Hogwatch – a bandwidth monitor that shows per process network transfer(github.com)

195 pointsby cujanovic10 tahun yang lalu52 comments

Hogwatch – a bandwidth monitor that shows per process network transfer

https://github.com/akshayKMR/hogwatch

52 comments

sciurus10 tahun yang lalu

Under the hood, this is using nethogs. Here's how nethogs associates traffic with a process:

On linux the file /proc/net/tcp lists all established TCP connections. It includes the local and remote socket addresses and the inode number for the local socket. Nethogs uses libpcap to sniff traffic and associate it with its entry in /proc/net/tcp. It takes the inode from there and scans through /proc/*/fd/ looking for the file descripter that has that inode to determine which process has the socket open. Once it finds the process it adds it to a table of inode to process id mappings so it doesn’t have to scan through /proc again the second time a packet for that connection comes through.

akshayKMR10 tahun yang lalu

Hey, project author here. This is the first python package or project for that matter I've built for my college assignment.

I am really overwhelmed by the response. However the project is still very much unifinished.

Here are somethings that need to be fixed/added for eg.

-fix some bugs on frontend.(proper sort on listing/chart switching etc.)

-Kill nethogs process on exit // fails sometimes

-Store history for restarts.

-proper packaging.

-unit tests.

I'll add the above to the readme.md

First time on Hackernews/Github feed feels great though. Cheers.

aparadja10 tahun yang lalu

If you're on Mac and just want to monitor the connections that each process makes (not the bandwidth), Radio Silence just got a built-in network monitor a few weeks ago: https://radiosilenceapp.com

Disclaimer: I'm the author

asendra10 tahun yang lalu

Nice, first time I hear about it and seems really nice. Good work.

If I only wanted to monitor network connections on my mac, and block/allow them forever/for a limited time, is there any difference in functionality between this and Little Snitcher?

iamcreasy10 tahun yang lalu

Is there anything like that for windows? or any command line tool?

TheAceOfHearts10 tahun yang lalu

On OS X I use Little Snitch. Unfortunately, it's not free.

I noticed in one of your screenshots you use LS as well, do they serve different purposes or was it just a project for fun?

extra8810 tahun yang lalu

Its "interface" is terrible but in Terminal you can run OS X's nettop [0] to see per-network connection, per-process bytes per second in and out.

[0] https://developer.apple.com/legacy/library/documentation/Dar...

heywire10 tahun yang lalu

Somewhat on topic, anyone know of something like Little Snitch for Linux?

aroch10 tahun yang lalu

There's LeopardFire: https://github.com/themighty1/lpfw

IIRC, it is the most recently active project. As far as I can tell, the whole user-facing, interactive firewall program never really caught on in linux land.

eps10 tahun yang lalu

> Unfortunately, it's not free.

What's so unfortunate about it?

toyg10 tahun yang lalu

It's not just nonfree (in speech and beer), but it's also very expensive for a personal product IMHO.

user_000110 tahun yang lalu

lol, it's 30 euro. I was expecting something about 500!

dghughes10 tahun yang lalu

These days everyone it seems uses a mobile smartphone using apps usually free or less than $1 over that amount would seem excessive even $2 os let alone €30.

€30 ($43 + taxes Canadian to me) that's quite enough for software maybe not excessive but any more and I'd pass on it.

toyg10 tahun yang lalu

Most personal Mac apps are half that or less. It is expensive.

rodgerd10 tahun yang lalu

You can afford a Mac, but you begrudge the author of a useful utility $30 bucks for a perpetual license?

toyg10 tahun yang lalu

I don't "begrudge" anyone, I'm just pointing out where the price lies in the market.

vic20forever10 tahun yang lalu

Having purchased a computer in 1990 along with WordPerfect ($300 then - $540 in today's dollars) and Lotus 123 (another $300/$540), this makes me smile ;-)

eps10 tahun yang lalu

On Windows: Sysinternals Process Explorer, already mentioned Glasswire and NetBalancer and a bunch of other apps, almost all which aren't very good at all. But Glasswire is very nice.

mossity10 tahun yang lalu

Process Hacker is much better than Process Explorer, plus it's open source :)

samueladam10 tahun yang lalu

http://processhacker.sourceforge.net/

joenathan10 tahun yang lalu

Also from Windows 8 and up the built in task manager has per process network usage along with disk usage. Makes it real easy to find bottlenecks or resource hogs.

dylan60410 tahun yang lalu

Does this require Administrator rights to see this granularity? In my office as a non-admin user, we have noticed that Task Manager seems really crippled.

