Wireshark vs Firebug vs Fiddler - 利弊？ [英] Wireshark vs Firebug vs Fiddler - pros and cons?

问题描述

最近我遇到了一个CGI应用程序没有响应的问题。症状是Firefox显示：

从本地主机传输数据...

但是，我看不到来自Firebug的Net面板的任何流量，浏览器只停留在同一个阶段。

我在想关于调试此应用程序的方法，但是我看不到源代码或其编译的Java / C ++组件，因此我认为HTTP网络级别的诊断是一个好的开始。

我没有Fiddler和Wireshark的经验，只是想知道他们会在HTTP网络层面获得更好的反馈/统计信息吗？我听说Wireshark是先进的，但可能会引入大量的流量，所以系统管理员不喜欢它。在这个时候，我觉得Firebug并没有给我足够的信息。

我需要收集信息，以便我可以转发给客户端作为证明。

解决方案

Wireshark，Firebug，Fiddler都做类似的事情 - 捕获网络流量。

• Wireshark捕获任何类型的网络数据包。它可以在TCP / IP下捕获数据包详细信息（Http在顶部）。它具有过滤器以减少其捕获的噪音。




• Firebug跟踪浏览器页面所产生的每个请求，并捕获相关的标题，并为每个阶段请求（ DNS，接收，发送，... ）。




• Fiddler作为一个http / https代理。它捕获计算机所做的每个http请求并记录与其相关联的所有内容。允许像将表单转换为表格表格和编辑/重播请求。 默认情况下，它不捕获IE中的localhost流量，请参阅解决方法的常见问题。

Recently, I came across an issue where a CGI application is not responding. Symptom is Firefox displaying:

Transferring data from localhost...

But the thing is I cannot see any traffic from Firebug's Net panel, and the browser just stays on the same stage forever.

I am thinking about the ways to debug this application but I cannot see the source code or any of its compiled Java/C++ components, therefore I reckon a HTTP network level of diagnostics is a good start.

I have little experience in Fiddler and Wireshark, just wondering will they get better feedback/statistics in the HTTP network level? I've heard Wireshark is advanced but could possibly introduce a large volume of traffic so system admins don't like it very much. At this time I think Firebug doesn't really show me enough information.

I need to collect information so that I can then forward to client as proof.

解决方案

Wireshark, Firebug, Fiddler all do similar things - capture network traffic.

• Wireshark captures any kind of a network packet. It can capture packet details below TCP/IP(Http is at the top). It does have filters to reduce the noise it captures.

• Firebug tracks each request the browser page makes and captures the associated headers and the time taken for each stage of the request (DNS, receiving, sending, ...).

• Fiddler works as a http/https proxy. It captures each http request the computer makes and records everything associated with it. Does allow things like converting post varibles to a table form and editing/replaying requests. It doesn't, by default, capture localhost traffic in IE, see the FAQ for the workaround.

这篇关于Wireshark vs Firebug vs Fiddler - 利弊？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！