MyRecon vs Maigret

What Maigret is

Maigret is an MIT-licensed Python tool that searches for accounts by username. Its README describes a catalogue of about 5,900 sites, with a default run covering the 500 highest-traffic ones and a flag to scan them all. It goes well beyond "does this profile exist": it parses profile pages for names, links and other IDs, then searches again on whatever it found. It filters by site tags and countries, can check Tor and I2P sites, tries to detect and work around blocks and CAPTCHAs, and exports reports as HTML, PDF, XMind mind maps, interactive graphs and Neo4j scripts. You can run it from a terminal, launch a local web interface, or use a community Telegram bot.

We tested Maigret's list, and here is what happened

In September 2026 we took Maigret's public site data, removed the platforms we already covered, and ran our own two-handle test on 1,015 of the remaining sites: one real username and one that cannot exist, compared response by response.

• 688 sites answered the two differently, so they can genuinely tell an account from no account.
• 105 answered identically, including 66 that returned 200 OK for both. Any tool trusting the status code on those sites will report an account for every name.
• 222 could not be reached from our machine at all.

We added the 688 behind a flag in our Android app, more than doubling its catalogue, and then ran real searches with it. The larger list found one true account the smaller list had missed. One. We kept that platform and removed the rest, because a sweep twice as long that finds nothing new is slower, not better. The full reasoning is in our guide on why username checkers report fake accounts.

This is not a verdict on Maigret, whose maintainers do real work on detection and whose data is what made the test possible. It is a verdict on a number. "5,900 sites" and "560 sites" measure the size of a list, not the number of true accounts found. The size that matters is the second one, and nobody publishes it.

Where Maigret beats MyRecon

• Depth on a single target. Recursive search and profile parsing can turn one handle into a web of linked identities automatically. MyRecon offers the pivots and lets you choose each step.
• Reports. A PDF or a graph you can hand to a client or attach to a case file. Ours is a printable page and JSON or CSV.
• Regional and niche coverage. Country tags and thousands of long-tail sites mean it knows forums we have never heard of.
• Tor and I2P. MyRecon does not check onion services at all, and says so.

Where MyRecon beats Maigret

• Zero setup. Maigret is a serious tool with a learning curve. MyRecon is a text box.
• Speed to a first answer. Fewer, better-behaved platforms means a result in seconds, not a long full scan.
• Scored, explained results. Every match carries a confidence label, and every platform we checked but did not report is listed with the reason.
• Everything else on the same page. Email provider and breach exposure, WHOIS through RDAP, DNS over HTTPS, IP ownership, SPF and DMARC verdicts, and a password check that never sends the password. Maigret is a username specialist.

Which one should you use?

If the job is a deep investigation into one online identity, Maigret is the stronger tool, and you should budget the time to verify what it reports. If the job is a quick check of a handle, your own footprint, or a lead that is about to become an email or a domain question, MyRecon is faster and keeps the whole trail on one page. Running both and trusting only the accounts both agree on is a cheap and effective way to cut false positives.

Questions people ask

Other comparisons