head to head · open source

afrog vs crlfuzz

afrog has 4,421 GitHub stars, 483 forks, 111 open issues and last shipped 4 days ago. crlfuzz has 1,566 stars, 146 forks, 1 open issues and last shipped 25 days ago. afrog leads on adoption by 182% (4,421 vs 1,566 stars). afrog is written in HTML under MIT; crlfuzz is written in Go under MIT. afrog has attracted 11% as many forks as stars, crlfuzz 9%. afrog was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (vulnerability-scanner), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

afrog ★ 4.4K crlfuzz ★ 1.6K category Security & Privacy

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

afrog crlfuzz
GitHub stars ★ 4.4K ★ 1.6K
License MIT MIT
Written in HTML Go
Last push 2026-09-18 2026-08-28
Forks ⑂ 483 ⑂ 146
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick afrog if

  • You weight community size — 4.4K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches HTML
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full afrog profile →

pick crlfuzz if

  • You want the crlfuzz feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You evaluated both and crlfuzz fits your workflow better

full crlfuzz profile →

About afrog

afrog is an MIT licensed vulnerability scanner built for bug bounty, penetration testing and red teaming, aimed at testers who need fast verification of web targets and network services with low false positives.

read the full afrog overview →

About crlfuzz

CRLFuzz is a fast, MIT licensed command line tool written in Go that scans web targets for CRLF injection vulnerabilities, aimed at penetration testers, bug bounty hunters, and security engineers who need to check either a single URL or a long list of them quickly.

read the full crlfuzz overview →

More in Security & Privacy

PayloadsAllTheThings ★ 81K Puter ★ 44K Mattermost ★ 39K Keycloak ★ 37K Tailscale ★ 37K HashiCorp Vault ★ 36K

Related comparisons

payloadsallthethings vs anthropic-cybersecurity-skills payloadsallthethings vs projectdiscovery payloadsallthethings vs pentagi payloadsallthethings vs pentestgpt payloadsallthethings vs osintgram payloadsallthethings vs vuls payloadsallthethings vs osv-scanner payloadsallthethings vs nettacker supabase vs better-auth keycloak vs jumpserver keycloak vs better-auth keycloak vs authelia keycloak vs authentik jumpserver vs better-auth jumpserver vs authelia better-auth vs authelia payloadsallthethings vs vault vaultwarden vs vault payloadsallthethings vs unkey payloadsallthethings vs phase payloadsallthethings vs keyshade puter vs vault mattermost vs vault keycloak vs vault

More Threat Detection & Response projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Threat Detection & Response field.

afrog vs PayloadsAllTheThings afrog vs Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills afrog vs ProjectDiscovery afrog vs pentagi afrog vs PentestGPT afrog vs Osintgram afrog vs thc-hydra afrog vs vuls afrog vs osv-scanner afrog vs rengine afrog vs Nettacker afrog vs GDA-android-reversing-Tool

Frequently asked questions

Is afrog or crlfuzz more popular?

afrog has 4,421 GitHub stars and crlfuzz has 1,566. afrog has the larger community by that measure.

Are afrog and crlfuzz free?

Both are open source. afrog is licensed under MIT and crlfuzz under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between afrog and crlfuzz?

afrog is written in HTML and crlfuzz in Go. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, afrog or crlfuzz?

Choose afrog if you want the larger community (4,421 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose crlfuzz if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.