hostingvsUUSEC WAF
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| hosting | UUSEC WAF | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 27/100 | 59/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 3 in Video Hosting | #2 of 3 in Web Application Firewall |
| GitHub stars | 11 | 1 718 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +6 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 9 |
| Latest release | — | v7.2.6 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | No | No |
| License | GPL-3.0 | BSD-2-Clause |
| Main language | JavaScript | Shell |
Which one should you pick?
UUSEC WAF scores 59/100 against 27/100 for hosting, so it is the safer default.
UUSEC WAF ships more often: 9 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for hosting.
If you want the quickest setup, UUSEC WAF is easier to run; hosting needs more configuration.
UUSEC WAF is growing faster right now (+6 stars in 30 days).
hosting details →UUSEC WAF details →