I want to inspect websocket messages with the latest Firefox.
I don't want to switch browsers. The situation is kind of messed up for me. I really don't want to move to closed-source browsers or to browsers like Chrome or Chromium that don't respect your privacy. I used to use ungoogled-chromium, but it receives updates way too rarely leaving you with critical vulnerabilities for weeks or months.

What I know
In the dev tools I can only see the web socket handshakes.
With Firefox Quantum the dev tool extension that I used for this just broke.

I don't think that Waterfox would solve the problem, as I don't want to miss out on features like electrolysis. And electrolysis is only compatible with WebExtensions, not with legacy extensions.

Is there any websocket inspection "web extension" that is compatible with Firefox Quantum?

  • Thanks. I updated the question. I don't think Waterfox would solve the issue. – Forivin Jan 4 '18 at 13:19
  • e10 was already available before FF limited extensions to WE. And there were "legacy addons" working with that. Waterfox supports both (as FF did with v55). Of course, your decision. For me I decided I don't want to be limited to crippled (web) extensions: I've got too many real ones that couldn't work as WE – and those that were converted lost most of the functionality important to me. Well, everyone must set his/her own priorities :) – Izzy Jan 4 '18 at 17:24
  • Do you have to use FireFox to capture it? If not, the industry standard for capturing, logging and parsing networking traffic (for hundreds of standards) is WireShark. There is a webtraffic filter available. – Mawg says reinstate Monica Jan 5 '18 at 11:55
  • Well, I would very much prefer doing it in Firefox. The problem with Wireshark is that it is bloated with functionality and ui elements that I don't need and that it is very unintuitive to use. I just want to be able to inspect the websocket messages for a specific browser tab and simply get a list of sent and reveiced messages simply formatted as strings in the correct order. – Forivin Jan 5 '18 at 12:06

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.