emailharvester
open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on emailharvester's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
EmailHarvester is a tool to retrieve domain email addresses from search engines including Google, Bing, Yahoo, ASK, Baidu, Dogpile, and Exalead.
Summary
emailharvester is an open-source command-line tool that collects domain email addresses by querying search engines and social sites like Google, Bing, Yahoo, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Github, then exports the results to text or XML. It runs as a Python script against a target domain, with options to limit results, set a custom user-agent, route requests through a proxy, and extend behavior through a plugin system. It suits red teamers and OSINTOSINTOpen-source intelligence, collecting and analyzing information from publicly available sources. Investigators use it to learn about people, infrastructure or threats. practitioners doing early-stage footprinting for phishing or social-engineering assessments, where the goal is building a list of harvestable addresses tied to an organization. Its README credits theHarvester and Metasploit's search_email_collector as inspirations, placing it in that same recon-tool lineage. First committed in 2016 with 12 contributors and ten tracked releases, it has seen only one commit in the past year, so treat it as stable but largely dormant.
EmailHarvester is a tool to retrieve domain email addresses from search engines including Google, Bing, Yahoo, ASK, Baidu, Dogpile, and Exalead.
How emailharvester helps
What email addresses tied to this domain are already exposed across the open web?
queries search engines like Google, Bing, Yahoo, ASK, Baidu, Dogpile, and Exalead for pages mentioning the domain and pulls the addresses out of the results
Which social platforms are leaking contacts I could use for a phishing pretext?
runs the same domain search against sites like Twitter, LinkedIn, Google+, Github, Instagram, Reddit, and Youtube and folds any addresses found into the same result set
Is one search engine giving a skewed or incomplete picture of a domain's exposure?
lets the search be pointed at a single engine or run across all of them together, so results can be compared engine by engine rather than trusting one source
How do I hand a target list of addresses to another tool or a report?
writes the collected addresses out to a text file and an XML file at once, ready to feed into later stages of an assessment
Am I pulling so many results that the search looks automated and gets blocked?
supports capping the number of results returned and swapping in a custom User-Agent or a proxy server, so the request pattern can be throttled or masked
Languages
Command line
| option | found in | since | description |
|---|
Values are placeholders taken from each option’s declared default. Nothing is executed here — the output shown is a recording of a run that already happened.
Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
- Community health
-
Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
-
Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
-
Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
-
Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply
Nine scores for emailharvester, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail emailharvester puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Releases
Nothing shipped since we started watching. Releases and docs updates land here as they happen.
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in maldevel/EmailHarvester, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.
- Contributors 1 −1 vs prior 12 months
- Maintainers 0 +0 joined · −0 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 0 committers behind half the commits
- Community-filed 100% of issues opened, last 12 months
- Median time to close not measured issues closed, last 12 months
- Open backlog 11 of 45 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 2 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 11
- Contributors / month 0
- Commits / month 0
- Stars 979
- other 100%
Counts from the project's public repository and git history; no individuals are identified. Maintainers are the committers covering 80% of the last year's commits. how we measure this
Libraries its release ships
What its latest release locks, checked against known advisories.None of its release's images build from a lockfile we can read.
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.
Choose a badge style and copy the code →