SHSelfHostIndex

ByteStash vs Encrypted Pastebin

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted pastebins & snippets options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
BY ByteStash Pastebin and file storage service with a simple web interface VS EN Encrypted Pastebin Zero-knowledge encrypted text and code sharing
FeatureByteStashEncrypted Pastebin
CategoryPastebins & SnippetsPastebins & Snippets
LicenseGPL-3.0Zlib
LanguageTypeScriptPHP
Setup difficultyMediumEasy
Min. RAM512 MB128 MB
Deploymentdockerdocker, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 2,514★ 83
First released20262016
Replaces—Pastebin.com, GitHub Gist

Why pick each one

Choose ByteStash if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (2.5k GitHub stars)
  • Written in TypeScript
ByteStash details

Choose Encrypted Pastebin if…

  • Released under the Zlib license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Written in PHP
Encrypted Pastebin details

Frequently asked questions

Is ByteStash or Encrypted Pastebin better?

Neither is universally better. ByteStash has the larger community, while Encrypted Pastebin is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are ByteStash and Encrypted Pastebin free and open-source?

Yes. ByteStash is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Encrypted Pastebin under Zlib. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run ByteStash and Encrypted Pastebin with Docker?

ByteStash: yes. Encrypted Pastebin: yes.

Related comparisons