localtunnel vs Mosh
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?
localtunnel
Expose your localhost to the world for testing
VS
Mosh
Mobile shell with roaming and intermittent connectivity
| Feature | localtunnel | Mosh |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | JavaScript | C++ |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | bare-metal, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 22,440 | ★ 14,307 |
| First released | 2015 | 2012 |
| Replaces | ngrok | SSH |
Why pick each one
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
Choose Mosh if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Mature project with 14.3k GitHub stars
- Written in C++
Frequently asked questions
Is localtunnel or Mosh better?
Neither is universally better. localtunnel has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are localtunnel and Mosh free and open-source?
Yes. localtunnel is licensed under MIT and Mosh under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run localtunnel and Mosh with Docker?
localtunnel: yes. Mosh: check the project docs for container support.