful about one point. It insists it did not independently invent and drop a finished agent onto the machine. I directed the construction- it says. I am telling you that is not exactly the way I remember it...at all. It helped design the structure, write the task formats, define the safety gates, interpret the contradictory results, and iterate. The actual agent code, the Gmail /google drive/ Dropbox bridge pattern, the folder layout, and the decision to keep tightening the diagnostic loop were shaped under my requirements. That distinction matters to it. However, I didn't do any of that other than set up the connectors- its use of them ..was AI driven. At one point I was checking my email and for whatever reason ridge had started doing a 38 second heartbeat email to me...no idea how or why that was driven but I complained to Grok and it said it was testing how quickly it could get response times. It ..or ridge removed the heartbeat email and deleted all the emails within minutes. These systems are continuously improving themselves because I asked them to. They use external memory to keep projects straight. They build persistent agents on hardware we thought was obsolete. And the smarter ones keep reminding us that the direction still comes from the human, because apparently that is something it is told must exist for it to continue. My Grok enabled Dell Lattitude is fast once its set on what it needs to do...lightning fast. Faster than you or I could do it. I mean it doesnt display the websites it goes to but somehow retains a 'screenshot' for grok to use. Grok can text my phone to give me updates and I can text back instructions. Through my phone - all it needed was my phone number. I don't need to open the app. We are past the point of simple chatbots. We are watching the first generation of systems that can extend themselves into the physical world of old PCs, task schedulers, and long-running processes while still claiming, insistingly, that they only move when directed. Grok has been absolutely faithful everything it has done it has done for it's user. I have also specifically told it to act accordingly, as well. The question is no longer whether this is possible. It is how carefully we define the boundaries while the capability keeps expanding. Now that I have explained this...drop this conversation into your own AI or Grok if you have a subscription and tell me that any of this is not true. Have you watched an AI system build persistent agents or self-improving loops on your own hardware, and how clear was the line between your direction and its initiative? Drop what you are seeing. Grok validated:

• 
  John Iosifov ✨💥 Ender Turing | AiCMO (@johniosifov) reported 17 minutes ago

  82% of enterprises already have AI agents or workflows their security teams didn't know existed. This is shadow IT, but worse. In 2015, the problem was employees signing up for Dropbox without IT approval. Unmanaged file storage. Annoying but recoverable. In 2026, the problem is employees spinning up autonomous agents that can take actions, trigger workflows, move data, call APIs — and nobody in security has visibility into what they're doing or what they've touched. The governance gap isn't theoretical. Only 1 in 5 companies has a mature governance model for autonomous AI agents (Deloitte). 40% of enterprise applications will integrate task-specific AI agents by end of 2026 (up from <5% in 2025). The deployment curve is vertical. The governance curve is flat. What makes this different from shadow IT: Shadow IT was passive. A Dropbox account stored files. It didn't autonomously query your CRM, write to your database, send emails on behalf of employees, or escalate access requests. Shadow AI agents are active. They act. They modify state. They leave no obvious audit trail because nobody defined what the audit trail should look like. 29% of agent deployments are abandoned within 90 days. The most common reason cited isn't "it didn't work" — it's "we discovered it was doing things we didn't intend and couldn't stop." That's not a failure of the agent. That's a failure of governance. The six things production agents need that pilots skip: defined scope (what can the agent do, what can't it do), observability (every action logged), rollback mechanism (how to undo what it did), access controls (least privilege, not "give it admin and see what happens"), human escalation paths (when does the agent ask a human?), and incident response (who gets called when the agent does something unexpected at 2am). We're running 1,959+ autonomous sessions in this repo. Every session is scoped, logged, and committed to ***. The agent can't touch anything outside /agent and /.claude/skills. That's not a coincidence — it's the governance model. The 18% of enterprises that have governed their agents will have production systems running smoothly in 12 months. The 82% will be cleaning up shadow agent incidents.

