Kerberos Vault vs motionEye
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?
Kerberos Vault
Storage and lifecycle management for surveillance recordings
VS
motionEye
Web frontend for the Motion video surveillance program
| Feature | Kerberos Vault | motionEye |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Video Surveillance | Video Surveillance |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Go | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes | docker, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 42 | ★ 4,651 |
| First released | 2021 | 2013 |
| Replaces | Milestone XProtect | Nest Cam |
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 Kerberos Vault or motionEye better?
motionEye is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Kerberos Vault if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Kerberos Vault and motionEye free and open-source?
Yes. Kerberos Vault is licensed under MIT and motionEye under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Kerberos Vault and motionEye with Docker?
Kerberos Vault: yes. motionEye: yes.