Kong Gateway vs UUSEC WAF
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted reverse proxy & gateways options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Kong Gateway
Cloud-native, fast, scalable API gateway
VS
UUSEC WAF
Industry-leading high-performance, AI and semantic technology web
| Feature | Kong Gateway | UUSEC WAF |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Reverse Proxy & Gateways | Reverse Proxy & Gateways |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Lua | Shell |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, helm | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 43,947 | ★ 1,699 |
| First released | 2015 | 2026 |
| Replaces | AWS API Gateway, Apigee | — |
Why pick each one
Choose Kong Gateway if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
- Mature project with 43.9k GitHub stars
Choose UUSEC WAF if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (1.7k GitHub stars)
- Written in Shell
Frequently asked questions
Is Kong Gateway or UUSEC WAF better?
Neither is universally better. Kong Gateway has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Kong Gateway and UUSEC WAF free and open-source?
Yes. Kong Gateway is licensed under Apache-2.0 and UUSEC WAF under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Kong Gateway and UUSEC WAF with Docker?
Kong Gateway: yes. UUSEC WAF: yes.