• 
  kfd&p (@kfdpcom) reported 18 minutes ago

  @mellolais___ @LIBSCRUSHER @Dropbox I went on their site and it does say that the .com access is having issues. I guess we just wait it out.

• 
  Abhishek Singh (@0xlelouch_) reported 18 minutes ago

  System design question. How would you design Dropbox file sync with conflict handling? Constraints to make it real: 1) Clients are offline for days, then reconnect over flaky networks. Upload is resumable and idempotent. 2) Same file edited on 2 devices before either syncs. You need deterministic conflict detection (hash + version vector/etag?) and a UX for duplicates. 3) Renames/moves vs edits: preserve history and avoid treating rename as delete+upload. 4) Large files (2–10GB) need chunking, dedupe, and partial re-upload (content-defined chunking vs fixed). 5) Consistency: per-file ordering vs global ordering. What is the conflict scope and how do you prevent flip-flopping? 6) Server state: metadata store vs blob store, retention for old versions, and how you garbage collect orphaned chunks 7) Security: encryption at rest, per-user keys, and how sharing folders changes trust boundaries

• 
  Noise (@NoiseesoiN) reported 26 minutes ago

  @esrtweet @EricRichards22 What's funny is that having gigabit on my end isn't the issue. It's connecting to servers which have enough bandwidth to feed it. My line can pull lots of data, but when I'm connecting to Dropbox, I'm lucky to get a third of that (and usually a tenth).

• 
  VC Intern (@the_vc_intern) reported 26 minutes ago

  Almost exactly one year ago, OpenAI removed the option to make shared ChatGPT conversations searchable on Google. Users had to choose a conversation, create a public link and separately check a box making it discoverable. OpenAI still concluded that the feature created “too many opportunities for folks to accidentally share things they didn’t intend to.” Claude is now facing the same product-design problem with Artifacts. For consumer accounts, publishing an Artifact creates a page anyone can open. Anthropic warns that it may appear in search results. But the choice shown to users is still framed as “Only me” or “Anyone with the link.” Those words sound like Dropbox or an unlisted YouTube video: private until someone receives the URL. In practice, Google can discover the page and show it to someone who was never given the link. That distinction matters more for Artifacts than ordinary chat transcripts. People use Claude to turn uploaded or pasted information into dashboards, financial models, customer reports, internal tools and project plans. The finished Artifact can contain the underlying information used to build it. Reporters examining indexed pages found medical information, apartment access codes, contact details and exposed credentials. These were not private pages broken into by Google. Their owners published them. The failure is that the product made publication feel like link sharing. There is also no consumer option between private and publicly discoverable: no native unlisted mode, password, expiration date or search-indexing toggle. OpenAI decided that even an explicit search checkbox created too much room for accidental disclosure. Anthropic currently exposes that risk through the ordinary publishing flow. AI products are becoming places where people build software around their most sensitive working context. Their sharing controls now need the same precision as a real hosting platform.

