Rubywarden vs One-Time Secret
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?
Rubywarden
Experimental Ruby implementation of the Bitwarden API
VS
One-Time Secret
Share sensitive credentials with self-destructing links
| Feature | Rubywarden | One-Time Secret |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Password Managers | Password Managers |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | Ruby | Ruby |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, source | docker, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 589 | ★ 2,894 |
| First released | 2017 | 2012 |
| Replaces | Bitwarden, 1Password | 1Password, Doppler |
Why pick each one
Choose One-Time Secret if…
- Great for one-off credential sharing
- Easy to self-host
Frequently asked questions
Is Rubywarden or One-Time Secret better?
One-Time Secret is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Rubywarden if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Rubywarden and One-Time Secret free and open-source?
Yes. Rubywarden is licensed under MIT and One-Time Secret under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Rubywarden and One-Time Secret with Docker?
Rubywarden: check the project docs for container support. One-Time Secret: yes.