Fast
Skip
Confidence: Low
Confidence is low: almost none of the ~50 public sources reviewed actually describe fast.io, and the Fastly-owned static-file CDN appears to have been wound down.
New check
Comparison
Fast lands on Skip, and GitHub Pages lands on Worth it.
Confidence is low: almost none of the ~50 public sources reviewed actually describe fast.io, and the Fastly-owned static-file CDN appears to have been wound down.
Buy it if your site is static and you already work in Git . it is free, simple, and battle-tested.
| Compare | ||
|---|---|---|
| Verdict | Skip | Worth it |
| Best for | Guess: Developers serving static files from GitHub | Developer portfolios |
| Who it's not for | Guess: Anyone building long-lived production sites . service may be sunset | Anyone needing server-side code, forms, or databases |
| Privacy | No known public vulnerabilities found in the sources reviewed.¹ | No active breaches of the service itself; past CVEs in Pages builds and ongoing phishing abuse of domains.12 |
| Support quality | No support evidence found | No support evidence in sources |
| Public sentiment | No verifiable user reviews of surfaced; review results matched unrelated products named Fast.² | Users call it free, dependable static hosting for Git users, but warn it is static-only and unfriendly to non-developers.⁹ |
| Biggest gotcha | Current service status unclear from public sources . confirm Fastly hasn't sunset it before committing any assets⁴ | 100 GB/month soft bandwidth cap; heavy sites risk throttling.⁶ |