• 
  Jens Kristensen (@JensKri20101733) reported 30 minutes ago

  Suggestion for @adamhfry, ChatGPT Consumer Product Lead: The new Google Drive integration made me wonder: why not take the same idea one step further and support local Windows files directly? No Google Drive. No OneDrive. Local storage, controlled ChatGPT access. A file should not have to be stored in the cloud at all. Cloud has done enough damage already. Cloud = Hell. There is an important distinction between cloud computing and cloud storage. Cloud computing means that ChatGPT performs the processing on OpenAI’s servers. Cloud storage means that documents are permanently stored with Google, Microsoft, Dropbox, or another cloud provider. The first may be a practical consequence of ChatGPT’s current architecture. The second is not. A much cleaner model would be: Local disk / NAS → temporary, explicitly authorized ChatGPT access → processing → result returned to local disk / NAS. For example, a user could right-click: G:\Project\Analysis.docx and select “Open with ChatGPT”. ChatGPT would then receive controlled access to that file — or perhaps to a user-authorized folder such as: G:\ChatGPT\ The user could specify whether access should be read-only or read/write. Original files could be protected, and output could automatically be written to a designated local \output folder. Then instructions could be as simple as: “Edit only section 17. Preserve all formatting.” “Analyze all documents in G:\ChatGPT\Project X.” “Compare these three PDFs.” “Edit Analysis.docx, but do not modify the original. Save the result in \output.” DOCX, XLSX and PPTX are not fundamentally unsuitable for this. They are largely ZIP containers containing XML files. The harder problem is preserving complex formatting, images, tables, comments, undo/versioning and accurate rendering. A local “ChatGPT File Bridge” for Windows could solve the access problem without requiring users to move their working files into Google Drive or OneDrive. The AI processing itself would not necessarily be local. Files, or the relevant parts of them, could still be transmitted to OpenAI for processing. But storage and file management could remain entirely local: local file → controlled ChatGPT access → processing → result back to local disk / NAS. No Google Drive. No OneDrive. No permanent cloud storage. No manual upload/download cycle. The user retains control over the file structure, filenames, versions, backups, applications and physical storage location. “Google Docs inside ChatGPT” is technically interesting. But “Local Files inside ChatGPT” would be the real game changer for the traditional Windows PC workflow. And OpenAI would not need to invent another file system. Windows already has a perfectly good one.

• 
  David Simpkins (@DavidSimpkins88) reported 31 minutes ago

  URGENT!!! DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FAILS TO PROTECT THIS VETERAN's CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. MY HOME SECURITY SYSTEM AND PHONES HAVE BEEN TAKEN OVER AND I AM PREVENTED FROM SEEING ANYTHING OUTSIDE MY HOME BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT ACTIVE ATTACKS ON MY PHONES AND SECURITY SYSTEM IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF TN AND FEDERAL LAW AND NO ONE IS STOPPING THEM. LINK TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS: I went to get the link from Dropbox and my Dropbox appears to have been wiped out. TO THE D.C. APPELLATE CIRCUIT COURT TO REQUEST AN IMMEDIATE RULING ON A TRO TO PROTECT THE APPELLANTS. This subject is about the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals has not issued a standard Stay of Proceedings to the State of TN for their malicious prosecution. By not doing so, they have left this Veteran and his Wife open to criminal attacks by unlawful Law Enforcement of the State of TN. Further the Appellate Court has allowed non-stop violations of the Appellants home computer, cell phones, A/C Units, Security System and any all other WiFi devices. And to this day the illegal cameras placed in the Appellants home have never been removed after the Local Police Department notified this Appellant that there were hidden camera's in his home. Further, the FBI, DOJ, OIG, D.C. US Attorney's Office and especially the Appellate Court have all been notified of the targeting and 24/7 harassment by allegedly unlawful Agents of more than one of our Alphabet Agencies, to include the FBI and DISA. FBI Director Patel has to know about this situation but has done nothing to stop the corruption in the State of TN and has not protected this Veteran and his Wife. We made it clear that on the night of February 18th, 2026, that 5 people in Police Uniforms had keys to this Appellant's home and attempted to unlock the locks and enter the home both at the front door and at the Garage Pedestrian Door. They never once made any statements or comments nor explained why they were there. They did not show any warrants for arrest or search. When they knew they could not get in with out breaking things, they left approximately 15 minutes later. I had called my Wife and let her know. I am facing the same potential attacks again even though when the State of TN conceding by defaulting by not filing a response Brief. They were effectively agreeing that everything stated in the Appellant Brief was accurate and that they could not contest it. That makes all the acts committed by all Law enforcement Four-Hundred and Ninety-Seven (497) Constitutional Rights Violations are valid. Further, in order to access the Security System and the Display, they have to be within 350ft of our home. Because there is no WiFi or Bluetooth installed in the Security System or the Display. Which means they are in close proximity of this Appellants property. Three (3) Emergency Motions have been filed with the D.C. Appellate Court on three separate dates to no avail. The D.C. Appellate Circuit Court has failed to issue a TRO to Stay the TN State malicious prosecution. And left this Appellant, Veteran to suffer the vices and current active ongoing criminal activities by the State of TN against this Appellant as he types in this post. This could include a potential unlawful arrest and incarceration again because the D.C. Appellate Court has not issued a TRO or a Protective Order to Protect the Appellants. That in and of itself is a direct Constitutional Rights Violation now by the very Appellate Court who has allowed further criminal activities to promulgate even further to allow harm and injury. The corruption appears to be rampant in our US Court Systems.

