OpenVPN vs strongSwan
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?
OpenVPN
Robust and flexible open-source VPN solution
VS
strongSwan
Modern IPsec-based VPN implementation
| Feature | OpenVPN | strongSwan |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | GPL-2.0 | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | C | C |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, docker, binary | bare-metal, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 14,345 | ★ 2,934 |
| First released | 2001 | 2005 |
| Replaces | Cisco AnyConnect | Cisco AnyConnect |
Why pick each one
Choose OpenVPN if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 14.3k GitHub stars
- Written in C
Choose strongSwan if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Active community (2.9k GitHub stars)
- Written in C
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is OpenVPN or strongSwan better?
Neither is universally better. OpenVPN has the larger community; both share a hard setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are OpenVPN and strongSwan free and open-source?
Yes. OpenVPN is licensed under GPL-2.0 and strongSwan under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run OpenVPN and strongSwan with Docker?
OpenVPN: yes. strongSwan: check the project docs for container support.