ByteStash vs Cryptgeon

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?
FeatureByteStashCryptgeon
CategoryPastebins & SnippetsPastebins & Snippets
LicenseGPL-3.0MIT
LanguageTypeScriptSvelte
Setup difficultyMediumEasy
Min. RAM512 MB128 MB
Deploymentdockerdocker, binary
GitHub stars★ 2,514★ 1,497
First released20262021
ReplacesPrivateBin, One-Time Secret

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 Cryptgeon if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (1.5k GitHub stars)
Cryptgeon details

Frequently asked questions

Is ByteStash or Cryptgeon better?

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

Are ByteStash and Cryptgeon free and open-source?

Yes. ByteStash is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Cryptgeon under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run ByteStash and Cryptgeon with Docker?

ByteStash: yes. Cryptgeon: yes.

Related comparisons