mitmproxy vs NGINX Unit
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?
mitmproxy
Interactive HTTPS proxy for inspection and debugging
VS
NGINX Unit
Dynamic application server and reverse proxy
| Feature | mitmproxy | NGINX Unit |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Reverse Proxy & Gateways | Reverse Proxy & Gateways |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Python | C |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary, source | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 44,605 | ★ 5,551 |
| First released | 2010 | 2017 |
| Replaces | Charles Proxy, Fiddler | Passenger, uWSGI |
Why pick each one
Choose NGINX Unit if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 5.6k GitHub stars
- Written in C
Frequently asked questions
Is mitmproxy or NGINX Unit better?
mitmproxy is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider NGINX Unit if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are mitmproxy and NGINX Unit free and open-source?
Yes. mitmproxy is licensed under MIT and NGINX Unit under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run mitmproxy and NGINX Unit with Docker?
mitmproxy: yes. NGINX Unit: yes.