Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Authelia vs Cloud Native Buildpacks

Authelia logo

Authelia

Cybersecurity

Open-source authentication and two-factor portal for reverse proxies

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Full reviewWebsite
Cloud Native Buildpacks logo

Cloud Native Buildpacks

Developer Tools

Specification and tooling that turns source code into OCI images without Dockerfiles

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Authelia depends on a reverse proxy: it is not a standalone identity provider; Cloud Native Buildpacks the operational cost is real: you own builder images, base image refresh cadence and migrations between specification versions, which currently sit at Buildpack API 0.10 and Platform API 0.12 with published migration guides, so breaking changes are a recurring chore.
  • They diverge on capability: Authelia covers Reverse proxy integration, Cloud Native Buildpacks covers Detect and build lifecycle.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Authelia and Cloud Native Buildpacks actually diverge.

Attributes where Authelia and Cloud Native Buildpacks differ
AttributeAutheliaCloud Native Buildpacks
PlatformsDocker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hostedLinux, macOS, Windows, CLI, Docker, Kubernetes
CategoryCybersecurityDeveloper Tools

Identical on both: starting price (Free), pricing model (Open source, no licence fee), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Authelia

  • Reverse proxy integration
  • Two-factor authentication
  • Access control rules
  • Lightweight backends

Only in Cloud Native Buildpacks

  • Detect and build lifecycle
  • Image rebasing
  • Reproducible layers
  • Builder images
  • Automatic SBOM output
  • pack CLI

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Authelia

  • Putting a login and 2FA in front of self-hosted services that have nonenot Cloud Native Buildpacks
  • Adding SSO across a small set of internal tools without a full identity platformnot Cloud Native Buildpacks
  • Home and small-team infrastructure behind a single reverse proxynot Cloud Native Buildpacks

Cloud Native Buildpacks

  • Patching a base image once and rebasing hundreds of application images rather than rebuilding and redeploying eachnot Authelia
  • Removing per-team Dockerfiles at an organisation where inconsistent base images have become an audit findingnot Authelia
  • Giving application teams a supported path to a hardened image without teaching every team container securitynot Authelia
  • Choosing a build system that a risk committee will accept because governance is vendor neutral rather than single vendornot Authelia

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Authelia

  • Depends on a reverse proxy: it is not a standalone identity provider
  • Configuration is YAML-first with no administrative interface, so changes mean editing files
  • Not a full IAM: user management, provisioning and federation are limited compared with Keycloak
  • Scales poorly as an organisation-wide identity solution, which is not its target

Cloud Native Buildpacks

  • The operational cost is real: you own builder images, base image refresh cadence and migrations between specification versions, which currently sit at Buildpack API 0.10 and Platform API 0.12 with published migration guides, so breaking changes are a recurring chore.
  • A cold build with no warm cache is noticeably slower than a well layered Dockerfile, and because the cache lives in a cache image or volume, ephemeral continuous integration runners pay full price on every run unless you deliberately warm them.
  • Reproducibility depends on discipline rather than defaults, because buildpacks resolve runtime patch versions at build time unless you pin them and stability is only as good as the builder image tag you point at.
  • The specification is neutral but the buildpacks are not, and in practice you depend on Paketo, Heroku or Google, whose roadmaps, support levels and update cadences differ; CNCF also records contributing organisations down 12 per cent year on year.
  • Native dependencies, unusual monorepo layouts and non-standard project structures push you into writing custom buildpacks or extensions, which is a genuine engineering investment and not a configuration change.

Pricing, plan by plan

Authelia

Free
  • AutheliaFree
    • Full functionality
    • No usage limits
    • Community support

Cloud Native Buildpacks

Free
  • Cloud Native BuildpacksFree
    • Apache-2.0, hosted by the CNCF
    • No commercial edition from the project itself
    • Commercial support only from vendors of specific buildpack distributions

Which should you pick?

Choose Authelia if

  • You need reverse proxy integration.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted.
  • You also want two-factor authentication.
Authelia review

Choose Cloud Native Buildpacks if

  • You need detect and build lifecycle.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, CLI, Docker, Kubernetes.
  • You also want image rebasing.
Cloud Native Buildpacks review

Questions people ask

Is Authelia or Cloud Native Buildpacks better?
Neither clearly leads. Authelia starts at Free and Cloud Native Buildpacks at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Authelia or Cloud Native Buildpacks?
Authelia starts at Free and Cloud Native Buildpacks at Free.
Does Authelia or Cloud Native Buildpacks run on more platforms?
Authelia runs on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted. Cloud Native Buildpacks runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, CLI, Docker, Kubernetes.
Can I use Authelia for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Authelia best used for?
Authelia is most often used for putting a login and 2fa in front of self-hosted services that have none, adding sso across a small set of internal tools without a full identity platform, home and small-team infrastructure behind a single reverse proxy. Of those, putting a login and 2fa in front of self-hosted services that have none and adding sso across a small set of internal tools without a full identity platform are not what Cloud Native Buildpacks is typically brought in for.
What can Authelia do that Cloud Native Buildpacks cannot?
Authelia covers Reverse proxy integration, Two-factor authentication, Access control rules, Lightweight backends. Cloud Native Buildpacks covers Detect and build lifecycle, Image rebasing, Reproducible layers, Builder images.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Authelia: Is Authelia free?

Yes, open source with no licence fee.

Cloud Native Buildpacks: What does CNCF graduation actually change?

Nothing technically, but it signals audited governance, security review and multi-vendor maintenance, which is usually what a procurement or risk team needs before approving a build system.

Authelia: Does Authelia need a reverse proxy?

Yes. It integrates through forward authentication with Nginx, Traefik, Caddy or HAProxy rather than sitting in front of traffic itself.

Cloud Native Buildpacks: How is this different from writing a Dockerfile?

Container build knowledge lives with the platform team in a builder image rather than in every repository, and rebasing lets you patch the runtime base of many images without rebuilding them.

Authelia: Authelia or Keycloak?

Authelia is far lighter and aimed at protecting self-hosted services behind a proxy. Keycloak is a full identity and access management platform, and much more to run.

Cloud Native Buildpacks: Does it cost anything?

No. The specification and tooling are Apache-2.0 and free. You pay only if you buy commercial support for a specific buildpack distribution from Broadcom, Heroku or Google.

Cloud Native Buildpacks: Is it slower than a Dockerfile?

On a cold build with no cache, yes. Warm builds are competitive, but continuous integration runners that start empty every time will feel the difference.

Share

Related pages

More on Authelia

More on Cloud Native Buildpacks

Keep looking

Other head to heads