Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Possible Duplicate:
Find what URL an EXE file is sending data to

Is it possible to find out what URL (not IP address and port) a program is requesting on Windows 7?

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Indrek, Diogo, Randolph West, allquixotic, Mokubai Aug 23 '12 at 17:09

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

up vote 3 down vote accepted

I have used Fiddler 2 for quite some times for such purposes. Also very handy to tinker with requests and see what exactly goes over the wire with HTTP.

share|improve this answer
Exactly what I needed, thanks! – Propeller Aug 23 '12 at 9:08

The Charles web debug proxy, for instance, can intercept and show you the URLs and data accessed by a program. I believe it is able to set itself up as the Windows system proxy, so should be able to intercept all URL calls made by programs.

There are lots of other debug proxies out there - google will find them for you. We've had great results with Charles though, so maybe start there.

share|improve this answer
any other service without the word proxy in it? That word is banned by my service provider. – 168335 Aug 23 '12 at 8:30
Fiddler 2 should work too. – Joey Aug 23 '12 at 8:39
Thanks @Joey, Fiddler2 seemedto have done the trick. And it's free! Will you write that as an answer? – Propeller Aug 23 '12 at 8:45

Install Wireshark - it'll let you monitor all outgoing and incoming traffic, and it is capable of examining the traffic in order to extract the URL being accessed.

Note that this cannot be done for https (secure) websites as the URL is encrypted. So you'll only get the IP address in those situations.

share|improve this answer
Wireshark is probably a bit overkill for monitoring just a single protocol. – Joey Aug 23 '12 at 8:40
Maybe, but it'd get the job done nicely. It's perfectly straightforward to only capture HTTP traffic so it's not a case of information overload. Plus you would need something that can do SPI in order to extract the actual URL from the requests. – PhonicUK Aug 23 '12 at 8:42

I've used Wireshark, Fiddler 2, Charles, and HTTP Analyzer.

Charles and Fiddler 2 have more debugging features then HTTP analyzer, such as ability to prevent requests from coming through, or allowing them to be edited, they can also view HTTPS via the browser. It's my understanding that they both work as a proxy and intercept that way, where as all HTTP/HTTPS is submitted through them, and then to the destination. Fiddler2 uses the default windows proxy system so it requires a firefox add-on to be installed.

Wireshark is the most technical but displays every bit of information you can obtain from the networking such as TCP and UDP protocols. It's not the recommended solution if all you are after is HTTP(S).

Sometimes when Charles or Fiddler 2 don't work as expected, such as when the application uses a non-compliant HTTP request. My typical go to application is Http Analyzer Standalone.

I think it works by actually injecting itself into the application and reading the WinINet and/or other APIs calls so there is no need to redirect the network to a debugging proxy. HTTP Analyzer can also read HTTPS if it goes through WinINet. The main issue with this solution is that it only has a 30 day trial and then you can't get access to raw data anymore - Where as I think fiddler2 and wireshark are freeware and Charles functions as normal but just with an annoying splash screen and automatically closing after a time interval.

Sometimes, when I have an application that I want to read what's being send via HTTPS I will use to run the connection through a debugging proxy - either HTTP or SOCKS mode depending on what you need, I've always had more success with Charles vs Fiddler2 using this.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .