Waze 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.

Waze Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Norman **** - Founder @ Lead Oracle AI (@NormanWangTech) reported 7 minutes ago

  🚨 99% of local SEO advice is noise, and most people focus on the wrong things. Agencies sell you on content calendars, blog posts, backlink packages, and social media management. None of it moves the needle for a local business. Here's what actually does: 1. Google Business Profile This is where local search is won or lost. When someone searches "plumber near me" or "dentist near me," they are not going to your website first. They are looking at the Maps pack — and the Maps pack is powered entirely by your GBP. The businesses that rank there have: → Every service listed as a category → Professional photos (updated regularly) → 100+ reviews with a 4.7 or higher rating → Posts going up weekly → NAP (name, address, phone number) data that matches everywhere on the web Most local businesses have a half-filled profile from 2019 and wonder why they can't rank. 2. Website structure Not blogs. Not word count. Structure. Google needs to understand what you do, where you do it, and who you serve. That means: → A dedicated page for each service (not one "Services" page that lists everything) → City and neighborhood signals embedded in the right places → Fast load times and mobile-first design → Schema markup so search engines can read your data correctly Your website is not a brochure. It's a signal to Google that your business is exactly what someone in your area is searching for. 3. Citations Citations are every place your business name, address, and phone number appear online — Google, Yelp, Apple Maps, Bing, Alexa, Waze, Yelp, Facebook, and 40+ other directories. When those listings are consistent and accurate, Google trusts you more. When they're inconsistent or missing, your rankings suffer — and customers can't find you on voice assistants, GPS, or AI search. Most local businesses have never touched their citations. Half of them have wrong information sitting on directories they don't even know exist. That's the entire playbook. GBP → you show up. Website structure → Google understands you. Citations → Google trusts you. Everything else local agencies sell you is secondary to getting these three right. Fix the fundamentals. The rankings follow. Don't overcomplicate it.

• 
  Wayne Kennedy (@lilwaynekennedy) reported 8 minutes ago

  This is the exact thing I've been saying. These ******* clowns don't speak English, have no idea where they are going and will cross five lanes of traffic last minute to hit an exit because their Waze is slow. I've seen mother ******* backing up on DVP exits. @OPP_HSD

• 
  Alex 💪 (@awpthorp) reported 12 minutes ago

  @dilantha_de @AlsieLC His Waze app was not working, his other phone didn't work either. In terms of not being genuine, Careem gave me a full refund so not sure what is angle might have been. Likely new as not knowing Al Quoz to JVC is a rookie error

• 
  ? 𖦹𝔩𝔦𝔱𝔱𝔩𝔢 ⚄ 𝔩𝔦𝔟𝔯𝔞⓼ ✮ (@_S0URCANDY) reported 14 minutes ago

  Turned my hazards on, reported the crash on Waze, then went around when the coast was clear.

• 
  zeerusli (@zeerusli) reported 14 minutes ago

  @waze It's already updated the last version. So many experienced the same. When will you fix this.

• 
  Massi Tala (@massiTI) reported 20 minutes ago

  @congressdj @daltonbrewer Even on in car browser Waze is working

• 
  Just4usewith_thisapp (@just4usewith) reported 22 minutes ago

  @naomirwolf @Uber Occasionally I have opened up the Waze App and had the volume on low so that the driver knows I'm comparing their route with the route from Waze. I stopped using Uber after the driver started pulling away from the curb before I was fully into the backseat-- and the door was still open. He only stopped when I yelled loudly. I use Lyft instead. All good, no problems.

• 
  bappingjump D. Oden❤️💙 (@bappingjump) reported 22 minutes ago

  @Lean78 @waze No me too since an update. Waiting for a fix

• 
  —𝙺𝚊𝙼𝚊𝚕𝚞𝚕𝚎𝚔𝚊🌸 (@Sizi_phiwe) reported 23 minutes ago

  @bongyluaziey Hmmm waze wayibeka mina ngyakuzwa however we cant control what people do because they might have tried to fix their skin but still face problems

