head to head · open source

CloakBrowser vs proxy_pool

CloakBrowser has 32,693 GitHub stars, 2,719 forks, 164 open issues and last shipped 3 days ago. proxy_pool has 23,778 stars, 5,418 forks, 298 open issues and last shipped 5 months ago. CloakBrowser leads on adoption by 37% (32,693 vs 23,778 stars). CloakBrowser is written in Python under MIT; proxy_pool is written in Python under MIT. CloakBrowser has attracted 8% as many forks as stars, proxy_pool 23%. CloakBrowser was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

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

CloakBrowser ★ 33K proxy_pool ★ 24K category Data & Analytics

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

CloakBrowser proxy_pool
GitHub stars ★ 33K ★ 24K
License MIT MIT
Written in Python Python
Last push 2026-11-01 2026-06-15
Forks ⑂ 2.7K ⑂ 5.4K
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick CloakBrowser if

  • You weight community size — 33K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full CloakBrowser profile →

pick proxy_pool if

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

full proxy_pool profile →

About CloakBrowser

Stealth Chromium that passes every bot detection test. Not a patched config. Not a JS injection. A real Chromium binary with fingerprints modified at the C++ source level. Antibot systems score it as a normal browser — because it is a normal browser. Cloudflare Turnstile — 3 live tests passing (headed mode, macOS) Drop in Playwright/Puppeteer replacement for Python and JavaScript. Same API, same code — just swap the import. 3 lines of code, 30 seconds to unblock. 87 source level C++ patches — canvas, WebGL, audio, fonts, GPU, screen, WebRTC, network timing, automation signals, CDP input behavior humanize=True —…

read the full CloakBrowser overview →

About proxy_pool

ProxyPool 爬虫代理IP池 ======= ( ) 0: try: html = requests.get(' proxies={"http": " 使用代理访问 return html except Exception: retry count = 1 删除代理池中代理 delete proxy(proxy) return None python from fetcher.baseFetcher import BaseFetcher from util.webRequest import WebRequest class MyProxyFetcher(BaseFetcher): """我的代理源""" name = "myproxy" url = " enabled = True def fetch(self): r = WebRequest().get(" for item in r.json: yield item["ip"] + ":" + item["port"] 2、添加好后, schedule 进程下次抓取时会自动扫描 fetcher/sources/ 目录并启用新代理源,无需修改配置。 可用 python proxyPool.py fetcher 命令查看当前启用的代理源列表。 如需临时禁用某个代理源,在 setting.py 的 PROXY FETCHER EXCLUDE 黑名单中添加其…

read the full proxy_pool overview →

More in Data & Analytics

Related comparisons

More Data Extraction & Web Scraping projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Data Extraction & Web Scraping field.

Frequently asked questions

Is CloakBrowser or proxy_pool more popular?

CloakBrowser has 32,693 GitHub stars and proxy_pool has 23,778. CloakBrowser has the larger community by that measure.

Are CloakBrowser and proxy_pool free?

Both are open source. CloakBrowser is licensed under MIT and proxy_pool under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between CloakBrowser and proxy_pool?

CloakBrowser is written in Python and proxy_pool in Python. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, CloakBrowser or proxy_pool?

Choose CloakBrowser if you want the larger community (32,693 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose proxy_pool if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.