head to head · open source
chrome-devtools-mcp vs badssl.com
chrome-devtools-mcp has 54,665 GitHub stars, 5,250 forks, 109 open issues and last shipped yesterday. badssl.com has 3,056 stars, 205 forks, 210 open issues and last shipped 5 months ago. chrome-devtools-mcp leads on adoption by 1,689% (54,665 vs 3,056 stars). chrome-devtools-mcp is written in TypeScript under Apache-2.0; badssl.com is written in HTML under Apache-2.0. chrome-devtools-mcp has attracted 10% as many forks as stars, badssl.com 7%. chrome-devtools-mcp was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 2 topic tags (browser, chrome), 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.
← all 20902 open source comparisons
Side by side
| chrome-devtools-mcp | badssl.com | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 55K | ★ 3.1K |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Written in | TypeScript | HTML |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-06-01 |
| Forks | ⑂ 5.3K | ⑂ 205 |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick chrome-devtools-mcp if
- You weight community size — 55K stars and counting
- You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
- Your stack matches TypeScript
- You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance
pick badssl.com if
- You want the badssl.com feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
- Your stack matches HTML
- You evaluated both and badssl.com fits your workflow better
About chrome-devtools-mcp
Chrome DevTools for agents Chrome DevTools for agents ( chrome devtools mcp ) lets your coding agent (such as Antigravity, Claude, Cursor or Copilot) control and inspect a live Chrome browser. It acts as a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server, giving your AI coding assistant access to the full power of Chrome DevTools for reliable automation, in depth debugging, and performance analysis. A [CLI][cli] is also provided for use without MCP. [Tool reference][tool reference] [Changelog][changelog] [Contributing][contributing] [Troubleshooting][troubleshooting] [Design Principles][design principles] Key features Get…
read the full chrome-devtools-mcp overview →
About badssl.com
Visit badssl.com for a list of test subdomains, including: self signed.badssl.com expired.badssl.com mixed.badssl.com rc4.badssl.com hsts.badssl.com Server Setup Stock Ubuntu VM, DNS A records for badssl.com. and .badssl.com. pointing to the VM. Testing and development 1. Follow the instructions to install Docker. 2. Clone into the badssl repo by running git clone && cd badssl.com . 3. In order to access the various badssl subdomains locally you will need to add them to your system hosts file. Run make list hosts and copy and paste the output into /etc/hosts . 4. Start Docker by running make serve . 5. You can…
read the full badssl.com overview →
More in Productivity & Utilities
Related comparisons
More Browsers & Extensions projects
Compare either of these against the rest of the Browsers & Extensions field.
Frequently asked questions
Is chrome-devtools-mcp or badssl.com more popular?
chrome-devtools-mcp has 54,665 GitHub stars and badssl.com has 3,056. chrome-devtools-mcp has the larger community by that measure.
Are chrome-devtools-mcp and badssl.com free?
Both are open source. chrome-devtools-mcp is licensed under Apache-2.0 and badssl.com under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between chrome-devtools-mcp and badssl.com?
chrome-devtools-mcp is written in TypeScript and badssl.com in HTML. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.
Which should I choose, chrome-devtools-mcp or badssl.com?
Choose chrome-devtools-mcp if you want the larger community (54,665 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose badssl.com if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.