ZeroTier vs strongSwan
A detailed comparison to help you choose between ZeroTier and strongSwan.
Quick Verdict
3.7/5
ZeroTier
0 reviews
3.7/5
strongSwan
0 reviews
Both ZeroTier and strongSwan are equally rated at 3.7/5. ZeroTier creates virtual Ethernet networks over the internet. Connect servers, VMs, and devices as if on the same LAN. Personal plan is free for 10 devices (non-commercial). SDN-based layer-2 architecture. 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.
ZeroTier Virtual networking — Ethernet over the internet | strongSwan Open-source IPsec VPN implementation for Linux and embedded systems | |
|---|---|---|
| Overview | ||
| Rating | 3.7 (0 reviews) | 3.7 (0 reviews) |
| Pricing model | freemium | free |
| Starting price | Free tier available | Free |
| Best for | Homelab operators, LAN-dependent software, and device-heavy, user-light fleets that need a flat virtual Ethernet network | 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 sourceapi access | free tieropen sourceself hostable |
| Visit ZeroTier → | Visit strongSwan → | |
ZeroTier
Pros
- + True layer-2 virtual Ethernet: broadcast and multicast work, unlike WireGuard-based overlays
- + Free Personal plan covers a 10-device homelab with no time limit
- + Native IPv6 support with RFC 4193, 6PLANE /80 delegation and public prefix routing
- + Lightweight agents (under 16 MB memory) with broad platform support including MikroTik and Docker
- + Direct peer-to-peer paths keep traffic off vendor infrastructure when NAT traversal succeeds
Cons
- - Free tier shrank to 10 devices, one network, non-commercial only; no API without a paid plan
- - No forward secrecy in its Salsa20/Poly1305 protocol, unlike WireGuard-based rivals
- - Since v1.16 the controller is non-commercial source-available; commercial self-hosting means Enterprise
- - Relayed fallback traffic is slow, and paid Premium Relays are still listed as coming soon
- - Monthly-only, non-refundable subscriptions with configuration lockout if payment lapses
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.