SHSelfHostIndex

Mosh vs WG-Easy

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?
MO Mosh Mobile shell with roaming and intermittent connectivity VS WG WG-Easy The easiest way to run WireGuard VPN with a web UI
FeatureMoshWG-Easy
CategoryRemote Access & VPNRemote Access & VPN
LicenseGPL-3.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageC++TypeScript
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM64 MB128 MB
Deploymentbare-metal, binarydocker
GitHub stars★ 14,307★ 26,595
First released20122021
ReplacesSSHOpenVPN Access Server

Why pick each one

Choose Mosh if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Mature project with 14.3k GitHub stars
  • Written in C++
Mosh details

Choose WG-Easy if…

  • Extremely easy setup
  • Friendly UI
WG-Easy details

Frequently asked questions

Is Mosh or WG-Easy better?

Neither is universally better. WG-Easy has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Mosh and WG-Easy free and open-source?

Yes. Mosh is licensed under GPL-3.0 and WG-Easy under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Mosh and WG-Easy with Docker?

Mosh: check the project docs for container support. WG-Easy: yes.

Related comparisons