←back to thread

Show HN: Octelium – FOSS Alternative to Teleport, Cloudflare, Tailscale, Ngrok

(github.com)
354 points geoctl | 2 comments | 29 Jun 25 11:24 UTC | HN request time: 0.402s | source

I have been working on Octelium for quite a few years now but it was open sourced only by late May 2025. Octelium, as described more in detail in the repo's README, is simply an open source, self-hosted, unified platform for zero trust resource access that is primarily meant to be a modern alternative to corporate VPNs and remote access tools. It can operate as a remote access/corporate VPN (i.e. alternative to Twingate, Tailscale, OpenVPN Access Server, etc...), a ZTNA/BeyondCorp platform (i.e. alterntive to Cloudflare Access, Teleport, Google BeyondCorp, etc...), and it can also operate as an API/AI gateway, an infrastructure for MCP and A2A architectures and meshes, an ngrok alternative, a homelab infrastructure or even as a more advanced Kubernetes ingress. It's basically designed to operate like a unified Kubernetes-like scalable architecture for zero trust secure/remote access that's suitable for different human-to-workload and workload-to-workload environments. You can read more in detail the full set of main features and links about how it works in the repo's README or directly in the docs https://octelium.com/docs
1. Tokumei-no-hito ◴[30 Jun 25 05:02 UTC] No.44419590[source]▶
this is incredible OP. nearly every criticism I've read could be resolved by reading the docs for 10-15 mins starting from the "how it works".

i did feel uncertain from the README but once i got into the docs i was blown away. this is incredibly well abstracted and organized both in terms of the implementation and docs. to hear that you built this yourself is absolutely legendary. thank you for releasing this.

replies(1): >>44419649 #
2. geoctl ◴[30 Jun 25 05:13 UTC] No.44419649[source]▶
Thank you really for your kind comment. Most of the links regarding how Octelium works, the quick management and installation guides, the examples (e.g. API/AI/MCP gateways, etc...) were actually included in the README itself. However, most of the criticism was supposedly coming from the terms used in the README. I was already assuming that the users are somewhat familiar with zero trust and zero trust architectures. Maybe that was the problem.