acme.sh vs Shadowsocks-libev
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted reverse proxy & gateways options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
acme.sh
Pure shell ACME client for TLS certificates
VS
Shadowsocks-libev
Lightweight encrypted SOCKS5 proxy
| Feature | acme.sh | Shadowsocks-libev |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Reverse Proxy & Gateways | Reverse Proxy & Gateways |
| License | GPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Shell | C |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 32 MB | 32 MB |
| Deployment | binary, source | bare-metal, source, docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 47,426 | ★ 16,181 |
| First released | 2016 | 2014 |
| Replaces | Certbot | commercial VPN proxies |
Why pick each one
Choose acme.sh if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Mature project with 47.4k GitHub stars
- Written in Shell
Frequently asked questions
Is acme.sh or Shadowsocks-libev better?
acme.sh is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Shadowsocks-libev if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are acme.sh and Shadowsocks-libev free and open-source?
Yes. acme.sh is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Shadowsocks-libev under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run acme.sh and Shadowsocks-libev with Docker?
acme.sh: check the project docs for container support. Shadowsocks-libev: yes.