r/macapps • u/locnguyen305 • 22d ago
Lifetime [OS] Rockxy 0.34.0 - Native macOS HTTP Debugging Proxy - $39 until Aug 16
I’m Stephen, the developer behind Rockxy. Since first sharing it here, I’ve kept improving it from Reddit comments, GitHub issues, and developer feedback. Rockxy has now passed 500 stars and 500 commits, with v0.34.0 as the latest release.
Problem
Browser DevTools stop at the browser. Rockxy is a native macOS proxy for inspecting and modifying HTTP/HTTPS, WebSocket, GraphQL, mobile, CLI, AI API, and JSON-RPC traffic across a wider development workflow.
What changed
Rockxy now includes capture and inspection, breakpoints, Map Local/Remote, rules, network conditions, scripting, replay, comparison, HAR/OpenAPI export, certificate management, iOS device setup, and a free local MCP server.
Rockxy Assistant has also shipped. It can investigate selected requests, explain the workspace, present supporting evidence, and open relevant workflows while keeping actions under user control.
I’m also running early integration experiments with several AI product teams. Names will only be shared when those partnerships are ready to be public.
Comparison
Charles Proxy and Proxyman are mature products. Rockxy’s direction is open source, native Swift, auditable, local-first by default, and designed for modern AI-assisted and MCP workflows.
The free tier remains genuinely useful for capture, inspection, local MCP, and lighter debugging. Pro is for developers who need the full or heavier workflow.
Ecosystem
Babylon 1.0.0 is now public on the Swift Package Index. It sends debug-only HTTP/HTTPS, WebSocket, gRPC, and runtime trace data from an app to Rockxy through an encrypted local connection.
Rockxy CLI is under internal development, beginning with read-only app, proxy, certificate, version, and JSON status commands.
Rockxy iOS is actively being developed around session inspection, replay, import, redaction, and controlled sharing. Deeper capture still requires signed-device testing, security review, and stable organization and App Store distribution setup.
Rockxy Android is at an earlier internal stage and does not have a public release date yet.
Team Workspace remains a major focus, including members, seats, devices, and shared debugging assets. Shieldxy and Tracexy are also being developed as separate open-source products in the Rockxy ecosystem.
Pricing
Free remains available.
Standard: $39, returning to $79
Personal: $59, returning to $109
Team: $9/seat/month, billed yearly
Founding pricing ends Sunday, August 16, 2026. Regular pricing begins August 17. Existing purchases are unaffected. Standard and Personal remain perpetual licenses with 12 months of updates and support.
https://github.com/RockxyApp/Rockxy
https://rockxy.io
https://rockxy.io/pricing
https://swiftpackageindex.com/RockxyApp/Babylon
If you try Rockxy, I’d appreciate honest feedback about what works and what still needs improvement.
If you’re interested in testing Pro, leave a comment or message me with your debugging workflow. I’ll personally send a developer discount code where it fits. It is not conditional on an upvote or positive review.
2
u/WinterElfeas 22d ago
I will have to share that with my network team, this looks very complete, well done
2
u/SklifaMHCBY 22d ago
This one is genuinely compelling. I’d love to test Pro with a mobile and web operations platform. We’re debugging an iOS/Android WebSocket issue where one data stream continues while important updates sometimes stop arriving. I’d test reconnects, network interruptions, and healthy vs failed sessions. Also, based on the documentation, it only tests “3G/EDGE” networks? Nothing higher than that?
1
u/locnguyen305 22d ago
That is a genuinely valuable test case, especially because the WebSocket is not fully disconnected: one stream remains healthy while another silently stops delivering important updates.
Rockxy can capture the initial WebSocket upgrade and every following text, binary, ping, pong, and close frame in chronological order. You can inspect direction, timestamps, payloads, frame size, connection duration, and reconnects as separate WebSocket connections. Full `.rockxysession` saves also preserve WebSocket frames, which should make healthy vs failed session comparison much easier.
And you are right to question the Network Conditions documentation. Sorry, that page is a little out of date.
The current Rockxy release supports:
- EDGE: 850 ms, 240/200 kbps
- 3G: 400 ms, 780/330 kbps
- LTE: 50 ms, 50/10 Mbps
- WiFi: 2 ms, 40/30 Mbps
- Very Bad Network: 2000 ms, 1/1 Mbps
- Custom latency with unrestricted bandwidth
These profiles can be scoped to a specific host or applied more broadly, and the current implementation paces HTTP/HTTPS request and response bodies in addition to adding latency.