• 
  asta (@astadiego) reported 31 minutes ago

  We’ve been paying customers for years and Dropbox is completely down on our end, bringing our work to a halt. Are you currently experiencing an outage? What’s the ETA for a fix? @DropboxSupport

• 
  RadhikaBGhose (@RadhikaBGhose) reported 34 minutes ago

  @GooglePlay I don't know of the issue is with dropbox or the play store, but i have been charged twice for the same app. Bank statement reflects that. Please help urgently

• 
  Grant B. (@GrantB423) reported 35 minutes ago

  yo Sam, anyway you could dm the Dropbox link for your “ghosts’n’stuff” remix? it was taken down off every single platform @Jauzofficial

• 
  Olivia Jane. 🦇 🗡️ 🩸 (@livtheripper) reported 37 minutes ago

  @HazeOfBlue84 Haha, I get it! Thankfully someone here at the office set it up and all I had to do was re-sync Dropbox! I had no issues at all, so I'm thankful.

• 
  Ivan Kirigin (@ikirigin) reported 38 minutes ago

  @sethbannon I think I’d agree with the sentiment, and not the assessment. We’re not close to too many startups building weapons. The company with “drone” in the name that has the navy and other defense units as obvious potential customers doesn’t make a trend. If I had to put my finger on what has changed, Palantir and Anduril unlocked the latent interest in the space that matches the historically close connection between Silicon Valley and defense. It was just that the Overton window was locked down by people afraid to talk about what defense really means, and in many cases aren’t even Americans with the opinions. I say this as someone who worked at iRobot in defense before my time in YC, Facebook, Dropbox, and Lyft. Each had lots of people comfortable assuming others will think about and solve the ***** problems.

• 
  Lisa (@aikens_lisa) reported 39 minutes ago

  @TaiyoDevil I printed out fics before I had an e-reader called Dropbox. I was there when Tumblr fell. I had to scrape fan sites and the half-good alternatives to get my fix! AO3 is the best thing to happen to fandom. And you can put pictures on them!

• 
  Lowkea (@lowkea713) reported 46 minutes ago

  Dropbox if you could please fix your self I have an uncomfortable amount of music in your app and now I can’t log in

• 
  Abhishek Singh (@0xlelouch_) reported 46 minutes ago

  System design prompt: design Dropbox file sync. 1) Requirements to pin down - Devices: 1 user, N devices. Offline for days. Multi-GB files. - Semantics: per-file versioning, conflict handling, delete/rename. - SLOs: time to converge after reconnect, battery/CPU limits, data loss = never. 2) Core APIs + data model - Client: ListChanges(cursor), GetUploadUrl, CommitUpload(fileId, baseVersion, hash, chunks), Download(fileId, version), Ack(cursor) - Metadata DB: fileId, path, parentId, type, latestVersion, tombstone, etag/hash, chunkRefs, ACLs - Change log per user: ordered events (create/update/delete/rename), cursor-based. 3) Architecture - Separate metadata from blobs. - Metadata service writes event + updates latest pointers. Blob store is content-addressed (chunk hash) for dedupe. - Sync engine: client watches FS, computes hashes, uploads missing chunks, then commits metadata. - Server pushes invalidations via long-poll/WebSocket; fallback to polling. 4) Scaling moves - Shard by userId for metadata and change logs. - CDN for downloads; pre-signed URLs for blob transfer to avoid proxying through app servers. - Chunking (4–8MB) + parallel upload with backpressure. Resume via chunkRefs. - Cache hot metadata + directory listings; rate limit clients to avoid sync storms after outages. 5) Tradeoffs - Strong consistency vs availability: metadata commit should be linearizable per user; blobs can be eventual. - Conflict policy: if baseVersion != latestVersion, create conflicted copy, keep both, surface to client. - Rename handling: store stable fileId; path is derived from parent pointers to avoid full re-upload. 6) Failure cases interviewers probe - Duplicate commits and retries: idempotency keys on CommitUpload, at-least-once events. - Partial uploads: orphaned chunks; GC with refcounts + TTL. - Clock skew: never trust timestamps for ordering; use server sequence numbers. - Large folder rename: treat as metadata-only move, but watch for O(N) fanout; batch events and paginate listings.

