Lufi vs PicoShare
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Lufi
Let users fight uploads with client-side encryption
VS
PicoShare
Minimalist file sharing for permanent direct links
| Feature | Lufi | PicoShare |
|---|---|---|
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Perl | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 300 | ★ 2,971 |
| First released | 2015 | 2021 |
| Replaces | WeTransfer, Firefox Send | Dropbox, WeTransfer |
Why pick each one
Choose Lufi if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Perl
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Choose PicoShare if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (3k GitHub stars)
Frequently asked questions
Is Lufi or PicoShare better?
PicoShare is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Lufi if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Lufi and PicoShare free and open-source?
Yes. Lufi is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and PicoShare under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Lufi and PicoShare with Docker?
Lufi: yes. PicoShare: yes.