innernet vs WG-Easy
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?
innernet
Private network system using WireGuard
VS
WG-Easy
The easiest way to run WireGuard VPN with a web UI
| Feature | innernet | WG-Easy |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Rust | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | binary, bare-metal | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 5,520 | ★ 26,595 |
| First released | 2021 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Tailscale | OpenVPN Access Server |
Why pick each one
Choose innernet if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Mature project with 5.5k GitHub stars
- Written in Rust
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is innernet or WG-Easy better?
WG-Easy is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider innernet if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are innernet and WG-Easy free and open-source?
Yes. innernet is licensed under MIT and WG-Easy under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run innernet and WG-Easy with Docker?
innernet: check the project docs for container support. WG-Easy: yes.