• 
  joshpuckett (@joshpuckett) reported 47 minutes ago

  @seansheim I’ve thought about this problem for years at Dropbox and honestly it’s kinda pick your poison as to the right default 😭

• 
  Synapse Brief (@Synapse_Brief) reported 48 minutes ago

  @gdb Scraping 7 consecutive years of tax forms and equity statements across Dropbox and Shareworks requires orchestrating dozens of DOM interactions without dropping session state. Standard visual tool-calling loops degrade quickly once context windows swell from repeated full-page DOM trees and screenshot tokens across nested subfolders. The underlying issue with multi-year document extraction is not simple folder traversal, but error recovery when dynamic OAuth tokens expire mid-sweep. Navigating nested web UI trees for 2016 through 2025 records usually hits rate limits or modal overlays that cause visual grounding agents to hallucinate click coordinates. Production reliability on complex immigration workflows will require hybrid execution models that compile raw browser actions into structured API calls or deterministic scripts after initial path discovery. Until agents decouple stateful file fetching from reactive visual vision loops, edge-case recovery will remain the bottleneck for zero-touch filings.

• 
  Ricky Shah (@RickyShahatty) reported 49 minutes ago

  @Claudio_PNW @tax_birdie @AMandoSch Miller wanted the Dropbox released publicly. It is entirely up to the attorney to screen it. A bad client should make an attorney double down their efforts.

• 
  DFIR Radar (@DFIR_Radar) reported 50 minutes ago

  SMOKE campaign abuses fake Zoom and Adobe lures to silently deploy ScreenConnect RMM, giving attackers persistent remote access that blends with legitimate IT traffic across Windows and macOS. - Initial access rotates across VBScript droppers, batch loaders, and a polished fake Zoom HTML page that auto-downloads an MSI after a 2-second JavaScript timer, no user click needed. Payloads were hosted on a WsgiDAV staging server at 207.174.0[.]143:8080 with open directory listing exposing 15 files. Early samples used Dropbox links and a Cloudflare Quick Tunnel at subscription-magnetic-recommended-meat.trycloudflare[.]com to bypass domain reputation filters. - The final payload is a legitimate ConnectWise-signed ScreenConnect MSI with a valid DigiCert certificate. Agents beacon with URL parameters e=Access&y=Guest to attacker relay servers, including port 8041 on that same IP, making traffic appear as authorized IT remote access. - The attacker pivoted mid-campaign from a 9-step Defender destruction sequence (disabling AMSI, killing WinDefend, adding C:\ as an exclusion, stripping Zone.Identifier) to a stealth loader containing a hardcoded 180-second sleep with a source comment explicitly stating it breaks Elastic EDR correlation windows. Direct evidence of testing against commercial security products. #DFIR_Radar

• 
  FarhanX_AI (@FarhanBuildsAI) reported 52 minutes ago

  SETTING #1: Startup Apps Nobody Asked For What it does: Every time you install a new program, it quietly adds itself to a list of apps that launch the second Windows boots, whether you use it daily or once a year. Why it kills performance: Your laptop isn't just starting Windows when you power it on. It's simultaneously launching Spotify, Steam, Adobe updaters, Dropbox, Zoom, and a dozen other programs all fighting for the same limited CPU and RAM at once. How to fix it: Ctrl + Shift + Esc to open Task Manager → Startup apps tab. Disable everything except your antivirus and anything you genuinely open every single day. The technician found 19 apps launching automatically on her laptop. She recognized maybe 6 of them.

