Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Authelia vs Teleport

Authelia logo

Authelia

Cybersecurity

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

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Teleport logo

Teleport

Cybersecurity

Certificate-based access to servers, Kubernetes, databases and apps, replacing shared credentials and VPNs

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Authelia has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Authelia depends on a reverse proxy: it is not a standalone identity provider; Teleport pricing is not published and is described as active users plus protected resources, so an autoscaling estate cannot forecast the bill and finance teams discover the true cost only after the first true-up.
  • They diverge on capability: Authelia covers Reverse proxy integration, Teleport covers Short-lived certificates.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Authelia and Teleport actually diverge.

Attributes where Authelia and Teleport differ
AttributeAutheliaTeleport
Starting priceFreeOn request
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feequote
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsDocker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hostedLinux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes, Cloud

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cybersecurity).

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 Teleport

  • Short-lived certificates
  • Protocol coverage
  • Session recording and replay
  • Access Requests
  • Device Trust
  • Identity provider integration
  • Machine identity
  • FIPS and FedRAMP builds

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 Teleport
  • Adding SSO across a small set of internal tools without a full identity platformnot Teleport
  • Home and small-team infrastructure behind a single reverse proxynot Teleport

Teleport

  • Removing long-lived SSH keys and shared database passwords so that offboarding an engineer takes one action in the identity providernot Authelia
  • Producing session recordings and per-user database audit trails as direct evidence for SOC 2 or FedRAMPnot Authelia
  • Giving contractors or on-call engineers time-boxed, approved access to production instead of standing admin rightsnot Authelia
  • Replacing a flat VPN with per-resource authorisation across servers, Kubernetes and internal web appsnot 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

Teleport

  • Pricing is not published and is described as active users plus protected resources, so an autoscaling estate cannot forecast the bill and finance teams discover the true cost only after the first true-up.
  • The proxy is a hard dependency on reaching production, so it needs its own high availability deployment and a tested break-glass path or an outage in Teleport becomes an outage in your ability to respond to outages.
  • The open source Community Edition omits Access Requests, Device Trust and the FIPS builds, which are exactly the controls an auditor asks about, so the free tier rarely survives a compliance review.
  • Self-hosting means running and upgrading a certificate authority and its backing store, and Teleport releases frequently enough that upgrade work becomes a standing operational commitment.
  • Coverage across protocols is uneven in depth, so teams with legacy systems, unusual databases or bespoke network appliances find gaps that still require the old VPN to remain in place alongside it.

Pricing, plan by plan

Authelia

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

Teleport

On request
  • Teleport Community Edition$undefined/year
    • Open source, self-hosted
    • SSH, Kubernetes, database and app access
    • Session recording
  • Teleport Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Cloud-hosted or self-hosted
    • Access Requests and approval workflow
    • Device Trust and hardware key enforcement

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 Teleport if

  • You need short-lived certificates.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes, Cloud.
  • You also want protocol coverage.
Teleport review

Questions people ask

Is Authelia or Teleport better?
Neither clearly leads. Authelia starts at Free and Teleport at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Authelia or Teleport?
Authelia has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Authelia and On request for Teleport.
Does Authelia or Teleport run on more platforms?
Authelia runs on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted. Teleport runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes, Cloud.
Can I use Authelia for free?
Yes. Authelia has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Teleport starts at On request.
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 Teleport is typically brought in for.
What can Authelia do that Teleport cannot?
Authelia covers Reverse proxy integration, Two-factor authentication, Access control rules, Lightweight backends. Teleport covers Short-lived certificates, Protocol coverage, Session recording and replay, Access Requests.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Authelia: Is Authelia free?

Yes, open source with no licence fee.

Teleport: Is the open source edition usable in production?

Yes, but it lacks Access Requests, Device Trust and FIPS builds, which most compliance programmes end up requiring.

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.

Teleport: How is it priced?

Not publicly. The vendor prices on active users and protected resources and provides a quote after a sales conversation.

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.

Teleport: What happens if Teleport goes down?

Nobody reaches the resources behind it, so you need a highly available deployment and a documented break-glass procedure.

Teleport: Does it replace our VPN?

For anything you put behind it, yes. Legacy systems and appliances it does not support will keep the VPN alive.

Share

Related pages

More on Authelia

More on Teleport

Keep looking

Other head to heads