5 Top Tailscale Alternatives: Open Source and Paid

If you're exploring alternatives to Tailscale, this guide is here to help. Securing remote access through VPNs remains a popular method for many organizations, but not all VPNs are the same. Different types offer various features, and there are even alternatives to traditional VPNs that provide enhanced security with reduced latency. 

Tailscale, a mesh VPN, offers a range of attractive features, but several strong alternatives are worth considering before making a decision. 

In this article, we’ve compiled a list of the top five Tailscale alternatives, including both open-source and paid options, to help you find the best fit for your needs.

What is Tailscale?

Tailscale works as a legacy VPN replacement by connecting devices across networks and creating a virtual private cloud. Like legacy VPNs, Tailscale’s VPN works at the network layer (Layer 4) but it is built using the more modern WireGuard protocol, which creates a peer-to-peer mesh network for secure, encrypted connections between devices. 

Core Services/Features:

• Zero-configuration networking: Automatically creates encrypted point-to-point connections between devices, bypassing complex firewall configurations.

• Ease of use: A single command or a few clicks is enough to set up a secure connection.

• Identity-based security: It leverages identity providers like Google Workspace or GitHub to authenticate devices.

• Automatic key rotation: Tailscale rotates encryption keys automatically for enhanced security.

• Mobile, desktop, and server compatibility: Works on major platforms (Linux, macOS, Windows, iOS, Android).

• Access control: Granular access control is used to manage which devices or services can communicate.

Pros:

1. Simplicity: Minimal setup and management overhead.

2. Security: End-to-end encryption via WireGuard.

3. Cross-platform support: Works across most operating systems.

4. Cost-effective for small teams: Free for personal use with affordable paid tiers for teams.

Cons:

1. Lack of Layer 7 security: Tailscale is primarily a Layer 4 solution and it is not optimized for web application security at Layer 7. It is not the best fit for securing modern web applications​.

2. Client-based solution: This client-based approach requires every machine and device to install the Tailscale client in order to join the private network, i.e. it requires individual client installations on each endpoint. A clientless solution is a much better alternative for growing teams. 

3. Missing context-aware authentication: It doesn’t offer context-based authentication which is a core pillar of ZTNA.

4. Dependent on third-party identity providers: It relies on external identity services.

5. Centralized control: It relies on Tailscale servers for coordination, which could be a single point of failure.

6. Latency concerns: Peer-to-peer routing may not be as efficient when dealing with geographically dispersed nodes.

7. Limited enterprise-grade features: Not suited for larger enterprises needing complex IAM integration.

5 Best Tailscale Alternatives: Detailed Comparison 

 1. Pomerium

Overview:

Just like Tailscale, Pomerium is also open-source but it fixes many issues that Tailscale struggles with. The reason Pomerium is the best self-hosted Tailscale alternative is that it is clientless, has context-based access, and offers layer 7 security. Plus, Pomerium has the latest features like identity-aware proxy (IAP), context-aware reverse proxy, and continuous verification. 

It focuses on securing web applications using identity-driven access controls rather than just network-level security.

• Features:

  • Pomerium focuses more on identity-based access to web applications, rather than general peer-to-peer networking like Tailscale.

  • It integrates with IAM systems (Okta, Azure AD) for seamless access management.

  • Provides features like Single Sign-On (SSO) and supports role-based access control (RBAC) for applications.

• Pricing:

  • Pomerium offers open-source and enterprise pricing models, making it more flexible for larger organizations.

• Other Factors:

  • Works best for enterprises needing fine-grained access control to web applications rather than a simple peer-to-peer VPN solution.

Pros:

• Robust context-aware access.

• Eliminates the VPN bottleneck issue that boosts speed. 

• Self-hosted and deployed on edge. 

• 100% clientless, improving the speed to its optimal. 

• Layer 7 security, works best for modern web applications​.

• Open-source and enterprise-friendly.

• Robust integrations with IAM systems.

Cons:

• Primarily focused on web-based application access.

• Effectively deploying the open source (Core) version requires technical expertise.

Tailscale Vs Pomerium

2. Twingate

Overview:

Twingate is another Tailscale alternative that offers secure remote access and implements zero-trust principles. Twingate works as a legacy VPN alternative, splitting the VPN gateway into a Relay and Connector architecture.  

Differences from Tailscale:

• Features:

  • Focuses on zero-trust network access (ZTNA) by offering seamless security to office networks, cloud VPCs, and other private resources.

  • Offers better scalability for enterprise use with granular access control and traffic segmentation.

  • Unlike Tailscale, Twingate routes traffic through encrypted relays, ensuring a more controlled and efficient connection path.

• Pricing:

  • The free version covers up to 5 users, 1 admin, and 10 remote networks. It has fewer pricing plans than Tailscale. 

Other Factors:

• Twingate is built for large-scale corporate environments where security, scalability, and performance are critical.

Pros:

• Enterprise-grade security and scalability.

• Zero-trust network access principles.

• Performance-optimized with controlled routing.

