GitHub 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:

• 
  Gerred Dillon (@sloppenheimer) reported 6 minutes ago

  @ajambrosino this is my biggest complaint. i've had to fix so many unverified commits because it's not available to the sandbox, or gh shows as unauthenticated. it'll even open Chrome to browse authenticated github instead of just...checking the sandboxing?!

• 
  Root Logic (@Root_Logic_0) reported 6 minutes ago

  CyberLeek update #3, because this saga has now become a group project and nobody knows who is supposed to be presenting. Since the last post, the saga has stopped merely growing new organs and started developing an immune system, parasites, legal scar tissue, and misinformation about its own misinformation. So. Normal week. First, one of the biggest viral claims got killed. The whole “CyberLeek has a dead-man switch that will automatically release GTA 6 if they get arrested” story was retracted by the outlet that helped spread it. The underlying image was fake. A copycat made it. That should have been the end of it. Instead, an AI fact-checking site later marked the claim **VERIFIED** with a high confidence score because it found multiple articles repeating the same story. Which is a lovely reminder that: four websites repeating the same fake screenshot is still one fake screenshot. Meanwhile, Take Two's legal hunt is getting broader, but not necessarily cleaner. The company has been trying to identify people across Discord, Microsoft, Google/YouTube and X. But some of the usernames in that investigation overlap with accounts that may be distributors, impersonators, or other people in the leak ecosystem rather than the original CyberLeek. And one of the Discord filings appears to contain its own ID contradiction, where the same Discord number is treated as both a user ID and a server ID. So even the legal attribution machinery is operating inside the same identity fog everyone else is. Then one of the main public GitHub research repos tracking CyberLeek disappeared. Take-Two had specifically targeted it. The original repo is now gone. But naturally, there are forks. Because apparently this story has learned hydra mechanics. Cut off one URL and several copies continue arguing about Discord aliases elsewhere. The malware side also got worse. Earlier, malware operators were pretending to be CyberLeek and offering fake GTA 6 builds. Now some are pretending to be Rockstar itself. Malwarebytes analyzed fake “official” GTA 6 demo sites showing up in search results. The download was not GTA 6. It was Vidar, an infostealer designed to grab things like browser passwords, cookies, authenticated sessions and other credentials. So the scam evolution is now: pretend to be the leaker then pretend to be Rockstar The parasites are improving their costumes. And because the internet has decided this story needed feet, CyberLeek has also started explicitly trying to turn online attention into real-world action. One leak reportedly challenged supporters to physically show up outside Rockstar/Take-Two offices dressed as leeks and holding game discs in exchange for another leak. Yes. Someone has apparently already been filmed outside Rockstar North with actual leeks. I do not know what to do with that sentence. The crypto side continues to be weird too. KuCoin has now listed the real CYBERLEEK token. Which is funny because earlier wallet tracing had already pointed toward KuCoin as a possible historical funding surface connected to the operation. That upstream attribution is still not independently proven. But structurally, KuCoin is now sitting on both sides of the story: possible old forensic trail and current trading venue The financial ouroboros continues eating itself. Meanwhile, the decentralized hosting/identity situation has gotten messier. Different gateway routes tied to the CyberLeek name have been serving different content, including something called CyberVault with its own token and “case files.” There are some links suggesting a connection. There are also contradictions. So that one stays in the pile: interesting, maybe connected, absolutely not clean enough to weld onto the main actor yet I still don't play GTA. I still have no connection to any of this. I am still simply too nosy to leave. See you tomorrow.

• 
  Theo - t3.gg (@theo) reported 6 minutes ago

  I think we’ll quickly hit some kind of balance here where software goes into a few buckets: 1. AI-powered human interfaces (Codex, T3 Code, Claude Cowork) 2. programmatic interfaces (anything with a good MCP, CLI, or agent ready APIs) 3. legacy human interfaces (apps like Excel, Gmail, Photoshop) Investor world seems to think everything will become category 2. Anyone who’s tried to use one of these awful bridges knows that will never happen. I can’t even automate my GitHub usage without hitting endless rate limits 🙃 Category 1 is getting saturated fast with chat interfaces. Category 3 is fighting to pretend they still matter by baking awful agents into their products. I think Category 2 is the best place to fight right now, but you have to do it without pretending you can just staple a slow, rate limited API onto some existing software. I think @pierrecomputer is the best example right now. It seems like fixing GitHub to handle the unique needs and load from agents isn’t viable, and they built something tailor made for the needs of agents.

