head to head · open source

rclone vs cryfs

rclone has 59,844 GitHub stars, 5,413 forks, 1,273 open issues and last shipped yesterday. cryfs has 2,304 stars, 170 forks, 154 open issues and last shipped yesterday. rclone leads on adoption by 2,497% (59,844 vs 2,304 stars). rclone is written in Go under MIT; cryfs is written in Rust under LGPL-3.0. rclone has attracted 9% as many forks as stars, cryfs 7%. rclone was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 4 topic tags (cloud-storage, dropbox, encryption, fuse-filesystem), 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.

rclone ★ 60K cryfs ★ 2.3K category Productivity & Utilities

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

rclone cryfs
GitHub stars ★ 60K ★ 2.3K
License MIT LGPL-3.0
Written in Go Rust
Last push 2026-09-19 2026-09-19
Forks ⑂ 5.4K ⑂ 170
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick rclone if

  • You weight community size — 60K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full rclone profile →

pick cryfs if

  • You want the cryfs feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the LGPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Rust
  • You evaluated both and cryfs fits your workflow better

full cryfs profile →

About rclone

Rclone is an MIT licensed, Go based command line program that syncs files and directories to and from cloud storage providers, built for anyone who needs one tool for many backends instead of a separate client for every service.

read the full rclone overview →

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 →

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.

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

Frequently asked questions

Is rclone or cryfs more popular?

rclone has 59,844 GitHub stars and cryfs has 2,304. rclone has the larger community by that measure.

Are rclone and cryfs free?

Both are open source. rclone is licensed under MIT and cryfs under LGPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between rclone and cryfs?

rclone is written in Go and cryfs 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, rclone or cryfs?

Choose rclone if you want the larger community (59,844 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose cryfs if its feature set, stack or LGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.