- ResourcesProduct TutorialOnline Tools
- Pricing
- Referral
- Developers
EN
Have you ever felt frustrated when a website blocks your web scraper at the last moment? That’s exactly why Camoufox exists. Camoufox is an open‑source anti‑detect browser built on Firefox. It helps you look like a real user online by hiding browser fingerprints and avoiding common detection methods. For example, in a recent case study one developer used Camoufox with Python and Playwright to scrape a site protected by Cloudflare and succeeded where standard browsers failed. Still, Camoufox is evolving and may not yet meet the needs of high‑volume or business‑critical scraping tasks. That’s why in this guide we’ll walk you through how Camoufox works, when you might need an alternative, and how to choose the right anti‑detection browser for your project.
Camoufox is an open-source anti-detect browser based on Firefox. It hides your browser’s fingerprints using features like fingerprint injection, WebGL and Canvas spoofing, WebRTC IP spoofing, and human-like mouse movements. While effective for web scraping, Camoufox is still in active development, with some features closed source and releases not always production-ready. If you need more stability, consider alternatives that offer a more reliable, feature-rich solution.
While Camoufox offers impressive features, it may not be the best fit for every project. Let’s explore two key concerns: customization challenges and performance & reliability issues.
With Camoufox, you have powerful settings—but that power comes with complexity. For example, the team at Kameleo noted: some context options like userAgent or timezoneId get overwritten by Camoufox’s fingerprint logic, making fine‑tuning harder.
If you are managing dozens of browser profiles with unique fingerprints, this can slow you down. One user wrote they needed to “script multiple browser sessions yourself” because Camoufox doesn’t include a built‑in browser pool manager. If you prefer plug‑and‑play customization or less technical setup, you might find these gaps frustrating.
Another important point is that Camoufox sits in “active development” mode and carries some warning flags for production use. The developer behind Camoufox faced a medical emergency in early 2025, delaying updates until late 2025. This hiatus means bug fixes and new features may be slow to arrive—a significant concern for businesses that need consistent updates and support. In a recent case study, a user tried Camoufox to scrape a protected site and found that stored cookies expired quickly, and switching proxies or user‑agents caused session invalidation — leading to failures. If you run critical scraping tasks or many simultaneous profiles (for example large‑scale data collection or campaign automation), you may require a tool with higher stability, faster updates, and stronger support. In those cases, exploring alternatives makes sense.
If you move beyond using Camoufox, you’ll want to pick a tool that fits your needs. Here are key factors to check — with real examples to help you decide.
Not every anti‑detect browser offers the same tools. A recent guide says you should look at things like automation API support, proxy integration, and team features.
Websites change their detection methods fast. If the browser you choose doesn’t update quickly, you risk being blocked. According to industry reports, “kernel‑level spoofing” and fast patch cycles are now core.
Having good documentation and a community helps when you hit issues. One review notes beginners often waste time because the browser lacks clear guides.
Cost isn’t just the monthly price. It’s also how much time you’ll spend managing it, how many profiles you can run, and whether proxies are included. An article on anti‑detect browsers lists price models, how many profiles each supports, and other hidden costs.
You may like the idea of using Camoufox. But other tools may fit better depending on your needs. Below are comparisons with three strong alternatives.
Camoufox is open‑source and offers flexibility. But if you're aiming for more built‑in features, then DICloak shows significant advantages. For example, DICloak supports custom proxy configuration and proxy pools out of the box—each profile can use a distinct residential or city‑targeted IP address. This level of built‑in proxy support helps if you run many profiles at once and want stable operations. DICloak also offers team collaboration features—role‑based permissions, logs, cloud sync—so multiple users can manage profiles while staying organized. By contrast, Camoufox lacks many of these built‑in enterprise‑tools and requires more manual setup.
Kameleo supports both desktop and mobile emulation, multiple browser engines, and is designed for cross‑platform fingerprinting and automation. In contrast, Camoufox is largely focused on desktop profiles and requires manual configuration of many fingerprint and proxy parameters. While Kameleo offers more device flexibility, it may come with a steeper learning curve and higher cost than what some users need.
