Netmaker vs strongSwan
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Netmaker and strongSwan.
Quick Verdict
3.6/5
Netmaker
0 reviews
3.7/5
strongSwan
0 reviews
strongSwan is rated higher (3.7 vs 3.6). Netmaker is an open source platform for creating and managing WireGuard virtual networks. Self-hosted on your infrastructure. More feature-rich than raw WireGuard with a dashboard and ACL management. Modular open-source IPsec/IKE (IKEv2, RFC 7296) suite for site-to-site and remote-access VPNs, with X.509, smartcard/TPM, and EAP authentication. Runs on Linux, FreeBSD, macOS, Windows, and Android; GPLv2, free.
Netmaker Self-hosted WireGuard network management | strongSwan Open-source IPsec VPN implementation for Linux and embedded systems | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 3.6 (0 reviews) | 3.7 (0 reviews)✓ |
| Pricing model | freemium | free |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free |
| Best for | DevOps teams that want self-hosted WireGuard mesh networking with a dashboard, ACLs, and site-to-site links under their own control | Infrastructure teams building standards-compliant IPsec gateways, site-to-site tunnels, or certificate/EAP-based remote access on Linux, BSD, or embedded hardware, who are comfortable operating open-source security software. |
| Features | ||
| IPv6 | ||
| DDoS protection | ||
| Automated backups | ||
| Snapshots | ||
| Managed option | ||
| Bare metal | ||
| GPU available | ||
| S3-compatible | ||
| Hourly billing | ✓ | |
| Free tier | ||
| Tags | ||
| Tags | free tieropen sourceself hostableapi access | free tieropen sourceself hostable |
| Visit Netmaker → | Visit strongSwan → | |
Netmaker
Pros
- + Free community tier is unlimited — self-hosted, Apache 2.0, unlimited networks and devices
- + Per-active-connection billing with hourly proration instead of idle seat licenses
- + Peer-to-peer WireGuard mesh keeps traffic off a central bottleneck; relay and egress gateways cover hard NAT cases
- + Deployment choice: fully self-hosted, Netmaker Cloud, or fully managed by their team
- + Dual-stack IPv4/IPv6 networks, private DNS, OAuth, ACLs; SCIM/SIEM/traffic logs on Business
Cons
- - Very small vendor (single-digit headcount, ~$2.8M raised) behind a critical-path product
- - Pricing page mixes current per-connection rates with legacy platform/network fees and a $99/month plan — billing basis is ambiguous
- - Community tier is community-supported only; SLAs are Enterprise-only
- - Self-hosting the server adds operational overhead (upgrades, database, TLS, monitoring)
- - Native mobile meshing not supported — phones connect via gateway and the standard WireGuard app
strongSwan
Pros
- + Complete IKEv2 (RFC 7296) implementation with IKEv1 legacy support, free under GPLv2
- + Deep authentication: X.509 attribute certificates, PKCS#11 smartcards, TPM 2.0, EAP/RADIUS
- + Multiplatform — Linux, FreeBSD, macOS, Windows (MinGW), and a native Android client
- + Two-node HA mode with state takeover, MOBIKE for roaming peers, full IPv6 support
- + Plugin architecture and distro packages make it embeddable and easy to deploy
Cons
- - Steep configuration learning curve — swanctl, IKE proposals, and IPsec policy are expert tooling
- - No vendor SLA; free community support, commercial support is optional and limited
- - Overkill for simple server-to-server encryption where WireGuard is easier and faster
- - Patching and PKI operations are entirely on you
- - No control plane, dashboard, or appliance — it is a component, not a product
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new hosting and infrastructure providers, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.