boringproxy 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?
Featureboringproxylocaltunnel
Deploy effortUnder-an-hour setupUnder-an-hour setup
Health score15 · At risk52 · Fair
CategoryRemote Access & VPNRemote Access & VPN
LicenseMITMIT
LanguageGoJavaScript
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM64 MB128 MB
Deploymentbinary, dockerdocker, binary
GitHub stars★ 1,384★ 22,486
First released20202015
Replacesngrokngrok

What are boringproxy and localtunnel?

boringproxy

boringproxy is a simple but powerful tool for tunneling from a public server to a private machine, with automatic HTTPS. It is designed to be boringly reliable and easy to run.

  • Automatic HTTPS
  • Single binary
  • Web admin UI
  • Self-hosted tunneling

localtunnel

localtunnel exposes a local web server through a public URL without configuring DNS or firewalls. The server component is open source and can be self-hosted.

  • Public URL for localhost
  • Self-hostable server
  • No DNS configuration
  • Useful for webhooks

Read the full localtunnel guide →

boringproxy vs localtunnel: key differences

Boringproxy is written in Go, while localtunnel is built with JavaScript. Boringproxy is the lighter option, starting around 64 MB of RAM against 128 MB for localtunnel. Localtunnel is the more established project (first released 2015), while boringproxy arrived in 2020. Localtunnel has the considerably larger community, at 22,486 GitHub stars versus 1,384.

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)
boringproxy details

Choose localtunnel if…

  • Zero configuration
  • Free public URLs
  • Self-hostable server

Watch out for

  • Public server unreliable
  • Limited security controls
localtunnel details

Frequently asked questions

Is boringproxy 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 boringproxy and localtunnel free and open-source?

Yes. boringproxy is licensed under MIT and localtunnel under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run boringproxy and localtunnel with Docker?

boringproxy: yes. localtunnel: yes.

Which is lighter on resources, boringproxy or localtunnel?

boringproxy has the smaller minimum footprint at 64 MB of RAM, compared to about 128 MB for localtunnel. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.

Related comparisons