Dufs vs Kubo (IPFS)

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

Not the right match-up?
FeatureDufsKubo (IPFS)
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseApache-2.0MIT
LanguageRustGo
Setup difficultyEasyHard
Min. RAM32 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, binarydocker, binary, snap
GitHub stars★ 10,562★ 17,093
First released20222015
ReplacesDropbox, Google DriveDropbox

Why pick each one

Choose Dufs if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 10.6k GitHub stars
Dufs details

Choose Kubo (IPFS) if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 17.1k GitHub stars
  • Written in Go
Kubo (IPFS) details

Frequently asked questions

Is Dufs or Kubo (IPFS) better?

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

Are Dufs and Kubo (IPFS) free and open-source?

Yes. Dufs is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Kubo (IPFS) under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Dufs and Kubo (IPFS) with Docker?

Dufs: yes. Kubo (IPFS): yes.

Related comparisons