# motionEye vs UUSEC WAF

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | motionEye | UUSEC WAF |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 65/100 ✓ | 59/100 |
| Rank in category | #4 of 24 in Video Surveillance | #2 of 3 in Web Application Firewall |
| GitHub stars | 4 720 ✓ | 1 718 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +36 ✓ | +6 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 9 ✓ |
| Latest release | 0.44.0 · 21 Jun 2026 | v7.2.6 · 12 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | No | No |
| License | GPL-3.0 | BSD-2-Clause |
| Main language | Python | Shell |

## Which one should you pick?

motionEye scores 65/100 against 59/100 for UUSEC WAF, so it is the safer default.

UUSEC WAF ships more often: 9 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for motionEye.

If you want the quickest setup, motionEye is easier to run; UUSEC WAF needs more configuration.

motionEye is growing faster right now (+36 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [motionEye](https://selfhost.directory/project/motioneye) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/motioneye.md)
- [UUSEC WAF](https://selfhost.directory/project/uusec-waf) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/uusec-waf.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/motioneye-vs-uusec-waf