Godel_unicode10 tahun yang lalu

You won't see other users processes, at least on my box however the detail is there for yours. Probably possible for it to be crippled by group policy.

nitrogen10 tahun yang lalu

In previous versions of Windows, the task manager menus could be toggled by double clicking an empty area in the window. You should also be able to select additional columns to display in the options. Note: I haven't used the win8 taskmgr.

josephcooney10 tahun yang lalu

Task Manager or Resource Monitor (which you can launch from Task Manager)? I see lots of per-process stuff in the latter but not the former.

joenathan10 tahun yang lalu

Windows 10 Task Manager http://imgur.com/R9mbMZY

snoopmaster10 tahun yang lalu

I agree, GlassWire is nice on Windows https://www.glasswire.com

The memory usage used to be bad but it seems better now.

kalleboo10 tahun yang lalu

A quick alternative on Mac is "nettop" in the Terminal

hanief10 tahun yang lalu

Nice. I use Little Snitch myself. I also appreciate the clever naming. ;)

lsv110 tahun yang lalu

The final build should have proper shebangs and I also noticed the CSS is a little messy. I'll submit a pull request in a bit.

Otherwise I'll give it a shot.

jszymborski10 tahun yang lalu

I've been working on a similar python webserver + webview GUI from that used in this repo, but aren't there security concerns of just opening it up to the local network? Aren't you exposing your entire API to any app on the same computer?

babhishek2110 tahun yang lalu

I don't think so. If you look at the code carefully, it's pretty much one way traffic. Nothing of significance goes from Client/Webview to the server to get executed.

I was however hoping for authorization based handshakes. Maybe he'll put it in sometime.

On a side note: The project author doesn't sleep enough. He's a good friend. And also it's Finals Week now. :P

gardano10 tahun yang lalu

Dammit, now I've gone down a Terry Pratchett black hole again. Thanks, cujanovic.

yduuz10 tahun yang lalu

NetBalancer is a similar tool for Windows, with interesting functionality, but not free https://netbalancer.com

Havoc10 tahun yang lalu

Glasswire is also interesting. Way smoother looking interface than any of the other stuff I've seen & there is a paid edition as well so they clearly put time into it.

lmz10 tahun yang lalu

Resource Monitor (resmon.exe) is built-in and will display per process up/down network usage. It does not have per-process graphs AFAIK.

jhovgaard10 tahun yang lalu

It does, you just have to select them: http://i.imgur.com/begi54h.png (notice orange lines)

babhishek2110 tahun yang lalu

Honestly, Task Manager does the job for me. Windows 8 and up, it's great!

aroch10 tahun yang lalu

WFN is a free, open source alternative: https://wfn.codeplex.com/

SixSigma10 tahun yang lalu

cli version

http://linux.die.net/man/8/netstat

similarly for disk

http://linux.die.net/man/1/iotop

tyingq10 tahun yang lalu

Netstat isn't really similar as it's not mapping bandwidth use to processes.

Iftop and iptraf are command line, and map bandwidth use, but not to processes.

http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pdw/iftop/

http://iptraf.seul.org/

lsv110 tahun yang lalu

I use nethogs myself but it's not being placed on repos/ppa lately :( http://askubuntu.com/questions/726601/nethogs-%E2%86%92-crea...

bostik10 tahun yang lalu

My current tool of choice for on-demand console traffic monitoring is tcptrack.[0] Uses libpcap so accepts the same filtering syntax as tcpdump.

It can be pretty CPU intensive, so I would recommend against running it on production perimeter systems. Also, the 2 second default retention period is a bit short.

But all in all very handy.

0: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/tcptrack

lsv110 tahun yang lalu

Thanks, I'll give this a try.

keenerd10 tahun yang lalu

Hogwatch uses Nethogs too: "Hogwatch uses a light python webserver(bottle) feeding nethogs trace mode output to the frontend (Vue.js) using websockets."

I'm not sure why a straightforward graphing project is getting so many votes.

ethbro10 tahun yang lalu

Because it keeps other people from having to write a straightforward graphing project that does the same thing?

Utility isn't always linked to complexity.

hvis10 tahun yang lalu

When you upgrade to Xenial, nethogs 0.8.1 is there in the universe repo. Works fine here.

pmontra10 tahun yang lalu

hogswatch needs nethogs 0.8.2+. I'll try to build it from source.

Edit: built from source but stuck with other people in the installation of hogswatch https://github.com/akshayKMR/hogwatch/issues/3

hvis10 tahun yang lalu

I haven't tried hogswatch; judging by the screenshots, it doesn't bring anything more, information-wise, than what's already present in nethogs' terminal UI.

But 0.8.1 fixes the problem described on the askubuntu page the grand-grandparent linked to.

janee10 tahun yang lalu

would be nice to configure a central server to which to push data to and list the machine name with each entry so you can monitor all machines on a network and see who and what is hogging the bandwidth. Might give it a go

jlgaddis10 tahun yang lalu

At a network-level, other tools are often used (e.g. sflow, netflow, ipfix, etc.).

jcoffland10 tahun yang lalu

etherape is another option on Linux.