boringproxy vs gTunnel
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?
boringproxy
Simple self-hosted reverse proxy and tunnel manager
VS
gTunnel
Robust TCP tunneling solution over gRPC
| Feature | boringproxy | gTunnel |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | binary, docker | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 1,381 | ★ 273 |
| First released | 2020 | 2020 |
| Replaces | ngrok | ngrok |
Why pick each one
Choose boringproxy if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (1.4k GitHub stars)
Choose gTunnel if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Go
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is boringproxy or gTunnel better?
boringproxy is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider gTunnel if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are boringproxy and gTunnel free and open-source?
Yes. boringproxy is licensed under MIT and gTunnel under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run boringproxy and gTunnel with Docker?
boringproxy: yes. gTunnel: yes.