# mitmproxy vs UUSEC WAF

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | mitmproxy | UUSEC WAF |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 86/100 ✓ | 59/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 48 in Network Monitoring | #2 of 3 in Web Application Firewall |
| GitHub stars | 46 459 ✓ | 1 718 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +1 324 ✓ | +6 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 5 | 9 ✓ |
| Latest release | v12.3.1 · 25 Oct 2026 ✓ | v7.2.6 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes ✓ | No |
| License | MIT | BSD-2-Clause |
| Main language | Python | Shell |

## Which one should you pick?

mitmproxy scores 86/100 against 59/100 for UUSEC WAF, so it is the safer default.

UUSEC WAF ships more often: 9 stable releases in the past year, against 5 for mitmproxy.

mitmproxy is growing faster right now (+1 324 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [mitmproxy](https://selfhost.directory/project/mitmproxy) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/mitmproxy.md)
- [UUSEC WAF](https://selfhost.directory/project/uusec-waf) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/uusec-waf.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/mitmproxy-vs-uusec-waf