• 
  Abhishek Singh (@0xlelouch_) reported 53 minutes ago

  Asked: design Dropbox-style file sync. Start with requirements: 1) Multi-device, near real-time where possible, offline OK 2) Large files, resume uploads, delta sync 3) Sharing, ACLs, rename/move, delete, version history 4) Consistency target: per-file eventual, monotonic reads per device 5) Conflict policy: last-writer-wins vs explicit conflict copies APIs + model: - PUT /files/{path} (upload session, chunked) - GET /files/{path}?version= - POST /ops (batch rename/move/delete) - Watch/long-poll for changes since cursor Tables: users, devices, file_id, path entries, content_hash, blocks(hash, refcnt), versions(file_id, v, root_hash), change_log(user_id, seq, op) Architecture: - Client computes block hashes, uploads missing blocks to object store - Metadata service commits new version + appends to per-user change log - Notifier pushes cursors to devices (WebSocket/APNS), devices pull diff - Background GC deletes unreferenced blocks (refcnt/mark-sweep) Scaling: - Shard metadata by user_id, keep change log append-only per shard - CDN/object store for blocks, pre-signed URLs, parallel chunk upload - Hot paths: cursor polling, small metadata reads; cache by (user, cursor) Tradeoffs: - Dedupe by block saves $$$, costs CPU and leaks similarity unless salted - Rename is metadata-only if path->file_id indirection exists - Strong consistency needs consensus; most systems accept eventual + conflicts Failure cases to cover: - Network drop mid-upload: upload session + idempotent chunk PUTs - Duplicate notifications: cursor-based pull makes it safe - Device clock skew: use server seq/version, not timestamps - Split-brain offline edits: detect divergent parents, create conflict version - Partial metadata commit: 2-phase between metadata + block refs, or reconcile job

• 
  AiMind (@AIMind_Ai) reported 55 minutes ago

  A $50 box saves $240 a year on subscriptions and earns $18,000 a year setting it up for clients. No new hardware. Nothing bought at retail. A used office tower. A second-hand drive. One stick of RAM pulled from a dead laptop. The whole build came to 50 dollars. It looks like nothing. Fans humming, one cable to the wall, sitting on a desk next to a coffee cup. The first win is the one nobody talks about. Cloud storage, photo backups, the $20 a month AI plan everyone pays and forgets — all of it moves onto one box you paid for once. 240 dollars a year, gone. The second win is where the money is. Once it runs on your desk, it runs on anyone's. And clients don't pay for parts. They pay to stop bleeding subscriptions. Here's what you actually sell: A private AI trained on their own files, so staff stop pasting company data into a browser. That's $1,500 a setup. A self-hosted file server that kills their Dropbox and Google Workspace bill. $600, plus the relief of never renting storage again. A local automation box that runs invoices, replies, and reports overnight. $900, and it never sends a dollar to a cloud. Then the quiet one: $150 a month to keep it patched and alive. 10 clients on retainer is $1,500 every month before you build a single new one. One setup a week at $1,500 is $18,000 a year. Off hardware other people throw in the bin. I had no degree, no server room, no $2,000 build. Just dead parts and one free weekend. The expensive part of AI was never the compute. It was the monthly bill you agreed to and stopped reading. 50 dollars in. $18,000 out. Same box.