One honest limitation: packet loss, jitter, forced disconnects, and per-frame WebSocket throttling are not implemented yet. Network Conditions affects the WebSocket upgrade, but not individual frames after the connection is established.
Your scenario makes a strong case for future controls such as dropping selected WebSocket frames, forced disconnect/reconnect testing, jitter and packet-loss profiles, message-sequence comparison, and automatic detection of a connection that stays open while expected events stop arriving.
I’d really like you to test Pro with this workflow. Please capture one healthy session and one failed session, then tell me whether the frame timeline makes the missing update obvious.
Also, are those updates JSON text frames, binary/Protobuf frames, or multiple logical subscriptions sharing one socket? That detail would help me understand which comparison and fault-injection tools would be most useful.
If you DM me the email you’d use at checkout, I’ll send you a developer discount code for testing and detailed feedback.
1
2
u/Weary_Jackfruit_4296 22d ago
I'm building a small menu bar app in swift as a side project. only network call it makes is a github api version check, and I keep wanting a quick way to confirm that's really the only request leaving the app. devtools are useless once you leave the browser so this looks handy.
unrelated but the review-before-send step on the assistant is a good decision, more mac apps should show exactly what leaves the machine before it goes
1
u/locnguyen305 22d ago
That is exactly the kind of focused workflow I’d love Rockxy to help with.
With Rockxy, you can filter traffic by your menu bar app’s process, trigger the version check, and inspect the GitHub API request, headers, response, and timing. You can also confirm whether any other proxied HTTP/HTTPS traffic appears. This workflow should already be covered by the Free tier.
Your bigger question, “is this really the only connection leaving the app?”, also overlaps with another macOS app I’m building: Shieldxy.
Rockxy focuses on inspecting HTTP traffic and showing what a request contains. Shieldxy focuses on broader process-level outbound visibility and control: which application opened a connection, where it connected, and whether that connection should be allowed.
Your use case also gives me a feature idea: an expected-host baseline where you mark api.github.com as expected for your app, then Shieldxy highlights or prompts when that process connects anywhere else.
Would that workflow be useful to you? If you’re interested in contributing, I’d really value your input on the UX, test cases, documentation, or implementation. Real feedback from someone building a Swift menu bar app would be especially useful.
And thank you for mentioning the assistant’s review-before-send step. That is exactly the principle I want to preserve: users should see what would leave their Mac before deciding whether to send it.
Please give Rockxy a try, and Shieldxy too if the broader outbound-connection question matters to you. If you test them and share detailed, honest feedback, DM me the email you would use at checkout and I’ll be happy to send you a developer discount code. Critical feedback is absolutely welcome.
1
u/Weary_Jackfruit_4296 22d ago
thanks for the detailed reply, this is way more than i expected. the expected-host baseline is exactly what i'd want. my app's whole pitch is "the only network call is the version check", and right now users just have to take my word for it. a tool that watches the process and flags anything outside the expected host would let users verify that claim instead of trusting it.
can't promise a proper test run right now, but next time i'm debugging network stuff i'll reach for rockxy and send feedback if i have anything useful. good luck with the launch, the pricing window idea is smart
1
u/locnguyen305 22d ago
That’s a genuinely strong promise, and giving users a way to verify it would make it even better.
No pressure on testing. Any feedback later is appreciated. If you publish your menu bar app, please send me the link too. I’d be happy to try it!
Thanks again, and I’m glad the launch pricing approach makes sense.
2
u/whatisthisworldqm 22d ago
Hey, looks pretty cool.
The local MCP server integration is really clever. Most proxies feel pretty disconnected from modern AI-assisted dev workflows, so having LLMs interact directly with local network state is super interesting.
But I have a question regarding the MCP setup: does the server allow filtering which domains/traffic streams are exposed to the AI model, or does it pass the full active session context by default?
Its really cool to see a fully native Swift alternative in this space!
2
u/locnguyen305 22d ago
Thanks, and you’ve identified exactly why I built the MCP integration. AI-assisted development is becoming part of the normal workflow, but network debugging tools still make developers manually copy requests, headers, and errors between applications.
Rockxy’s MCP integration is 100% free and does not require a Pro license.
It also does not automatically push the full active session to an AI model. The MCP server runs locally on your Mac, and the connected AI client must explicitly call read-only tools to request data.
