Cameradar vs Kerberos Vault
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted video surveillance options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Cameradar
RTSP stream discovery and access-auditing tool for cameras
VS
Kerberos Vault
Storage and lifecycle management for surveillance recordings
| Feature | Cameradar | Kerberos Vault |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Video Surveillance | Video Surveillance |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 1,024 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary, source | docker, kubernetes |
| GitHub stars | ★ 5,147 | ★ 42 |
| First released | 2016 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Commercial camera audit tools | Milestone XProtect |
Why pick each one
Choose Kerberos Vault if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
- Written in Go
Frequently asked questions
Is Cameradar or Kerberos Vault better?
Cameradar is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider Kerberos Vault if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Cameradar and Kerberos Vault free and open-source?
Yes. Cameradar is licensed under MIT and Kerberos Vault under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Cameradar and Kerberos Vault with Docker?
Cameradar: yes. Kerberos Vault: yes.