Lufi vs XBackBone
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
XBackBone
Lightweight file manager with full ShareX support
| Feature | Lufi | XBackBone |
|---|---|---|
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Perl | PHP |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 50 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 300 | ★ 1,161 |
| First released | 2015 | 2023 |
| Replaces | WeTransfer, Firefox Send | 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 XBackBone if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Active community (1.2k GitHub stars)
- Written in PHP
Frequently asked questions
Is Lufi or XBackBone better?
XBackBone 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 XBackBone free and open-source?
Yes. Lufi is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and XBackBone under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Lufi and XBackBone with Docker?
Lufi: yes. XBackBone: check the project docs for container support.