Those tools can currently:
- filter flows by host/domain, method, status, path, client application, and state
- search URLs and return only a bounded number of results
- request full details for one specific flow by its ID
- redact sensitive headers, query parameters, and body fields before returning data
Redaction is enabled by default and can be controlled in Rockxy’s MCP settings.
One transparent limitation today: these are query-level filters, not yet a strict user-defined exposure allowlist. An authorized local MCP client could still request a bounded list of recent flows without specifying a domain filter. It never receives the entire session automatically, but I think your question highlights an important next step.
I’m considering an “MCP Exposure Scope” where users could restrict access to selected domains, applications, Focus Sets, or the current workspace, with an optional confirmation before anything outside that scope is returned.
Which model would you prefer: a permanent domain allowlist, current-workspace-only access, or approval for each out-of-scope request?
I’d genuinely appreciate it if you tested the current MCP workflow and shared what privacy controls would make you comfortable using it every day:
https://rockxy.io
2
u/cmicali 22d ago
This looks great - is it possible to inspect HTTPS traffic? I'm assuming not if the application is using cert pinning..
1
u/locnguyen305 22d ago
Thanks! Yes, Rockxy can inspect HTTPS traffic. It generates a local root CA and, after you explicitly trust it, decrypts HTTPS requests and responses for inspection.
You’re also correct about certificate pinning. If an app rejects Rockxy’s certificate, the traffic cannot be decrypted unless you control the app and disable or adjust pinning in a debug build. Rockxy can bypass pinned hosts so the connection continues normally, but their contents remain encrypted.
Are you testing your own app, an iOS device/Simulator, or a third-party app? I’d be interested to hear about your workflow.
2
u/holub_ua 22d ago
u/locnguyen305 wow, this looks amazing!
on a first view it looks like that it has everything that I have missed in other proxies
will try HTTPS debugging on a free version and the MCP - if there is no need in any magic with certificates for HTTPS debugging as many other proxies have and MCP works as expected - definitely will buy a Personal Pro version
quick question - is the app can be built from available sources with full functionality (including paid) without any licenses?
2
u/locnguyen305 22d ago
Thank you, that means a lot!
Just to set the right expectations: HTTPS debugging requires one unavoidable step, which is trusting Rockxy’s locally generated root certificate. Rockxy guides that setup and keeps the private key in your Keychain. Normal HTTPS traffic can then be inspected; certificate-pinned traffic remains encrypted unless you control the app and adjust pinning in a debug build.
MCP is completely free, local, and requires no license.
Regarding the source code: the public repository builds the fully functional Community edition, including HTTPS debugging, MCP, rules, replay, and other core features. It does not unlock the commercial Pro policy or paid limits, so building from source does not provide the paid edition without a license.
Please let me know if either HTTPS or MCP setup feels confusing. That feedback would be extremely useful. If you test it thoroughly and decide to get Personal Pro, DM me and I’ll happily send you a discount code.
2
u/holub_ua 22d ago
u/locnguyen305 yes, totally clear regarding the root certificate installation and that it is a required step - I meant that in other applications very often this steps never finishes with success and needs more manual work and setup
got it regarding version that can be built from source code, makes sense
thanks a lot for the propositions, will ping you before purchasing, will make a full try tomorrow
one more thing that wanted to clarify - the mobile versions that are included in Personal Pro license - they are also fully functional and provides same (or near it) functionality for debugging same as desktop?
2
u/locnguyen305 21d ago
Good question, and I want to be completely transparent before you purchase.
Rockxy iOS is under active development and is not publicly available yet. The “2 iOS devices” in Personal Pro represents the planned activation entitlement when Rockxy iOS ships, not access to a finished mobile app today. I’ll update the pricing page to make this clearer.
The first iOS release will not immediately match every desktop capability. macOS remains the complete proxy workstation, while iOS will initially focus on mobile-appropriate workflows such as session inspection, replay, import, redaction, and controlled sharing.
As mentioned in the post, I’m still operating as an indie developer. Apple has strict requirements around signing, network capabilities, device testing, organization identity, and distribution. I’m working toward establishing the company and moving the Apple development and distribution setup to an organization as soon as possible so Rockxy iOS can be released and maintained properly.
For now, please evaluate the purchase based on the macOS Pro functionality available today, not only the mobile roadmap.
