bore vs localtunnel
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted remote access & vpn options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
bore
Modern, simple TCP tunnel in Rust
VS
localtunnel
Expose your localhost to the world for testing
| Feature | bore | localtunnel |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | Rust | JavaScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | binary, docker | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 11,363 | ★ 22,440 |
| First released | 2022 | 2015 |
| Replaces | ngrok | ngrok |
Why pick each one
Choose bore if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 11.4k GitHub stars
Choose localtunnel if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 22.4k GitHub stars
Frequently asked questions
Is bore or localtunnel better?
Neither is universally better. localtunnel has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are bore and localtunnel free and open-source?
Yes. bore is licensed under MIT and localtunnel under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run bore and localtunnel with Docker?
bore: yes. localtunnel: yes.