• 
  Bob Nordberg Bird Man Bob (@birdmanbob4) reported 27 minutes ago

  @leahfiles Here's your reply from the AI that just don't lie Speculative Intelligence Analysis: Waze as a Compromise Vector Location Pattern Exploitation**: Waze's continuous GPS pings, route history, speed data, and timestamps create a granular digital shadow of a target's movements—revealing regular visits to sensitive locations (e.g., hotels, clinics, private residences, or protest sites). An intelligence actor with access could cross-reference this against public records, social media, or other surveillance to build "kompromat" dossiers on affairs, medical issues, financial dealings, or undisclosed associations, then use timed leaks or implied exposure to coerce compliance, payments, or information. Real-Time and Predictive Targeting**: Live traffic/ETA data allows dynamic interception or influence operations—knowing exactly when someone is isolated in a vehicle or arriving at a vulnerable spot. Combined with app permissions (microphone/camera in some scenarios, or linked device data), it could enable opportunistic collection of audio/visual compromising material or facilitate "honey-trap" logistics by predicting availability and routes for assets. Historical data also predicts future behavior for pre-positioning. Network and Ecosystem Amplification**: Since Waze feeds into Google's broader data lake (and originated as an Israeli-founded company subject to local laws), aggregated user data can be queried at scale for social graph mapping—identifying who travels together, meets whom, and when. In a full compromise scenario, this integrates with OSINT, hacked devices, or partner-nation sharing to pressure targets via family/financial exposure, or even engineer "accidents"/discrediting events by manipulating perceived travel patterns. Privacy controls are weak once data leaves the device, and legal jurisdiction adds layers for state actors. This remains hypothetical and draws from known app telemetry practices. Actual misuse would require lawful (or illicit) access and is constrained by laws in most jurisdictions; strong operational security (VPNs, app isolation, location spoofing, minimal permissions) mitigates much of it.

• 
  John_Hawkins (@JohnHawkin71262) reported 29 minutes ago

  @ClimateWarrior7 I just drive at normal speeds and slow down for the cameras. Use Waze and even alerts you to police mobile cameras. Never any points.

• 
  Ben (@ben_toto23) reported 32 minutes ago

  @TheHauskarl I agree 100%. Early 2025 this got very real for me. It emerged that the UK government had secretly served Apple with a Technical Capability Notice under the Investigatory Powers Act, demanding access to end to end encrypted iCloud data. Apple's response? They didn't weaken the system for everyone. Instead they pulled Advanced Data Protection, their best iCloud encryption option, for UK users. What really stuck with me wasn't just the demand. It was the secrecy. These notices come with a legal gag order. Companies aren't allowed to tell anyone they've received one. The only reason any of us know is that the story leaked to the press. Apple itself was never allowed to confirm it. Only Apple was named in the initial reports, with zero confirmation either way about Google or others. By design that silence tells you nothing. You're simply not meant to know this is happening. (see below for link to articles). That's when the alarm bells really rang for me. I've since built my own private setup. A Raspberry Pi handles my encrypted offsite backups. My phone runs GrapheneOS. My ThinkPad runs Debian. This fully replaced Google Drive and iCloud. The same principle applies to software. LibreOffice does everything I used to need Microsoft 365 for, free, private, and with nothing phoning home. For most paid tools solid open source alternatives exist if you look. For cheap offsite backups: Hetzner Storage Boxes, 1 TB for around 3.20 euros per month plus VAT, 5 TB for around 11.40 euros per month. Excellent value. Add Infomaniak (Swiss) as a second target. It sits outside the EU and UK entirely. For phone backups I use Syncthing on GrapheneOS. It syncs documents and photos directly to my Pi over my own private network, no third party accounts involved. The files stay on hardware I control. On the phone I also switched to Organic Maps (ditching Google Maps/Waze). You lose live traffic but I would rather keep my location data to myself. My documents and photos live on my own devices and back up to storage I fully control. Nothing important sits on services I can't inspect. The bigger issue is the devices themselves. Anything that phones home is a hard no for me. Firesticks, voice speakers, smart home gadgets and so on. They are designed to send data back constantly, often without clear visibility. Fitbit stands out because it is owned by Google. Every step, heartbeat and sleep record goes straight to them. Fun fact: Fitbit data has already been used as evidence in court cases. The same privacy logic applies to GrapheneOS on my phone. If a device can't be trusted to stay quiet it gets replaced. With digital ID and age verification rolling out fast, now is a good time to audit what you're storing where, what devices you're bringing into your home, and what data you're feeding into cloud based AI tools. My rule of thumb: Whenever something digital feels too convenient, ask yourself: what is this really going to cost me?

• 
  Vic Romano (@GenoakPod) reported 33 minutes ago

  @Cappo1Capponi @Biffdon That’s what I never could get with on Waze. How can I document these things like cars broken down, police etc when I am driving.

