SHSelfHostIndex

WebSSH2 vs WG-Easy

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?
WE WebSSH2 Web-based SSH client using xterm.js and WebSockets VS WG WG-Easy The easiest way to run WireGuard VPN with a web UI
FeatureWebSSH2WG-Easy
CategoryRemote Access & VPNRemote Access & VPN
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageTypeScriptTypeScript
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM128 MB128 MB
Deploymentdocker, sourcedocker
GitHub stars★ 2,766★ 26,595
First released20172021
ReplacesPuTTYOpenVPN Access Server

Why pick each one

Choose WebSSH2 if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (2.8k GitHub stars)
WebSSH2 details

Choose WG-Easy if…

  • Extremely easy setup
  • Friendly UI
WG-Easy details

Frequently asked questions

Is WebSSH2 or WG-Easy better?

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

Are WebSSH2 and WG-Easy free and open-source?

Yes. WebSSH2 is licensed under Apache-2.0 and WG-Easy under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run WebSSH2 and WG-Easy with Docker?

WebSSH2: yes. WG-Easy: yes.

Related comparisons