Ultraviolet vs Nebula vs Other Proxies — Full Comparison 2026

The Titanium Network Ecosystem — Context First

Titanium Network is the open-source organization behind most of the serious service-worker proxy projects in active development. They maintain Ultraviolet, Nebula, and several supporting libraries. Understanding that these are sibling projects from the same organization — not competing commercial products — explains why they share code and why choosing between them is a technical question rather than a brand loyalty one.

All proxies covered here operate client-side using service workers. None of them route traffic through a centralized server the way a traditional VPN or HTTP tunnel proxy does. This shared architecture means they share both the strengths (speed, simplicity, no software installation) and the limitations (blocked by service-worker-aware filters, browser compatibility requirements) of the service worker model.

Ultraviolet Proxy — The Established Standard

Ultraviolet is the most mature and widely deployed project in the Titanium Network suite. It introduced the bare server protocol, which separated the client-side service worker from the server-side transport layer — a design decision that allowed the two components to evolve independently and made Ultraviolet significantly more scalable than earlier monolithic proxy tools.

Key strengths of Ultraviolet as a proxy platform: broad compatibility with modern JavaScript-heavy sites, active maintenance with regular updates, the largest community of self-hosters, and the widest availability of documentation and tutorials. When users search for ultraviolet proxy instances or ultraviolet proxy links, they are almost always looking for Ultraviolet specifically — it has become the generic name for this category of tool.

Ultraviolet Proxy Nebula — A Newer Architecture

Nebula is Titanium Network's next-generation proxy, designed to address specific limitations in Ultraviolet's architecture. The core difference is in how Nebula handles the transport layer. While Ultraviolet relies on the bare or wisp server protocol, Nebula uses a different approach that is designed to be more resistant to traffic pattern analysis — meaning networks that identify Ultraviolet by its request signature may not catch Nebula.

In terms of ultraviolet proxy nebula comparison, Nebula is faster in benchmarks for specific content types, particularly for video streaming and large file downloads. This is because its transport protocol is optimized for sustained throughput rather than the general-purpose request-response model that Ultraviolet's bare server uses.

However, Nebula has a smaller community, fewer available instances, and less documentation than Ultraviolet. For a first-time self-hoster, Ultraviolet remains the more accessible choice. Nebula is best suited for technically experienced users who need its specific performance or evasion characteristics.

TN Proxy — Titanium Network's Historical Legacy

The ultraviolet tn proxy label refers to the broader category of proxy tools developed under the Titanium Network brand, sometimes used loosely to describe older tools that predate Ultraviolet. The original TN proxy tools (Corrosion, Rammerhead) used server-side rewriting rather than service workers. Rammerhead, for instance, processes entire HTML documents server-side before sending them to the client — a fundamentally different architecture from Ultraviolet's client-side approach.

Rammerhead and Corrosion are still in use on some self-hosted instances, but they are no longer under active development. Ultraviolet replaced them as the primary recommendation from Titanium Network because the service worker model is faster, more maintainable, and doesn't require the server to parse HTML — reducing CPU load dramatically on high-traffic instances.

Ultraviolet-Based Proxy Forks and Derivatives

The open-source nature of Ultraviolet has spawned a wide ecosystem of ultraviolet-based proxy projects. These forks range from minor modifications (custom themes, different default prefixes) to substantial rewrites (different transport protocols, additional access control layers).

Common derivatives include proxies that swap the UV frontend for a different UI while keeping the bare/wisp backend intact, proxies that add authentication layers for private deployment, and projects that bundle Ultraviolet inside a larger academic tool collection (often distributed as all-in-one school proxy sites with games, tools, and proxy functionality combined).

When evaluating an ultraviolet-based proxy, the key questions are: Is the bare/wisp server still the one maintained by Titanium Network, or has it been replaced? Is the uv.config.js pointing to a legitimate bare server endpoint? Has the uv.bundle.js been modified in any way? A modified bundle is the highest-risk element — it touches every page you browse through the proxy.

What Is Ultraviolet Proxy BBS?

Ultraviolet proxy BBS refers to instances deployed on BBS-style hosting or community portal platforms — essentially bulletin-board-system-inspired platforms where proxy links, tools, and communities aggregate. The term is also used in some communities to describe proxy link aggregators that list hundreds of ultraviolet instances in a directory format.

BBS-style ultraviolet proxy pages are useful for discovering new instances but carry the same caveats as any third-party proxy list — links go stale quickly and the quality of operators is unverifiable. Treat BBS proxy lists as a starting point for finding instances, not a guarantee of quality or safety.

IP Address Considerations for Proxy Users

A common misconception about ultraviolet proxy ip address behavior: Ultraviolet does not hide your IP address from the websites you visit. The bare/wisp server fetches content on your behalf — the target website sees the IP address of the bare server, not your personal IP. However, the operator of the bare server sees both your IP and your browsing destinations.

This distinction is critical. Ultraviolet is designed to bypass content filters, not to provide anonymity. If you need to hide your IP address from your ISP or from target websites simultaneously, a VPN is the appropriate tool. Ultraviolet and a VPN can be used together — the VPN hides your IP from the bare server operator, while Ultraviolet bypasses content filters on the VPN network.

On school networks specifically: your school network administrator can see that you are making connections to the proxy server's IP address, even if they cannot see the content of those connections. Ultraviolet's URL encoding and service worker architecture prevent deep-packet inspection from identifying specific destinations, but the existence of proxy server connections is visible at the network infrastructure level.

Performance Comparison Summary

Based on community benchmarks and deployment experience across the Titanium Network ecosystem:

• General browsing speed: Ultraviolet ≈ Nebula > Rammerhead (Rammerhead adds server-side parsing overhead)
• Video streaming: Nebula > Ultraviolet (Nebula's transport is optimized for sustained throughput)
• Site compatibility: Ultraviolet > Nebula > Corrosion (Ultraviolet has the most battle-tested DOM rewriter)
• Evasion resistance: Nebula > Ultraviolet (Nebula has a less-recognized traffic signature)
• Community support and documentation: Ultraviolet > all others (by a wide margin)

Which Proxy Should You Use?

Use Ultraviolet if you want maximum compatibility, ease of deployment, and community support. It handles the overwhelming majority of websites correctly and has the most deployment resources available online. For most users — students bypassing school filters, workers accessing blocked sites, travelers accessing home content — Ultraviolet is the right answer.

Consider Nebula if you are an experienced deployer whose network has specifically started blocking Ultraviolet's traffic signature, or if video streaming performance is your primary use case. Be prepared for less documentation and a smaller support community.

Avoid older TN proxy tools (Rammerhead, Corrosion) for new deployments — they are unmaintained and have lower site compatibility than current Ultraviolet. They may still appear in ultraviolet proxy list repositories, but they represent legacy infrastructure rather than current best practice.