Authelia vs Infisical
| Tagline | Self-hosted authentication server with TOTP, WebAuthn, and SSO | Open-source secrets management platform for developers and teams |
| Category | Password Managers & Secrets | Password Managers & Secrets |
| Replaces | 1Password, HashiCorp Vault | HashiCorp Vault |
| GitHub stars | 29k | 29k |
| Language | Go | TypeScript |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | today | today |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Authelia
- Not a password vault; does not store or generate passwords for websites
- Requires a reverse proxy to function; no standalone mode
- LDAP/AD integration configuration is complex for non-enterprise users
Infisical
- Core is MIT but a number of features live under an enterprise (ee) license requiring a paid plan
- Less battle-tested than Vault for low-level cryptographic/dynamic-secret workloads
- Self-hosted instances do not include all features available in the paid cloud tier
- Smaller plugin/integration catalog than HashiCorp Vault
Bottom line
Both are a similar lift to self-host; choose Infisical for the larger community and ecosystem. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.