Cons:

• Limited to Layer 4 security. While it simplifies network security and access control, it faces limitations in managing Layer 7 applications.

• Just like Tailscale, Twingate is also a client-based solution that adds a significant burden to manage tokens, updates, and configurations for each endpoint. All users and devices connecting to the network must install and maintain the Twingate client application. It creates a bottleneck, just like a traditional VPN, causing latency issues. 

• It requires more configuration and setup expertise.

• It lacks continuous verification, which is a huge disadvantage compared to Tailscale. 

• Not user-friendly for small teams or individuals.

Twingate Vs. Tailscale

3. Perimeter 81

Overview:

Perimeter 81’s remote cloud-based VPN is one of the leading alternatives to Tailscale’s mesh VPN services. It is a zero-trust secure network-as-a-service (SaaS) platform. It aims to replace traditional corporate VPNs with a flexible and scalable cloud solution.

Perimeter 81 is built for hybrid and remote workforces, offering full network security, not just secure connections between devices.

Differences from Tailscale:

• Features:

  • Offers a cloud-based solution with global access points, supporting both zero-trust access and SD-WAN capabilities.

  • Advanced features include DNS filtering, secure web gateways, and firewall-as-a-service (FWaaS).

  • Integrated network security stack, including security for remote workforces and IoT devices.

• Pricing:

  • Perimeter 81 has gated pricing. It forces potential buyers to contact the sales team to know the pricing. Tailscale’s transparent pricing model is much better than Perimeter 81’s hidden prices. 

Pros:

• Comprehensive security solutions with zero-trust and SD-WAN integration.

• Scalable for enterprises and remote workforces.

• Enhanced security features like DNS filtering and FWaaS.

Cons:

• Non-transparent pricing model. 

• May offer more features than necessary for smaller teams or projects.

• Greater complexity in setup and management.

Perimeter 81 vs. Tailscale

4. StrongDM

Overview:

StrongDM focuses on access control for infrastructure by simplifying and securing database, server, and Kubernetes access. It eliminates the need for VPNs and instead provides a unified control plane for infrastructure access.

StrongDM is enterprise-focused, ideal for organizations needing secure infrastructure access management.

Differences from Tailscale:

• Features:

  • StrongDM provides centralized access to databases, servers, and Kubernetes clusters, with auditing and logging built-in.

  • It focuses more on infrastructure access control (e.g., databases, Kubernetes) rather than secure device communication.

  • Includes comprehensive user access auditing and role-based access controls.

• Pricing:

  • It has 3 plans. Essentials: $70/user/month. Enterprise and GovCloud plans have custom pricing. StrongDM is significantly more expensive than Tailscale for smaller teams. 

Pros:

• Focused on infrastructure access control (databases, servers).

• Granular access management with comprehensive auditing.

• High scalability for enterprises.

Cons:

• Enterprise-oriented pricing and complexity.

• StrongDM API is a must to access managed resources.

• Less suited for general peer-to-peer device communication.

• Overkill for small teams or simple networking needs.

StrongDM Vs. Tailscale

5. Zscaler 

Overview:

Zscaler is a cloud-based zero-trust security platform designed for enterprise networks, focusing on secure remote access, cloud security, and application protection. It provides a full security stack, including secure web gateways (SWG), firewall-as-a-service (FWaaS), and cloud access security brokers (CASB) to replace traditional VPNs with a zero-trust model.

Zscaler is designed for large-scale enterprise environments requiring comprehensive security for all devices and applications. Tailscale is a more lightweight solution aimed at simplifying secure connections between devices.

Differences from Tailscale:

• Features:

  • Zscaler offers a full zero-trust security architecture with comprehensive cloud-based services, whereas Tailscale focuses on peer-to-peer device connectivity.

  • Zscaler includes web filtering, data loss prevention, and full traffic inspection as part of its secure web gateway.

  • Zscaler does not use peer-to-peer networking like Tailscale; instead, it routes all traffic through its cloud to enforce security policies.

• Pricing:

  • Zscaler is typically priced for enterprise use, and the cost can be significantly higher than Tailscale, especially for smaller teams. It has a gated pricing model. 

Pros:

• Comprehensive zero-trust security with a full security stack.

• Scalable for large enterprises with global operations.

• Strong protection for cloud and remote workforces.

Cons:

• High cost, particularly for small teams or startups.

• More complex to set up and manage compared to Tailscale’s simplicity.

• Overkill for simple device-to-device networking needs.

Zscaler vs. Tailscale

Summary of Tailscale Alternatives

For small to medium-sized teams, Pomerium and Twingate stand out as top alternatives to Tailscale. Both offer transparent pricing and are similarly priced. If you’re looking to bypass VPN bottlenecks and implement Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) with features like identity-aware proxying, continuous verification, Layer 7 security, and a clientless solution, Pomerium may be the most logical Tailscale alternative. For larger enterprise needs, Perimeter 81, StrongDM, and Zscaler are popular choices. However, these options come with higher costs and typically require a dedicated team to manage their complex systems.