mitmproxy vs Twingate
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
Twingate
Twingate Connector for CasaOS
| Feature | mitmproxy | Twingate |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Reverse Proxy & Gateways | Reverse Proxy & Gateways |
| License | MIT | free |
| Language | Python | |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary, source | docker, one-click |
| GitHub stars | ★ 44,605 | — |
| First released | 2010 | 2022 |
| Replaces | Charles Proxy, Fiddler | — |
Why pick each one
Choose Twingate if…
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- One-click install on common self-host platforms
- Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is mitmproxy or Twingate better?
Neither is universally better. mitmproxy has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are mitmproxy and Twingate free and open-source?
Yes. mitmproxy is licensed under MIT and Twingate under free. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run mitmproxy and Twingate with Docker?
mitmproxy: yes. Twingate: yes.