BentoPDFvsUUSEC WAF
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| BentoPDF | UUSEC WAF | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 77/100 | 59/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 12 in Document Processing | #2 of 3 in Web Application Firewall |
| GitHub stars | 16 180 | 1 718 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +481 | +6 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 15 | 9 |
| Latest release | v2.8.10 · 19 Oct 2026 | v7.2.6 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | BSD-2-Clause |
| Main language | JavaScript | Shell |
Which one should you pick?
BentoPDF scores 77/100 against 59/100 for UUSEC WAF, so it is the safer default.
BentoPDF ships more often: 15 stable releases in the past year, against 9 for UUSEC WAF.
If you want the quickest setup, BentoPDF is easier to run; UUSEC WAF needs more configuration.
BentoPDF is growing faster right now (+481 stars in 30 days).
BentoPDF details →UUSEC WAF details →
Swap a project
Keep BentoPDF, compare it with
Keep UUSEC WAF, compare it with