localtunnel vs x11vnc
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
x11vnc
VNC server for real X11 displays
| Feature | localtunnel | x11vnc |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | MIT | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | JavaScript | C |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | bare-metal, binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 22,440 | ★ 846 |
| First released | 2015 | 2002 |
| Replaces | ngrok | TightVNC, RealVNC |
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 x11vnc if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Written in C
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is localtunnel or x11vnc better?
localtunnel is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider x11vnc if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are localtunnel and x11vnc free and open-source?
Yes. localtunnel is licensed under MIT and x11vnc under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run localtunnel and x11vnc with Docker?
localtunnel: yes. x11vnc: check the project docs for container support.