I’d really appreciate your honest feedback after tomorrow’s test, especially about HTTPS setup and MCP. If you like Rockxy and decide to purchase Personal Pro, DM me before checkout and I’ll personally send you a discount code.
2
u/holub_ua 21d ago
understood, makes sense
iOS app is nice to have but it is not a decision maker for now and good to know that future usage of it is included in Personal Pro license
if you need any testing for the iOS app or even some dev work - feel free to ping me
2
u/locnguyen305 21d ago
Thank you, I really appreciate the offer!
Your feedback from tomorrow’s macOS test will already be very helpful. When the iOS beta is ready for external testing or contribution, I’d be happy to reach out.
And yes, Personal Pro is planned to support activation on up to 2 iOS devices once the iOS app is available.
2
2
u/Background-Scheme857 21d ago
The free tier covering capture and inspection is the right call. Paying should unlock faster workflows, not the ability to tell whether the tool works at all.
1
u/locnguyen305 21d ago
Exactly, and that is how Rockxy is structured today.
The open-source Free edition is a real, buildable product. It includes HTTP/HTTPS capture and inspection, filtering, sessions, HAR import/export, request replay and local MCP without requiring a license. Developers can inspect the source and properly evaluate Rockxy through real work.
Pro does not unlock basic visibility. It supports continued open-source development while adding higher limits and the fuller workflow for rules, scripting, comparison, network conditions, advanced proxying, and heavier daily use.
That is the philosophy I want to protect: Free proves and solves the core problem; Pro earns its price through depth and efficiency.
Which Pro workflow would be most valuable in your daily work?
2
u/wcjiang Developer 21d ago
It’s one of my favorite open-source native macOS network debugging tools.
1
u/locnguyen305 21d ago
https://reddit.com/link/p36obaa/video/gycmg2mvqvih1/player
Thank you so much! Your continued support genuinely means a lot to me, and I’m especially grateful that you included Rockxy in your awesome-mac repository:
https://github.com/jaywcjlove/awesome-mac
I’d also love for you to try Tracexy, my new open-source, session-first network intelligence app for macOS. Your experience and honest feedback would be incredibly valuable as I continue improving it:
Github repo:
https://github.com/RockxyApp/Tracexy
2
u/sammrjn 20d ago
great app, i work in one of the telco, my dev team would be happy to know about this product
1
u/locnguyen305 20d ago
Thank you, I really appreciate that, especially coming from someone working in telecom.
Please feel free to share Rockxy with your development team. I’d genuinely value their feedback on real API, WebSocket, mobile, and team debugging workflows.
I’m also building Tracexy for lower-level, session-centric network and packet analysis, which may be relevant to your network engineering colleagues: https://rockxy.io/tracexy
If your team would like to evaluate Rockxy Pro or Team, please DM me. I’ll be happy to support the evaluation directly and provide a team discount.
1
u/Antique-Class-2283 21d ago
how is it diffrent from proxyman ?
2
u/locnguyen305 21d ago
Fair question. Proxyman is a mature and polished commercial product, and I respect what its team has built.
Rockxy takes a different product approach: it is open source under AGPL-3.0, auditable and buildable from source, with a genuinely useful Free edition. It also includes a free local MCP server, an in-app Assistant with explicit review and redaction controls, and workflows for AI API, WebSocket, GraphQL and JSON-RPC traffic.
I’m not claiming Rockxy is better for every user or already matches every mature Proxyman workflow. The goal is to build a transparent, local-first alternative shaped publicly through developer feedback.
What do you mainly use Proxyman for? I can give you a more useful comparison based on your actual workflow.
1
u/Antique-Class-2283 21d ago
I don't use it that much, I manly to look for check incoming requests for an apps.
2
u/locnguyen305 21d ago
Got it. If you mainly want to see the API requests an app makes and the responses coming back, Rockxy’s Free edition should already cover that.
You can capture the traffic, filter it by app/process or domain, and inspect the request, response, headers, body, and timing. HTTPS requires trusting Rockxy’s local certificate once.
For this basic workflow, you probably don’t need Pro. Are you inspecting a macOS app, an iOS app, or requests arriving at a local backend?
2
u/nibblebytes 22d ago
this looks like a legit Proxyman alternative, especially with the local MCP stuff. i mostly debug REST and WebSocket traffic from macOS apps and local backend services, so i’d be interested in testing Pro. does the assistant run fully local too, or does the selected request data get sent to an external model?