All comparisons
toran vs Nginx / Envoy logging
Nginx and Envoy are widely used proxies. Teams often add access logs, headers, or custom filters to get visibility into HTTP requests. This can work well, but it is a DIY approach that comes with configuration, operational, and privacy overhead.
What proxy-level logging is good at
- ✓Capturing request/response metadata at high volume
- ✓Integrating with existing infrastructure and log pipelines
- ✓Adding routing, retries, and policy controls when needed (beyond logging)
Where the DIY approach falls short
- △Complex configuration and subtle failure modes (timeouts, buffering, header handling)
- △Easy to accidentally log sensitive data without strong defaults
- △Operational burden: scaling, retention, search, and access control
- △Harder to keep changes reversible once baked into deployments
How toran is different
- →toran provides a ready-made forward proxy with no infrastructure to operate
- →Activation is reversible by swapping a base URL
- →Read-only by design: toran does not retry, cache, or mutate requests
- →Built-in safety defaults for redaction and text-only body logging
- →Designed for understanding third-party API consumption, not running production routing
💡
Quick decision rule
Use Nginx/Envoy logging if you already operate proxy infrastructure and want maximum control, even if it means more maintenance. Use toran if you want immediate, reversible visibility into outbound API requests with conservative logging defaults.
Ready to try toran?
See your outbound API requests in seconds - no setup required.