Pros of Photon

• Broader functionality: Photon is a multi-purpose OSINT tool for web crawling, information gathering, and reconnaissance
• More versatile: Can extract various types of data like emails, social media accounts, and metadata from websites
• Active development: Regular updates and improvements from the community

Cons of Photon

• More complex to use: Requires more setup and configuration compared to FireProx
• Potentially overwhelming: The extensive features might be unnecessary for simple proxy needs
• Higher resource usage: May consume more system resources due to its comprehensive functionality

Code Comparison

Photon:

import photon
photon.main(url, threads, depth, timeout)

FireProx:

from fireprox import FireProx
fp = FireProx(access_key, secret_key, region)
fp.create_api(url)

Summary

Photon is a feature-rich OSINT tool with broader capabilities, while FireProx focuses specifically on creating API gateways for IP rotation. Photon offers more versatility but may be more complex to use, whereas FireProx provides a simpler solution for proxy needs. The choice between the two depends on the specific requirements of the project and the user's familiarity with the tools.

Pros of Proxify

• More versatile: Supports HTTP, HTTPS, and WebSocket protocols
• Advanced features: Request/response modification, TLS inspection, and replay functionality
• Active development: Regular updates and improvements

Cons of Proxify

• More complex setup and configuration
• Steeper learning curve for users
• May be overkill for simple proxy needs

Code Comparison

Proxify (Go):

func main() {
    options := &types.Options{}
    flagSet := goflags.NewFlagSet()
    flagSet.SetDescription(`Proxify is a Swiss Army knife Proxy tool.`)
    flagSet.CreateGroup("input", "Input",
        flagSet.StringVarP(&options.ListenAddr, "listen", "l", "127.0.0.1:8080", "listen address"),
    )
    // ... (additional configuration)
}

FireProx (Python):

def main(args):
    if args.command == 'create':
        create_api(args.url, args.region)
    elif args.command == 'delete':
        delete_api(args.api_id, args.region)
    elif args.command == 'list':
        list_apis(args.region)
    # ... (additional command handling)

Both tools serve as proxies, but Proxify offers more advanced features and flexibility, while FireProx focuses on simplicity and AWS integration for creating API Gateway proxies. Proxify is written in Go and has a more complex setup, whereas FireProx is Python-based and easier to use for basic proxy needs.

Pros of Social-Engineer-Toolkit

• Comprehensive suite of social engineering tools
• Well-established project with a large user base
• Regularly updated and maintained

Cons of Social-Engineer-Toolkit

• More complex to use, requiring more technical knowledge
• Larger codebase, potentially harder to customize
• Primarily focused on social engineering attacks

Code Comparison

Social-Engineer-Toolkit:

# Example of a phishing attack setup
choice = raw_input(setprompt(["1"], "SET vector [phishing]"))
if choice == 'exit':
    exit_set()

FireProx:

# Example of creating a new proxy
proxy = client.create_http_proxy(
    Name=name,
    TargetUrl=target,
    RouteSelectionExpression="$request.header.x-my-header"
)

FireProx is a more focused tool for creating rotating proxies, while Social-Engineer-Toolkit offers a broader range of social engineering attack vectors. FireProx is simpler to use for its specific purpose, while Social-Engineer-Toolkit provides more comprehensive options for various attack scenarios. The code examples highlight the different focuses: FireProx on proxy creation and Social-Engineer-Toolkit on attack vector selection.

Pros of MITMf

• More comprehensive set of attack modules and plugins
• Supports a wider range of protocols and attack vectors
• Active community and regular updates

Cons of MITMf

• More complex setup and configuration
• Requires deeper networking knowledge to use effectively
• May be overkill for simple proxy needs

Code Comparison

MITMf example (config.py):

config = {
    'sslstrip': True,
    'hsts': False,
    'dns_spoof': {
        'google.com': '192.168.1.100'
    }
}

FireProx example (fireprox.py):

@app.route('/', defaults={'path': ''})
@app.route('/<path:path>')
def proxy(path):
    url = f"{target_url}/{path}"
    resp = requests.request(
        method=request.method,
        url=url,
        headers={key: value for (key, value) in request.headers if key != 'Host'},
        data=request.get_data(),
        cookies=request.cookies,
        allow_redirects=False)
    return (resp.content, resp.status_code, resp.headers.items())

MITMf offers more advanced features for complex man-in-the-middle attacks, while FireProx focuses on simple API proxying. MITMf requires more setup but provides greater flexibility, whereas FireProx is easier to use for basic proxying needs. The code examples show MITMf's configuration-based approach versus FireProx's straightforward request handling.

Pros of mitmproxy

• More comprehensive and feature-rich proxy tool
• Supports a wide range of protocols and use cases
• Active development with a large community

Cons of mitmproxy

• Steeper learning curve due to its complexity
• Requires more setup and configuration for specific tasks

Code Comparison

mitmproxy:

from mitmproxy import http

def request(flow: http.HTTPFlow) -> None:
    if flow.request.host == "example.com":
        flow.request.headers["Custom-Header"] = "Modified"

FireProx:

def lambda_handler(event, context):
    host = event['headers'].get('Host', '')
    if host == 'example.com':
        event['headers']['Custom-Header'] = 'Modified'
    return event

Summary

mitmproxy is a powerful, general-purpose proxy tool with extensive features for intercepting, modifying, and analyzing HTTP/HTTPS traffic. It offers a command-line interface, a web interface, and a Python API for scripting.

FireProx, on the other hand, is a specialized tool designed to create on-demand HTTP pass-through proxies using AWS API Gateway. It's more focused on providing dynamic IP rotation for web scraping and penetration testing.

While mitmproxy provides more flexibility and features, FireProx offers a simpler solution for specific use cases, particularly those involving IP rotation and AWS integration.