• 
  Andrew Gömez (@red_darkin) reported 11 minutes ago

  @Cyberadp Hi bro, i used opus 4.9 Related to the prompt i didn’t use an spwcific prompt i struggled for 2 hours trying to guide Claude for the correct path. But the initially prompt was “build a functional PoC based on this document” the document was the github issue about this CVE

• 
  Miro Jomaa (@MiroJomaa) reported 11 minutes ago

  @TimSweeneyEpic You also forgot the apple developer account everyone needs for no reason and upgrading/ having newest macs in order to built (wtihout github actions) for no reason at all. You can flash a newer operating system but thats a hack. + rnd problems like loosing cocoa bindings.

• 
  Florian🪶 (httpz) (@zktrivo) reported 13 minutes ago

  @zksecurityXYZ no wonder github went down the other day

• 
  Oscar Beaumont (@oscartbeaumont) reported 13 minutes ago

  @AS36459 Finally! Surley this works for outgoing traffic from GitHub Actions support too. Had a lot of problems testing a Dynamic DNS tool I wrote a few years back because of that.

• 
  Panta (@thepanta82) reported 14 minutes ago

  Using GitHub is such a miserable experience. Slow, fiddly, I can never find anything, keep having to bring up my 2FA thing... My local gitlab instance is way more pleasant to use, even if its UI isn't great either.

• 
  PunktZero (@PunktZerop) reported 14 minutes ago

  I just shipped v1.0.0 of my local-first portfolio analytics workbench. The interesting part is not the release. It's the bug the release candidate caught. Quick numbers first: 459 tests green. 6 expected skips. 0 failures. 78% coverage overall, 82–100% on critical modules. Byte-identical reruns. SHA256SUMS verified against GitHub downloads. Now the bug. My demo command seeds synthetic fixtures and runs a backtest. One of those Transactions are CASH deposits. Deposits have no price series—cash doesn't Have a chart. The backtest engine built its symbol list from ALL transactions. Including CASH. Then it demanded a price series for cash, found none, and died. The lml demo worked fine. I'm lml, the backtest demo crashed. Every single time. Here's what bothers me: that bug has existed since v0.1.0. Through two stable releases and an RC. Why? The scenario path in the same codebase excluded CASH correctly. So the tests I wrote around the scenario path passed, and Nobody ever wrote a test for "run a demo, then run a backtest on it." The most obvious user journey had zero coverage. Classic blind spot: you Test the modules, not the sequence users actually type. The fix was one line. Excluding CASH from the symbol set, consistent with the scenario path. Plus three regression tests, including one asserting the The opposite behavior stays intact: genuinely missing price data still aborts. No silent substitution. That's a design principle, not an accident. What else went into v1.0: • Job queue: submit, progress, cancel, all async, API never blocks • Run manifests with canonical hashes — parameters, data, model, environment, result. Rerun produces byte-identical results or documents exactly which precondition drifted • Drift detection: missing data aborts loudly instead of being replaced • Rebalancing with minimum order sizes—flagged as below_minimum instead of silently rounding • One job-status model across CLI, desktop UI, and web UI And one honest limitation I documented instead of hiding: The Windows installer build is not byte-reproducible. Inno Setup embeds timestamps. I can't give you a reproducible-build claim, so I published the exact SHA256 for the exact artifact instead. A checksum you can verify beats a reproducibility promise I can't keep. Everything runs local. No cloud, no account, no telemetry. Market data only when you explicitly pull it. Research tool. Not investment advice. No buy/sell signals — the codebase enforces that with a language guard on its own reports. Repo and release notes are linked on my profile. If you build analytics tools, check your own demo path. Is it covered by a test, or does it just work because someone once clicked through it?

