Firezone vs localtunnel
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted remote access & vpn options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Firezone
Open-source secure remote access platform
VS
localtunnel
Expose your localhost to the world for testing
| Feature | Firezone | localtunnel |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Language | Elixir | JavaScript |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 8,993 | ★ 22,440 |
| First released | 2021 | 2015 |
| Replaces | Cisco AnyConnect, Tailscale | ngrok |
Why pick each one
Choose Firezone if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 9k GitHub stars
- Written in Elixir
Choose localtunnel if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 22.4k GitHub stars
Frequently asked questions
Is Firezone or localtunnel better?
localtunnel is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Firezone if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Firezone and localtunnel free and open-source?
Yes. Firezone is licensed under Apache-2.0 and localtunnel under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Firezone and localtunnel with Docker?
Firezone: yes. localtunnel: yes.