SHSelfHostIndex

SoftEther VPN 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?
SO SoftEther VPN Multi-protocol VPN server from the University of Tsukuba VS TE Teleport Identity-aware access for infrastructure
FeatureSoftEther VPNTeleport
CategoryRemote Access & VPNRemote Access & VPN
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageCGo
Setup difficultyHardHard
Min. RAM256 MB1,024 MB
Deploymentbare-metal, binarydocker, kubernetes, binary
GitHub stars★ 13,447★ 20,780
First released20142016
ReplacesCisco AnyConnectCisco AnyConnect, AWS Systems Manager

Why pick each one

Choose SoftEther VPN if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Mature project with 13.4k GitHub stars
  • Written in C
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
SoftEther VPN details

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
Teleport details

Frequently asked questions

Is SoftEther VPN or Teleport better?

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

Are SoftEther VPN and Teleport free and open-source?

Yes. SoftEther VPN is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Teleport under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run SoftEther VPN and Teleport with Docker?

SoftEther VPN: check the project docs for container support. Teleport: yes.

Related comparisons