tcpflow
2012-10-26 Simson Garfinkel <simsong@npsair.local> open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on tcpflow's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
tcpflow captures data transmitted as part of TCP connections and stores each flow in its own file for protocol analysis and debugging.
tcpflow -r file1.pcap file2.pcap tcpflow -R captured_traffic.pcap
Summary
tcpflow is an open-source command-line tool that captures and reconstructs TCP connection data streams from live traffic or pcappcapA packet capture, recorded network packets that can be inspected later. Analysts use it to reconstruct communication and investigate protocol behavior or suspicious traffic. files, writing each flow to its own file for later inspection. It costs nothing to use and installs from standard Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora and RedHat package repositories, or builds from source on Linux, Windows via mingw, or Amazon AMI. It suits incident responders and forensic analysts who need to reassemble sessions from captured traffic rather than watch them live, and its console output can color-code client-to-server, server-to-client and undecided flows for quick review. It sits in the packet-capture and traffic-forensics space alongside tools built on libpcap. First committed in 2012 and maintained by 59 contributors, it has seen only 3 commits in the past year, suggesting slow but ongoing upkeep rather than active development.
tcpflow captures data transmitted as part of TCP connections and stores each flow in its own file for protocol analysis and debugging.
How tcpflow helps
What did the two ends of this connection actually send each other?
reassembles each TCP stream from the capture into its own file with client and server payloads in order, so the conversation can be read as a whole rather than as individual packets
Which conversation in a large capture is the one worth looking at first?
splits every flow into its own separate file, so an analyst can scan file sizes and names instead of scrolling through one giant packet trace
Was this exchange initiated by the server or the client, and did the direction ever become ambiguous?
color-codes console output by direction, marking client-to-server, server-to-client, and flows where the direction could not be determined
What actually happened during an incident that was only captured to a file, not watched live?
works directly against saved pcap files after the fact, rebuilding the sessions inside them exactly as it would from live traffic
What passed between two hosts before the capture was reviewed?
writes the full reconstructed payload of each flow to disk, so the content can be read, searched, or handed to another tool well after the traffic occurred
Languages
Command line
No command matches.
| 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 tcpflow, 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 tcpflow 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
6 entries
No entries match these filters.
- January 20261
- October 20121
- May 20121
- January 20121
- December 20111
- February 20011
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in simsong/tcpflow, 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 1 +1 joined · −0 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 1 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 72 of 185 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 72
- Contributors / month 0
- Commits / month 0
- Stars 1,777
- 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.