localtunnel vs Shell In A Box
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
Shell In A Box
Web-based terminal emulator for remote shell access
| Feature | localtunnel | Shell In A Box |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | MIT | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | JavaScript | C |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | bare-metal, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 22,440 | ★ 3,088 |
| First released | 2015 | 2009 |
| Replaces | ngrok | PuTTY |
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 Shell In A Box if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Active community (3.1k GitHub stars)
- Written in C
Frequently asked questions
Is localtunnel or Shell In A Box 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 Shell In A Box free and open-source?
Yes. localtunnel is licensed under MIT and Shell In A Box under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run localtunnel and Shell In A Box with Docker?
localtunnel: yes. Shell In A Box: check the project docs for container support.