Lufi vs transfer.sh
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
| Feature | Lufi | transfer.sh |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy effort | Under-an-hour setup | Under-an-hour setup |
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | Perl | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 300 | ★ 15,897 |
| First released | 2015 | 2014 |
| Replaces | WeTransfer, Firefox Send | WeTransfer |
What are Lufi and transfer.sh?
Lufi
Lufi is a file hosting application where files are encrypted in the browser before being uploaded, so the server never sees their contents. Files can be set to delete after a chosen expiration period.
- Client-side encryption
- Automatic file expiration
- Part of the Framasoft suite
transfer.sh
transfer.sh is a service that lets you upload and share files directly from the command line using curl. It supports encryption, S3 and Google Cloud Storage backends, and maximum download counts.
- Command-line uploads with curl
- Multiple storage backends
- Optional encryption
Lufi vs transfer.sh: key differences
Lufi is written in Perl, while transfer.sh is built with Go. Licensing differs — AGPL-3.0 for Lufi versus MIT for transfer.sh. Transfer.sh is the lighter option, starting around 64 MB of RAM against 128 MB for Lufi. Transfer.sh has the considerably larger community, at 15,897 GitHub stars versus 300.
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 transfer.sh if…
- Curl-friendly uploads
- S3 backend support
- Download limits and encryption
Watch out for
- Sparse recent development
- Minimal web interface
Frequently asked questions
Is Lufi or transfer.sh better?
transfer.sh 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 transfer.sh free and open-source?
Yes. Lufi is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and transfer.sh under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Lufi and transfer.sh with Docker?
Lufi: yes. transfer.sh: yes.
Which is lighter on resources, Lufi or transfer.sh?
transfer.sh has the smaller minimum footprint at 64 MB of RAM, compared to about 128 MB for Lufi. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.