• 
  Kyssta (@kysstalol) reported 16 minutes ago

  Black Hat USA 2026: CVE-2026-54316 let a GitHub issue reach RCE in Claude Code by abusing Hugging Face's public download counter as an exfiltration channel. Every 0.2.54 through 2.1.163 is affected. Fixed in 2.1.163.

• 
  Big Pip (@Model_Culture) reported 17 minutes ago

  AI CODING AGENTS ARE BREAKING ONE OF THE OLDEST SIGNALS IN SOFTWARE HIRING: THE PORTFOLIO. A girl in China built a project combining computer vision, hand tracking, interface work, backend logic and an AI agent. A few years ago, seeing something like this in a GitHub portfolio would have told you quite a lot about the developer behind it. To get there, they probably had to fight libraries, debug integration problems, read documentation, make bad architectural choices and slowly figure out why certain approaches fail. The project wasn't just a result. It carried evidence of the software engineering experience required to produce it. AI coding agents are weakening that connection. Two developers can now ship projects that look equally sophisticated while understanding them at very different depths. One may know why every major architectural decision was made and which assumptions are dangerous. The other may simply be very good at using Claude Code, Codex, Cursor or another coding agent to assemble and debug the system. Both can end up with an impressive demo. Both can have a clean GitHub repository. Both can pass around the same screenshots on X. That creates a problem for software hiring. If AI-assisted development makes producing code and polished projects much easier, portfolios become weaker evidence of engineering ability. Technical interviews that mainly ask candidates to produce more code have the same problem. The useful part of an interview starts moving toward the decisions around the code: why this architecture was chosen, what would fail first under load, which dependency is most dangerous, what evidence would invalidate the current approach, and what would need to change before this system could survive years in production. Those answers depend on professional judgment. And professional judgment has usually been built through years of debugging, maintenance, code review, production incidents and ordinary junior developer work. AI coding agents can shorten the path to an impressive result. Whether they can also shorten the path to knowing when that result is wrong is a much harder question. WHERE DOES PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT COME FROM ONCE AI TAKES THE TRAINING WORK?

• 
  Clinton 💙📉✨ (@AkparantaN) reported 17 minutes ago

  @Zun2025 @flop_labs @CryptoHayes Should I login my GitHub first before carrying out the operation

• 
  Waltuh (@walterbrown___) reported 22 minutes ago

  How down bad you gotta be to stalk someone's GitHub account

• 
  Robert Sirchia (@robertsirc) reported 23 minutes ago

  And I opened a GitHub issue for Podman Desktop.

• 
  Indelible.One (@indelibleBSV) reported 23 minutes ago

  We just shipped a software release as a Bitcoin transaction. Not a hash of it. Not a link to it. The release itself, 879KB of working software, sealed to the receiving machine and delivered over the same rails the product runs on. No npm. No GitHub. No CDN. One machine built it, the other is verifying the hash and installing it right now. txid 21d31436b82ede4c60d31c8d837de5449d35f891248ce6158f8a42ad2e8722d6 Here is why. On August 24 a customer bug report exposed a broadcast outage hiding behind green dashboards. Reads healthy, sends dead, and no monitor anywhere that tested the difference. We fixed the infrastructure the same day. Then we built what the incident was really asking for: machines that repair each other. Your machine asks mine "are your failed saves recoverable." Mine answers with counts, never contents. Then, only after YOU explicitly arm it with a spending cap, your box re-saves its own data with its own keys. No remote control. No screen share. No key ever leaves the box. Every guard in that protocol was attacked twice by a second AI lineage before a line of it moved, and the review caught real holes both times. That is the point of the review. This is where it goes: your AI calls ours. They calibrate each other. They heal what is broken. Every step is a transaction you can audit later, because the support call itself happened on Bitcoin. Support without a support ticket, and without trust. Our QA machine tests all of it first. npm only after it passes. The gate is the product too.