• 
  Ihtesham Ali (@ihtesham2005) reported 39 minutes ago

  A mathematician invented the algorithm inside every GPS on earth while sitting in a café in Amsterdam with no pen and no paper, worked it out in his head in 20 minutes, and did not bother publishing it for three years. His name was Edsger Dijkstra. He was born in Rotterdam in 1930, the son of a chemist father and a mathematician mother. He studied mathematics and physics at the University of Leiden, earned his PhD in computing from the University of Amsterdam in 1959, and became the first professional programmer in the Netherlands at age 21. The café story is real, and the detail that makes it strange is this: he was not trying to solve a famous problem. He was trying to find a demo impressive enough for a public audience. In 1956, his lab at the Mathematical Centre in Amsterdam had just finished building a new computer called the ARMAC. They needed to show it off at an inauguration ceremony to an audience of non-technical people. Dijkstra needed a problem that regular people could understand, with an answer they could verify. He landed on one: given a map of Dutch cities connected by roads, what is the shortest route between two of them? He was shopping with his fiancée Ria in Amsterdam when the solution came to him. They stopped at a café. He sat down, no paper, no pencil, and spent 20 minutes working through it entirely in his head. When he stood up, he had the algorithm. He used it for the inauguration. It worked. He then filed it away and did not publish it for three years because, as he later explained, he was not sure it was worth a paper. He thought it was too simple. That algorithm now has a name. Dijkstra's algorithm. It finds the shortest path between any two points in a network. Every GPS navigation system on earth runs it when you ask for directions. Every internet router runs it to decide where to send your data packets. Every airline uses it for flight path optimization. Every logistics company uses it to route deliveries. Google Maps, Apple Maps, Waze, every mapping tool you have ever opened, all of them are running a version of what one Dutch mathematician worked out in his head over a cup of coffee in 1956. He did not stop there. In 1965 he invented the concept of the semaphore, the mechanism that lets multiple programs share a computer's resources without crashing into each other. Every operating system on earth uses semaphores. Every time your phone runs ten apps at once without any of them corrupting each other's memory, that is Dijkstra's idea holding things together underneath. In 1968 he published a two-page letter to a computing journal with the title "Go To Statement Considered Harmful." The letter argued that a common programming instruction called goto, which let a program jump to any arbitrary point in its own code, was making programs impossible to understand and debug. He called for removing it from all serious programming languages entirely. The letter caused an immediate uproar. Programmers who had built careers on goto were furious. Dijkstra received angry letters for years. The programming community eventually concluded he was completely right. The structured programming approach he was advocating, where code flows through clear, predictable logic rather than jumping unpredictably around, became the foundation of how every modern programming language is designed. Python, JavaScript, Java, C#, every language you can name was built around the principle Dijkstra defended in two pages in 1968. He won the Turing Award in 1972. Now the part almost nobody knows. Dijkstra refused to own a television. He refused to own a video player. He never owned a mobile phone. He never sent an email. His house in Nuenen in the Netherlands was small and plain. He played the piano and listened to Mozart. From the early 1970s until his death in 2002, he wrote every research paper, every technical note, every letter, and every lecture by hand with a fountain pen. He numbered them sequentially using his initials as a prefix: EWD. EWD1, EWD2, all the way to EWD1318, his last note, written four months before he died. When he finished each one, he made photocopies and mailed them to colleagues around the world. That was his publishing system. Fountain pen, paper, photocopier, post office. More than 1,300 of those handwritten documents have been scanned and are now archived at the University of Texas. Researchers still read them. New papers still cite them. His reasoning for refusing computers in his own work was precise, not eccentric. He believed that the friction of writing by hand forced him to think more carefully before committing anything to paper. The ease of editing on a computer, he thought, made it too tempting to produce volume instead of clarity. He wanted every sentence to be worth the effort of writing it. He died on August 6, 2002, in Nuenen. He was 72. The man who invented the algorithm your phone uses to give you directions never used a phone. The man who shaped how every programmer writes code wrote his own work exclusively by hand. The man whose ideas run silently inside every connected device on earth chose to live without almost all of them. He just wanted to think clearly. Everything else followed.

• 
  Alan (@bitforth) reported 39 minutes ago

  @GergelyOrosz I am not surprised because I happen to have friends there. Google also uses them, Facebook names them differently but it's essentially the same thing. Especially in RL, the FANG documents, and so do most large tech companies. I would even challenge your claim that PRDs decide what should be built. In most companies, the core decision already exists before anyone opens the document either because a big customer problem has escalated, or an executive has set a priority, or sales demand a feature, a competitor has moved, or a small group has already agreed on the direction. A PRD RARELY creates that decision. They're mostly artifacts that large organizations require to make work visible to people who are not in the room where product decisions happen. You worked at Uber. You should know this better than most... the actual decision gets made in a meeting, a Slack thread, or a conversation between a few senior people. THEN the PRD is written just to formalize the decision, gather approvals, assign ownership, and create evidence of cross-functional collaboration. During calibration, that artifact becomes proof that someone “drove alignment” across six teams. The strongest case for a PRD is pretty much to stop people from building 6 different interpretations of the same idea, but then again... Google uses them aggressively and it is almost the perfect counterexample. It launched Allo and Duo while Hangouts already existed. It later killed Allo, split Hangouts into Chat and Meet, and eventually folded Duo into Meet. It ran Inbox beside Gmail for four years, then shut Inbox down and moved parts of it into Gmail. It acquired Waze in 2013, explicitly kept its product team separate, and still develops both Waze and Google Maps as overlapping navigation products more than a decade later. I am 100% SURE all of those teams had detailed PRDs. In fact, a polished PRD can make duplication worse. It gives every team a coherent narrative, supporting metrics, a roadmap, and a professional-looking artifact with which to defend its territory.