/jump to repo

Repos Recent Bookmarks Watched Notes Tags Discover Compare Stats GitHub

Repository brief

shadowsocks/shadowsocks-android

Read the upstream summary on the left, browse the cached forks below it, and load each fork comparison into the right-hand panel.

Cached analysis

cached 2026-03-31T10:07:45.426Z

1mo ago

shadowsocks/shadowsocks-android

shadowsocks/shadowsocks-android is a long-lived, active Android client for Shadowsocks. It is widely used, with 36,729 stars and 11,518 forks, and it is not archived. The repo targets Android, Chrome OS, and Android TV, and the README shows a modern build setup with Kotlin, Gradle, Rust, and Android API 23+ support.

Loading tags...

Stars36,729

Forks11,518

Default branchmaster

Last pushed2026-02-18T07:09:54Z

Recommended shortcuts

Jump straight into Discofork's strongest cached fork picks, or open a compare view in one click.

Forks

Choose a fork to inspect

9 of 9 fork briefs

Maintenance:

Magnitude:

Sort:

Selected

Choose this fork only if ShadowsocksR compatibility or its older ACL/profile behavior is the goal. If you want an actively maintained Android client with current fixes and platform support, upstream is the safer default.

Choose this fork only if you need its ShadowsocksR-specific and proxy-subscription behavior. If you want an actively maintained Android client with newer upstream fixes, broader device support, and lower operational risk, upstream is the safer default.

Prefer this fork only if its older region-specific routing behavior is the point. For most users, upstream is the better choice because this fork is materially stale and likely missing many years of fixes and modern support.

Prefer this fork only if its no-ad branding and bundled rule-set behavior are exactly what you want. For most users, the upstream project is the safer choice because this fork is materially stale and behind on current maintenance.

Prefer this fork only if you specifically need its legacy custom routing and native-networking changes. For normal adopters, upstream is the safer choice because this fork is far behind and materially harder to maintain.

Choose this fork only if you want an almost stock Shadowsocks Android codebase and do not mind manually catching up with upstream. For most adopters, the upstream project is the better choice because it is active and materially ahead.

Choose this fork only if you need SSR-specific behavior and are comfortable maintaining an old, highly diverged client. For most adopters, the active upstream is the safer and more future-proof choice.

Choose upstream unless you specifically need this fork's older routing/plugin behavior. This fork is materially stale and likely carries significant maintenance and compatibility risk.

Choose this fork only if you need the Android server-oriented behavior; otherwise upstream looks much safer and better maintained.

Fork comparison

shadowsocksrr/shadowsocksr-android

38/100

stale

significant_divergence

Choose this fork only if ShadowsocksR compatibility or its older ACL/profile behavior is the goal. If you want an actively maintained Android client with current fixes and platform support, upstream is the safer default.

Likely purpose

Preserve or customize the older ShadowsocksR Android experience, likely centered on SSR-specific profiles, ACL/routing behavior, and plugin-related adjustments, rather than tracking upstream Android client development.

Best for

Users specifically needing a ShadowsocksR Android client; Maintainers willing to own an older fork and backport fixes themselves; Teams that prefer SSR-era behavior over staying aligned with upstream Shadowsocks

Additional features

ShadowsocksR-specific Android client behavior
Custom ACL/routing rule handling centered on `bypass-*.acl`, `gfwlist.acl`, and `china-list.acl` assets
Fork-specific profile, service, and plugin documentation/workflow changes implied by the heavily edited `ProfilesFragment`, `BaseService`, and `plugin/doc.md` paths
Adds or extends platform-specific client support, such as mobile, Android, iOS, or desktop packaging.
Expands API, schema, or SDK surface area for downstream integrations and generated clients.
Adds plugin, tool, or MCP-style extensibility beyond the upstream baseline.

Missing features

Falls far behind upstream maintenance and bugfixes, including recent dependency updates, build fixes, and the added E2E test workflow
Likely lacks newer upstream plugin behavior such as the 2026 change making VPN flags opt-in for plugins
Appears to have removed or reduced built-in ACL rule-pack content, given the large deletions in bundled ACL asset files
Does not track upstream’s recent Android/Chrome OS/Android TV maintenance and release work
It trails upstream by 231 commits, so some recent upstream features and fixes are likely not present yet.

Strengths

May better fit users who need ShadowsocksR compatibility
Likely offers older SSR-era routing and profile workflows that some users may still prefer
Could be attractive to adopters who want a frozen, less-changing codebase

Risks

Very stale compared with upstream, with the last push in 2019
Large divergence and heavy deletions make it harder to judge compatibility and long-term maintainability
Users may miss upstream fixes, test coverage, and newer platform behavior
Potentially weaker support for current Android and plugin expectations

shadowsocks/shadowsocks-android · Discofork