noVNC vs Teleport
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?
noVNC
VNC client that runs entirely in the browser
VS
Teleport
Identity-aware access for infrastructure
| Feature | noVNC | Teleport |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | MPL-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | JavaScript | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 1,024 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, docker, source | docker, kubernetes, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 13,911 | ★ 20,780 |
| First released | 2010 | 2016 |
| Replaces | RealVNC | Cisco AnyConnect, AWS Systems Manager |
Why pick each one
Choose noVNC if…
- Released under the MPL-2.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 13.9k GitHub stars
Choose Teleport if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
- Mature project with 20.8k GitHub stars
Frequently asked questions
Is noVNC or Teleport better?
Neither is universally better. Teleport has the larger community, while noVNC is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are noVNC and Teleport free and open-source?
Yes. noVNC is licensed under MPL-2.0 and Teleport under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run noVNC and Teleport with Docker?
noVNC: yes. Teleport: yes.