Pros of Streisand

• Automates the setup of multiple VPN protocols and services
• Provides a comprehensive suite of privacy-enhancing tools
• Supports various cloud providers for easy deployment

Cons of Streisand

• More complex setup process compared to Easy-RSA
• Requires more system resources due to multiple services
• May include unnecessary services for some users

Code Comparison

Easy-RSA:

./easyrsa init-pki
./easyrsa build-ca
./easyrsa gen-req server nopass
./easyrsa sign-req server server

Streisand:

- name: Set up OpenVPN
  include_role:
    name: openvpn
- name: Set up Shadowsocks
  include_role:
    name: shadowsocks

Easy-RSA focuses solely on certificate management for OpenVPN, while Streisand automates the setup of multiple VPN protocols and privacy tools. Easy-RSA provides a simpler, more focused approach to certificate management, whereas Streisand offers a broader range of services but with increased complexity. Easy-RSA is more suitable for users who only need OpenVPN certificates, while Streisand is better for those seeking a comprehensive privacy solution across multiple protocols and services.

Pros of algo

• Simplified setup process with automated deployment scripts
• Supports multiple VPN protocols (WireGuard, IPsec/IKEv2)
• Enhanced security features and modern encryption standards

Cons of algo

• Less flexible and customizable compared to easy-rsa
• Limited to cloud-based deployments, not ideal for on-premises setups
• Steeper learning curve for users familiar with traditional OpenVPN setups

Code comparison

easy-rsa:

./easyrsa init-pki
./easyrsa build-ca
./easyrsa gen-req server nopass
./easyrsa sign-req server server

algo:

- name: Set up WireGuard VPN
  hosts: localhost
  roles:
    - role: wireguard

The easy-rsa example shows manual certificate generation steps, while algo uses Ansible roles for automated deployment.

Summary

algo offers a more streamlined, cloud-focused VPN setup with modern protocols, while easy-rsa provides greater flexibility for traditional OpenVPN deployments. easy-rsa is better suited for users who need fine-grained control over their VPN infrastructure, whereas algo caters to those seeking a quick, secure cloud VPN solution with less manual configuration.

Pros of openvpn-install

• Simplified, automated installation process
• All-in-one script for setup, user management, and configuration
• Beginner-friendly with minimal user input required

Cons of openvpn-install

• Less flexibility and customization options
• Limited to specific operating systems (mainly Debian-based)
• May not be suitable for complex enterprise environments

Code Comparison

easy-rsa:

./easyrsa init-pki
./easyrsa build-ca
./easyrsa gen-req server nopass
./easyrsa sign-req server server
./easyrsa gen-dh

openvpn-install:

wget https://git.io/vpn -O openvpn-install.sh
chmod +x openvpn-install.sh
./openvpn-install.sh

Summary

easy-rsa is a flexible key management tool for OpenVPN, offering granular control over certificate creation and management. It's suitable for various environments and provides extensive customization options.

openvpn-install is a user-friendly script that automates the entire OpenVPN setup process. It's ideal for quick deployments and users who prefer a streamlined approach, but may lack advanced features for complex setups.

The choice between the two depends on the user's needs, technical expertise, and deployment requirements. easy-rsa is better for those who need fine-grained control, while openvpn-install is perfect for rapid, straightforward deployments.

Pros of docker-openvpn

• Containerized solution, offering easier deployment and isolation
• Includes built-in scripts for managing users and certificates
• Provides a more streamlined setup process for OpenVPN

Cons of docker-openvpn

• Less flexibility in configuration compared to easy-rsa
• Requires Docker knowledge and infrastructure
• May have a slightly larger footprint due to container overhead

Code Comparison

easy-rsa:

./easyrsa init-pki
./easyrsa build-ca
./easyrsa gen-req server nopass
./easyrsa sign-req server server

docker-openvpn:

docker run -v $PWD:/etc/openvpn --rm kylemanna/openvpn ovpn_genconfig -u udp://VPN.SERVERNAME.COM
docker run -v $PWD:/etc/openvpn --rm -it kylemanna/openvpn ovpn_initpki
docker run -v $PWD:/etc/openvpn -d -p 1194:1194/udp --cap-add=NET_ADMIN kylemanna/openvpn

The easy-rsa repository focuses on providing a flexible set of scripts for managing a PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) for OpenVPN. It offers more granular control over the certificate generation process but requires more manual steps.

The docker-openvpn repository, on the other hand, encapsulates the OpenVPN setup process within a Docker container. It simplifies deployment and management but may be less customizable for advanced use cases.

Both projects serve the purpose of setting up OpenVPN, but they cater to different deployment preferences and levels of expertise.

Pros of setup-ipsec-vpn

• Simpler setup process with automated scripts for quick deployment
• Supports a wider range of devices and operating systems out-of-the-box
• Includes additional security features like fail2ban integration

Cons of setup-ipsec-vpn

• Less flexibility in customizing certificate management
• May require more system resources compared to OpenVPN
• Limited to IPsec/L2TP and IPsec/XAuth ("Cisco IPsec") protocols

Code Comparison

setup-ipsec-vpn:

wget https://git.io/vpnsetup -O vpnsetup.sh
sudo sh vpnsetup.sh

easy-rsa:

./easyrsa init-pki
./easyrsa build-ca
./easyrsa gen-req server nopass

The setup-ipsec-vpn project focuses on simplicity with a single script for deployment, while easy-rsa provides more granular control over certificate management. setup-ipsec-vpn is ideal for quick, standardized VPN setups, whereas easy-rsa offers more flexibility for customizing OpenVPN configurations and certificate handling.