Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

authentik vs Osano

authentik logo

authentik

Cybersecurity

Open-source identity provider with flexible authentication flows

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Osano logo

Osano

Cybersecurity

Consent management and data privacy platform with a published self-serve tier

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: authentik smaller project than Keycloak, with a correspondingly smaller community and fewer integration guides; Osano the published visitor ceilings are low, with the paid self-serve tier stopping around 30,000 monthly visitors, so any consumer facing site with real traffic leaves published pricing immediately and negotiates a quote with no public anchor.
  • They diverge on capability: authentik covers Configurable flows, Osano covers Consent banner.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which authentik and Osano actually diverge.

Attributes where authentik and Osano differ
AttributeauthentikOsano
Pricing modelOpen-source core with a paid enterprise tierPer month by monthly website visitors
PlatformsDocker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hostedWeb

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), 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 authentik

  • Configurable flows
  • Protocol support
  • Application proxy
  • Modern admin interface

Only in Osano

  • Consent banner
  • Pre-consent tag blocking
  • Consent record
  • No fines guarantee
  • Subject rights requests
  • Data mapping
  • Vendor privacy monitoring
  • Cookie scanning

What people use each for

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

authentik

  • Self-hosted SSO across internal services without commercial identity pricingnot Osano
  • Putting authentication in front of applications that have none, via the proxynot Osano
  • Teams who tried Keycloak and wanted something less heavynot Osano

Osano

  • A mid market company selling into the EU and California that needs one banner honouring different consent rules by visitor regionnot authentik
  • A privacy counsel who wants a vendor that will contractually stand behind its consent product rather than disclaim all liabilitynot authentik
  • A marketing team that needs Google Consent Mode signals wired correctly so analytics and ads degrade rather than break when consent is refusednot authentik
  • A company with a handful of brand domains wanting one consent record and one scanning schedule across all of themnot authentik

Where each one falls short

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

authentik

  • Smaller project than Keycloak, with a correspondingly smaller community and fewer integration guides
  • The flow model is flexible but conceptually unfamiliar, and simple setups can feel over-abstracted
  • Enterprise support and some governance features sit behind the paid tier
  • Self-hosted identity is still yours to secure, patch and keep available

Osano

  • The published visitor ceilings are low, with the paid self-serve tier stopping around 30,000 monthly visitors, so any consumer facing site with real traffic leaves published pricing immediately and negotiates a quote with no public anchor.
  • The no fines guarantee is bounded and conditional on configuring the product as instructed, so it is a marketing differentiator with an indemnity cap rather than the insurance policy the name suggests, and the limits should be read before it influences a decision.
  • Everything beyond consent, including subject rights automation, data mapping and vendor monitoring, is enterprise quoted, so the transparent pricing that attracts buyers covers only the cheapest part of the platform.
  • Tag blocking depends on tags being loaded through the mechanisms Osano can intercept, and marketing teams that inject scripts directly into templates or through server side tagging routinely leak trackers past the banner without anyone noticing.
  • It is a privacy platform rather than a security compliance one, so organisations that also need SOC 2 or ISO 27001 evidence collection run it alongside a separate tool and duplicate parts of the vendor and asset inventory.

Pricing, plan by plan

authentik

Free
  • Open sourceFree
    • Full identity provider
    • All protocols
    • Community support

Osano

Free
  • FreeFree
    • 1 user
    • 1 domain
    • 5,000 monthly visitors
  • Plus$199/month
    • 2 users
    • 3 domains
    • 30,000 monthly visitors
  • Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Unlimited domains and higher visitor volumes
    • Subject rights request automation
    • Data mapping and assessments

Which should you pick?

Choose authentik if

  • You need configurable flows.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted.
  • You also want protocol support.
authentik review

Choose Osano if

  • You need consent banner.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want pre-consent tag blocking.
Osano review

Questions people ask

Is authentik or Osano better?
Neither clearly leads. authentik starts at Free and Osano at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, authentik or Osano?
authentik starts at Free and Osano at Free.
Does authentik or Osano run on more platforms?
authentik runs on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted. Osano runs on Web.
Can I use authentik for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is authentik best used for?
authentik is most often used for self-hosted sso across internal services without commercial identity pricing, putting authentication in front of applications that have none, via the proxy, teams who tried keycloak and wanted something less heavy. Of those, self-hosted sso across internal services without commercial identity pricing and putting authentication in front of applications that have none, via the proxy are not what Osano is typically brought in for.
What can authentik do that Osano cannot?
authentik covers Configurable flows, Protocol support, Application proxy, Modern admin interface. Osano covers Consent banner, Pre-consent tag blocking, Consent record, No fines guarantee.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

authentik: Is authentik free?

The open-source edition is free and complete for most use. An enterprise tier adds support and additional features.

Osano: Does the free tier include the no fines guarantee?

No. The guarantee attaches to paid use of the consent product, and the free tier is capped at one domain and 5,000 monthly visitors.

authentik: authentik or Keycloak?

authentik is generally reported as easier to run and administer; Keycloak is more established with a larger community and Red Hat behind it.

Osano: How is Osano priced?

By monthly website visitors, number of domains and tier. The self-serve path stops at a low visitor ceiling and everything above is quoted.

authentik: Can authentik protect apps with no login of their own?

Yes. Its application proxy places authentication in front of services that have no built-in authentication.

Osano: Can it handle US state privacy laws as well as GDPR?

Yes, with region aware rule sets covering GDPR, ePrivacy and the US state regimes, so an EU visitor sees an opt-in banner and a US visitor sees the applicable opt-out.

Osano: Does Osano do subject access requests?

Yes, but in the enterprise tier rather than the published plans, and it is quoted separately from consent.

Share

Related pages

More on authentik

More on Osano

Keep looking

Other head to heads