head to head · open source

cryfs vs Hoodik

cryfs has 2,304 GitHub stars, 170 forks, 154 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Hoodik has 1,479 stars, 68 forks, 11 open issues and last shipped 22 days ago. cryfs leads on adoption by 56% (2,304 vs 1,479 stars). cryfs is written in Rust under LGPL-3.0; Hoodik is written in Rust under a custom or non-standard licence. cryfs has attracted 7% as many forks as stars, Hoodik 5%. cryfs was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (cloud), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

cryfs ★ 2.3K Hoodik ★ 1.5K category Productivity & Utilities

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

cryfs Hoodik
GitHub stars ★ 2.3K ★ 1.5K
License LGPL-3.0 Custom / other
Written in Rust Rust
Last push 2026-09-19 2026-08-29
Forks ⑂ 170 ⑂ 68
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick cryfs if

  • You weight community size — 2.3K stars and counting
  • You want the LGPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Rust
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full cryfs profile →

pick Hoodik if

  • You want the Hoodik feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the Custom / other license terms
  • Your stack matches Rust
  • You evaluated both and Hoodik fits your workflow better

full Hoodik profile →

About cryfs

CryFS is a FUSE based cryptographic filesystem written in Rust that encrypts a vault directory so it can be stored safely in cloud services such as Dropbox, iCloud, or OneDrive, and it is intended for Linux users who want their file contents, file sizes, directory structure, and metadata hidden from the storage provider rather than encrypted one file at a time.

read the full cryfs overview →

About Hoodik

Hoodik is a self hosted, end to end encrypted cloud storage server. It lives in the Rust and Vue ecosystem, using Actix web on the backend and Vue 3 on the frontend, and it is packaged as a Docker first service with SQLite or PostgreSQL and S3 compatible storage options.

read the full Hoodik overview →

More in Productivity & Utilities

n8n ★ 205K Excalidraw ★ 132K RustDesk ★ 124K LocalSend ★ 92K AppFlowy ★ 77K OBS Studio ★ 76K

Related comparisons

localsend vs rclone localsend vs copyparty localsend vs files localsend vs yazi localsend vs spacedrive localsend vs nextcloud localsend vs uppy localsend vs cloudreve openclaw vs khoj open-webui vs open-notebook open-webui vs khoj appflowy vs affine appflowy vs memos appflowy vs plane appflowy vs joplin mem0 vs memos n8n vs langchain n8n vs browser-use firecrawl vs browser-use n8n vs langgraph n8n vs frigate n8n vs lightpanda n8n vs proxmoxve n8n vs activepieces

More File Management & Sync projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the File Management & Sync field.

cryfs vs LocalSend cryfs vs rclone cryfs vs copyparty cryfs vs Files cryfs vs yazi cryfs vs Spacedrive cryfs vs Nextcloud cryfs vs uppy cryfs vs cloudreve cryfs vs superfile cryfs vs ranger cryfs vs Seafile

Frequently asked questions

Is cryfs or Hoodik more popular?

cryfs has 2,304 GitHub stars and Hoodik has 1,479. cryfs has the larger community by that measure.

Are cryfs and Hoodik free?

Both are open source. cryfs is licensed under LGPL-3.0, and Hoodik has no licence declared in this registry. Both are free to self-host.

What is the difference between cryfs and Hoodik?

cryfs is written in Rust and Hoodik in Rust. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, cryfs or Hoodik?

Choose cryfs if you want the larger community (2,304 stars) or its LGPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose Hoodik if its feature set, stack or Custom / other licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.