Softwr

Developer Tools · head to head

Keycloak vs Osano

Keycloak logo

Keycloak

Developer Tools

Open-source identity and access management server.

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Full reviewWebsite
Osano logo

Osano

Cybersecurity

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

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Keycloak requires self-hosted deployment and operational expertise to install, configure and maintain; 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.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Keycloak and Osano actually diverge.

Attributes where Keycloak and Osano differ
AttributeKeycloakOsano
Pricing modelopen-sourcePer month by monthly website visitors
PlatformsSelf-hosted, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Windows, APIWeb
CategoryDeveloper ToolsCybersecurity

Identical on both: starting price (Free), 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 Keycloak

Nothing recorded that Osano does not also cover.

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.

Keycloak

  • Organisations requiring self-hosted identity infrastructure for compliance or data residencynot Osano
  • Companies with existing LDAP/Active Directory systems needing federated authenticationnot Osano
  • Open-source projects and communities requiring free IAM without licensing costsnot Osano
  • Enterprises building custom identity workflows requiring fine-grained authorisationnot Osano
  • Teams with sufficient operational expertise to manage infrastructurenot Osano

Osano

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

Where each one falls short

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

Keycloak

  • Requires self-hosted deployment and operational expertise to install, configure and maintain
  • No managed cloud option provided by Red Hat; organisations must operate infrastructure themselves or use third-party distributions
  • Clustering and high-availability configurations require additional operational knowledge
  • Community support only; commercial support requires third-party vendors or distributions

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

Keycloak

Free
  • Open-sourceFree
    • Full platform functionality
    • Self-hosted deployment
    • 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 Keycloak if

  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Self-hosted, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Windows, API.
Keycloak 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 Keycloak or Osano better?
Neither clearly leads. Keycloak 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, Keycloak or Osano?
Keycloak starts at Free and Osano at Free.
Does Keycloak or Osano run on more platforms?
Keycloak runs on Self-hosted, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Windows, API. Osano runs on Web.
Can I use Keycloak for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Keycloak best used for?
Keycloak is most often used for organisations requiring self-hosted identity infrastructure for compliance or data residency, companies with existing ldap/active directory systems needing federated authentication, open-source projects and communities requiring free iam without licensing costs, enterprises building custom identity workflows requiring fine-grained authorisation. Of those, organisations requiring self-hosted identity infrastructure for compliance or data residency and companies with existing ldap/active directory systems needing federated authentication are not what Osano is typically brought in for.
What can Keycloak do that Osano cannot?
Osano covers Consent banner, Pre-consent tag blocking, Consent record, No fines guarantee.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Keycloak: What protocols does Keycloak support?

Keycloak supports OpenID Connect, OAuth 2.0 and SAML 2.0 protocols for authentication and authorisation.

Source
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.

Keycloak: Can Keycloak integrate with existing user directories?

Yes. Keycloak supports user federation with LDAP and Active Directory systems, allowing organisations to leverage existing user directories.

Source
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.

Keycloak: Is Keycloak free?

Yes. Keycloak is fully open-source and free to deploy and use. No licensing fees are required.

Source
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 Keycloak

More on Osano

Keep looking

Other head to heads