GoLogin emphasizes user‑friendliness—easy setup, many pre‑configured profiles, and mobile support. For example, a review notes that GoLogin is simpler to get started with than Camoufox. Camoufox, on the other hand, appeals more to technically‑inclined users who don’t mind deeper configuration. If your focus is quick deployment and less manual setup, GoLogin may fit better. The trade‑off is less deep customization compared to Camoufox.
Pricing Models and Value for Money Camoufox is free (open‑source), but you may end up spending more on development time, proxy setup and manual fixes. Among paid tools, DICloak’s pricing starts at about $8 per month for its “Share” plan. In comparison, GoLogin plans begin around $24 per month for 100 profiles. Kameleo pricing begins at roughly €45/month for its basic plan, making it the most expensive of the three. If you run 100 profiles a day and need strong proxy integration, team access, and automation support, paying for DICloak may cost less in effort, time, and risk than using Camoufox and building everything yourself. Because DICloak starts lower and bundles key features, it offers the best value among the options.
While Camoufox has some compelling features, its limitations make it less ideal for businesses that need reliability and consistent performance. Here’s how DICloak overcomes these challenges and provides a more dependable solution for multi-account management and anti-detection needs.
Unlike Camoufox, which is still in active development and has faced delays in updates, DICloak offers a production-ready, reliable solution. It’s designed for high-stakes operations like dropshipping, affiliate marketing, and large-scale data scraping. DICloak provides regular updates, responsive support, and ensures that its features are always optimized for current detection systems. This makes it a much more reliable choice for businesses that cannot afford downtime or disruptions.
While Camoufox has closed-source components, limiting transparency for certain advanced features, DICloak offers full transparency and control. With features like fingerprint spoofing, proxy management, and browser automation, DICloak gives users access to every component without any hidden restrictions. One of DICloak’s standout features is custom proxy configuration. You can assign residential proxies or city-targeted IPs to individual profiles, ensuring that each account is linked to a unique and credible IP address. This helps maintain privacy and avoids detection. Additionally, each browser profile in DICloak operates in its own isolated profile, meaning different profiles do not share data or browser fingerprints, which prevents cross-account detection.
For businesses or teams managing multiple accounts, DICloak’s team management features are a game-changer. With role-based permissions, you can control who has access to each account, what actions they can take, and who they can share the accounts with. This helps keep operations organized and secure, reducing the risk of accidental exposure or misuse.
While Camoufox’s automation features are limited and may not be as stable, DICloak’s browser automation is built for professional use. It includes RPA (Robotic Process Automation) capabilities, which help gradually warm up accounts by simulating human-like actions. These actions include interacting with web pages in a natural manner, such as scrolling, clicking, and simulating mouse movements. DICloak’s window synchronization feature also allows multiple accounts to run simultaneously, each in its isolated profile, while performing actions like liking posts, following users, and browsing content. This makes accounts look organic and reduces the likelihood of being flagged by platforms like Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok.
Camoufox is a powerful open-source anti-detect browser, offering advanced features like fingerprint spoofing and WebRTC IP spoofing. It’s a great choice for small-scale tasks and experimentation. However, Camoufox is still in active development and may not be fully production-ready. For businesses managing multiple accounts or sensitive operations, more stable, feature-rich solutions like DICloak may be a better choice. Evaluate your needs, risks, and scalability before deciding which tool fits best.
Camoufox is an open-source anti-detect browser built on Firefox. It helps web scrapers avoid detection by modifying browser fingerprints, such as screen size, user-agent, and IP address. It also supports advanced features like canvas and WebGL spoofing to make your actions appear more like those of a real user.
While Camoufox offers great features for smaller-scale tasks, it is still in active development and may not be reliable for high-volume, mission-critical operations. For large-scale web scraping, consider using more stable solutions that offer built-in automation and enterprise-level support.
Camoufox has some key limitations, such as slow updates, closed-source components, and potential instability for production use. Users need to be aware that it might not be suitable for business-critical operations or profiles requiring consistent updates and high reliability.
While Camoufox is open-source and customizable, DICloak provides more robust features, such as profile isolation, team management, proxy configuration, and browser automation. DICloak also offers stronger support and regular updates, making it a more reliable choice for businesses needing stable, scalable solutions.
Yes, Camoufox can help with multi-account management by spoofing browser fingerprints to avoid detection. However, for larger teams or more complex setups, a tool like DICloak may offer better isolation and control through its built-in team collaboration features and proxy management.
