Canary Tokens vs mitmproxy
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted reverse proxy & gateways options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Canary Tokens
Generates lightweight, embedded honeypot triggers called canary tokens
VS
mitmproxy
Interactive HTTPS proxy for inspection and debugging
| Feature | Canary Tokens | mitmproxy |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Reverse Proxy & Gateways | Reverse Proxy & Gateways |
| License | BSD-3-Clause | MIT |
| Language | Python | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | docker | docker, binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 2,978 | ★ 44,605 |
| First released | 2026 | 2010 |
| Replaces | — | Charles Proxy, Fiddler |
Why pick each one
Choose Canary Tokens if…
- Released under the BSD-3-Clause license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (3k GitHub stars)
- Written in Python
Frequently asked questions
Is Canary Tokens or mitmproxy better?
mitmproxy is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Canary Tokens if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Canary Tokens and mitmproxy free and open-source?
Yes. Canary Tokens is licensed under BSD-3-Clause and mitmproxy under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Canary Tokens and mitmproxy with Docker?
Canary Tokens: yes. mitmproxy: yes.