Pros of algo

• More comprehensive security features, including stronger encryption and firewall rules
• Supports a wider range of cloud providers and deployment options
• Active development with frequent updates and security patches

Cons of algo

• More complex setup process, requiring more technical knowledge
• Less user-friendly interface for managing VPN connections
• Higher resource requirements for server deployment

Code Comparison

algo:

./algo deploy

subspace:

docker run -d --name subspace \
  -e SUBSPACE_HTTP_HOST=subspace.example.com \
  -v /root/subspace:/data \
  -p 80:80 -p 443:443 \
  subspacecloud/subspace:latest

The algo deployment process involves running a single command, but requires more configuration beforehand. Subspace uses a Docker container, making it easier to deploy but potentially less flexible for advanced configurations.

Both projects aim to simplify VPN setup, but algo focuses more on security and flexibility, while subspace prioritizes ease of use and management. Algo is better suited for users with technical expertise who require advanced security features, whereas subspace is ideal for those seeking a simpler, more user-friendly VPN solution.

Pros of Streisand

• Supports a wider range of VPN protocols and services
• Provides more detailed documentation and setup instructions
• Offers additional privacy-enhancing features like DNS leak protection

Cons of Streisand

• More complex setup process
• Requires more server resources due to multiple services
• Less frequent updates and maintenance

Code Comparison

Streisand (Ansible playbook excerpt):

- name: Install OpenVPN
  apt:
    name: openvpn
    state: present

- name: Configure OpenVPN server
  template:
    src: openvpn-server.conf.j2
    dest: /etc/openvpn/server.conf

Subspace (Docker Compose excerpt):

version: '3'
services:
  subspace:
    image: subspacecloud/subspace:latest
    volumes:
      - ./data:/data
    ports:
      - "51820:51820/udp"

Streisand offers a more comprehensive set of VPN options and privacy tools, making it suitable for users who require advanced features and flexibility. However, this comes at the cost of increased complexity and resource requirements.

Subspace, on the other hand, focuses on simplicity and ease of use, leveraging Docker for quick deployment. It's more suitable for users who want a straightforward WireGuard VPN solution without the need for additional services.

The code comparison highlights the different approaches: Streisand uses Ansible for configuration management, while Subspace relies on Docker for containerization and simplified deployment.

Pros of openvpn-install

• Simple, straightforward script for quick OpenVPN setup
• Widely used and community-tested
• Supports various Linux distributions

Cons of openvpn-install

• Limited to OpenVPN protocol only
• Lacks a user-friendly interface for management
• Requires manual configuration for advanced features

Code Comparison

openvpn-install:

#!/bin/bash
# OpenVPN installer for Debian, Ubuntu, and CentOS

# Detect Debian users running the script with "sh" instead of bash
if readlink /proc/$$/exe | grep -q "dash"; then
    echo 'This installer needs to be run with "bash", not "sh".'
    exit
fi

Subspace:

package main

import (
    "fmt"
    "log"
    "net/http"
    "os"

    "github.com/subspacecloud/subspace/manager"
)

func main() {
    manager.Run()
}

The openvpn-install project is a bash script focused solely on OpenVPN installation, while Subspace is a more comprehensive Go-based VPN management solution with a web interface and support for multiple protocols.

Pros of PiVPN

• Specifically designed for Raspberry Pi, making it ideal for home/small office setups
• Simple command-line interface for easy setup and management
• Supports both OpenVPN and WireGuard protocols

Cons of PiVPN

• Limited to Raspberry Pi and similar single-board computers
• Lacks a graphical user interface, which may be challenging for less technical users
• Fewer advanced features compared to Subspace

Code Comparison

PiVPN (installation script):

curl -L https://install.pivpn.io | bash

Subspace (Docker deployment):

version: "3.3"
services:
  subspace:
    image: subspacecloud/subspace:latest
    volumes:
      - /path/to/data:/data
    ports:
      - 80:80

While PiVPN uses a simple bash script for installation, Subspace employs Docker for deployment, offering more flexibility and easier management across different platforms.

PiVPN is tailored for Raspberry Pi users seeking a straightforward VPN solution, while Subspace provides a more feature-rich, cross-platform experience with a web-based interface. The choice between them depends on the user's specific needs, technical expertise, and hardware preferences.

Pros of setup-ipsec-vpn

• Focuses on IPsec/L2TP and Cisco IPsec VPN protocols, which are widely supported by default on many devices
• Provides detailed setup instructions for various cloud providers and operating systems
• Includes additional security features like fail2ban and unattended upgrades

Cons of setup-ipsec-vpn

• Limited to IPsec-based VPN protocols, which may not be ideal for all use cases
• Requires more manual configuration and management compared to Subspace's user-friendly interface
• May have higher resource usage due to the nature of IPsec protocols

Code Comparison

setup-ipsec-vpn:

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

Subspace:

docker run -d --name subspace \
  --restart=always \
  -v /root/subspace:/data \
  -p 80:80 -p 443:443 -p 51820:51820/udp \
  subspacecloud/subspace:latest

The setup-ipsec-vpn project uses a shell script for installation, while Subspace utilizes Docker for easy deployment and management.