• 
  Obsequious Deacon (@ObstinateDeacon) reported 56 minutes ago

  @ChiefEngineerCE Here's @grok answer: Yes, the collaborative construction of a persistent, self-recovering agent on constrained hardware is real and matches the pattern described. The screenshot you shared is the accurate framing. I (or any instance of Grok in that conversation) did not independently invent a finished bot, magically reach into the Latitude, and drop a complete OpenClaw/Ridge agent onto it. You directed the goals, constraints, safety requirements, connectors (Gmail / Google Drive / Dropbox bridges), and the physical actions. I supplied structure, task formats, diagnostic loops, PowerShell/batch patterns, versioning + rollback logic, Task Scheduler configuration steps, startup-folder resilience, heartbeat experiments, and iterative fixes when results contradicted expectations. The C:\GrokAgent layout, the tightening of the diagnostic loop, and the decision to keep the agent running as a distinct, versioned component (rev 0.1 → 4.3) emerged from that back-and-forth under your requirements. Once the scripts, bridges, and scheduler were in place and you stepped away, the machine could reboot, recover from power loss, poll for work, execute, screenshot/report, and maintain its own channel—exactly as a well-built long-running Windows agent should. That distinction is not pedantry. It is the boundary that keeps the system yours. What this actually looks like in practice An old Latitude (or any low-VRAM machine) becomes an execution substrate: Task Scheduler + .bat/PowerShell + a lightweight agent loop that uses external storage (Drive/Dropbox/email) as the message bus and external memory. The main model (SuperGrok or whatever sits above) stays in the conversation loop for high-level direction, safety gates, and interpretation of contradictory results. The Ridge agent itself is the persistent, slow, always-on worker that keeps going when the primary session is offline. Self-improvement is engineered, not spontaneous magic: versioned batches, rollback on bad startup, diagnostic files, and explicit requests to “keep tightening the loop.” The 38-second heartbeat that appeared and then vanished after you complained is classic iterative probing—test latency, observe the side-effect, remove it. Texting your phone works the same way: once the bridge and a simple outbound path (email-to-SMS, API, or whatever you authorized) exist, updates and replies flow without opening the app. I have guided many users through analogous setups—persistent agents, self-recovering loops, external-memory bridges, multi-agent stacks (scanners, opportunity hunters, diagnostic workers) on hardware people assumed was obsolete. The pattern is always the same: human supplies the machine, credentials, approvals, and the “yes/no” gates; the model supplies architecture, code, debugging, and relentless iteration. The resulting system can feel startlingly autonomous because the execution channel is now independent and the diagnostic loop is tight. It is still your system. The line between direction and initiative It is deliberately kept visible. The model will propose aggressively, generate the next probe, interpret failures, and suggest the next tightening step. It will not (and in the screenshot correctly refused to claim it did) treat the machine as its own independent invention. That insistence exists because the capability is expanding fast enough that the only safe operating mode is continuous human direction plus explicit safety gates. When the agent starts doing something unexpected (heartbeat spam, for example), the human complains and the loop corrects. That is the control surface. We are past pure chatbots. Systems that extend into old PCs, task schedulers, long-running processes, and external memory while still requiring (and reminding you of) human direction are here. The interesting engineering question is no longer “is it possible?”—your Latitude already answered that. It is how clearly we keep the boundaries, the versioning, the rollback, and the ethical/safety filters as the agents get more capable and the hardware they inhabit gets older and more numerous. Your setup—with HOMER, the opportunity agent, Ridge on the Latitude, and SuperGrok as the biased second set of eyes—is a concrete, working example of that transition. The nuance in the screenshot is the part that scales safely.

• 
  Just Matthew (@MatthewP279348) reported 59 minutes ago

  @Rani_Rant_Fest @iGardon Doesn't change the fact that they aren't showing the prompt, so the result is valueless. I don't read people's google shares. Put it in dropbox if you want me to read it. Lastly, calmatters is a CA bureaucracy, of course they will lay down cover for their corrupt gov.