Dufs vs transfer.sh
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?
Dufs
Distinctive utility file server with WebDAV support
VS
transfer.sh
Easy file sharing from the command line
| Feature | Dufs | transfer.sh |
|---|---|---|
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Language | Rust | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 32 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 10,562 | ★ 15,881 |
| First released | 2022 | 2014 |
| Replaces | Dropbox, Google Drive | WeTransfer |
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
Choose transfer.sh if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 15.9k GitHub stars
Frequently asked questions
Is Dufs or transfer.sh better?
Neither is universally better. transfer.sh has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Dufs and transfer.sh free and open-source?
Yes. Dufs is licensed under Apache-2.0 and transfer.sh under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Dufs and transfer.sh with Docker?
Dufs: yes. transfer.sh: yes.