pass-otp vs Rubywarden
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted password managers options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
pass-otp
One-time-password extension for the pass manager
VS
Rubywarden
Experimental Ruby implementation of the Bitwarden API
| Feature | pass-otp | Rubywarden |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Password Managers | Password Managers |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | Shell | Ruby |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 32 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | binary, source | bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 1,485 | ★ 589 |
| First released | 2017 | 2017 |
| Replaces | Authy, 1Password | Bitwarden, 1Password |
Why pick each one
Choose pass-otp if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Active community (1.5k GitHub stars)
- Written in Shell
- Tiny footprint — runs in 32 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is pass-otp or Rubywarden better?
Neither is universally better. pass-otp has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are pass-otp and Rubywarden free and open-source?
Yes. pass-otp is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Rubywarden under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run pass-otp and Rubywarden with Docker?
pass-otp: check the project docs for container support. Rubywarden: check the project docs for container support.