HashiCorp Boundary vs Oathkeeper

Overview

Oathkeeper

Stacks4

Followers14

Votes0

GitHub Stars3.5K

Forks386

HashiCorp Boundary

Stacks22

Followers40

Votes0

GitHub Stars4.0K

Forks299

HashiCorp Boundary vs Oathkeeper: What are the differences?

## Introduction

Key differences between HashiCorp Boundary and Oathkeeper:

1. **Authentication Mechanisms**: Boundary provides a comprehensive approach to user authentication, including support for multiple authentication methods such as OIDC, LDAP, and GitHub authentication. On the other hand, Oathkeeper focuses primarily on OAuth2 for securing APIs and services, with less emphasis on traditional user authentication methods.

2. **Access Control Policies**: HashiCorp Boundary emphasizes role-based access control (RBAC) and fine-grained access policies that can be defined at the project, user, or resource level. In contrast, Oathkeeper offers a more simplistic approach to access control with pre-defined rules for enforcing access policies.

3. **Scalability and Performance**: Boundary is designed to handle large-scale deployments and supports horizontal scaling for improved performance. Oathkeeper, while efficient for smaller setups, may face scalability challenges when used in high-traffic environments due to its architecture limitations.

4. **Integration Capabilities**: HashiCorp Boundary offers seamless integration with other HashiCorp tools like Vault and Consul for enhanced security and policy management. Oathkeeper, on the other hand, is more focused on integration with OAuth2 providers and may require additional effort for integrating with other tools in the ecosystem.

5. **Open Source Community Support**: Oathkeeper has a more active open-source community contributing to its development and providing support for users. In contrast, Boundary, being a relatively newer offering, is still building its community and may have limited resources compared to Oathkeeper.

6. **Use Cases and Target Audience**: HashiCorp Boundary is geared towards secure access management for modern infrastructure environments, suited for organizations with complex network architectures. Oathkeeper, with its API-centric approach, is better suited for application developers and teams looking to secure their APIs and services with OAuth2 standards.

In Summary, the key differences between HashiCorp Boundary and Oathkeeper lie in their authentication mechanisms, access control policies, scalability and performance, integration capabilities, open-source community support, use cases, and target audience.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

Oathkeeper	HashiCorp Boundary
A cloud native Identity & Access Proxy (IAP) which authenticates and authorizes incoming HTTP requests. Inspired by the BeyondCorp / Zero Trust white paper. Written in Go.	Simple and secure remote access — to any system anywhere based on trusted identity. It enables practitioners and operators to securely access dynamic hosts and services with fine-grained authorization without requiring direct network access.
Identify the user and provide the user session to API backends; Restrict access to certain resources based on a set of rules; Transform access credentials (e.g. OAuth2 Access Tokens, SAML Assertions, ...) to a format (e.g. JSON Web Token, Plaintext, Basic Authorization, ...) consumable by your API services	Identity-based access; Session management; Platform agnostic; Session visibility; Infrastructure as code; Manage dynamic environments
Statistics
GitHub Stars 3.5K	GitHub Stars 4.0K
GitHub Forks 386	GitHub Forks 299
Stacks 4	Stacks 22
Followers 14	Followers 40
Votes 0	Votes 0
Integrations
No integrations available	Terraform

What are some alternatives to Oathkeeper, HashiCorp Boundary?

AWS IAM

It enables you to manage access to AWS services and resources securely. Using IAM, you can create and manage AWS users and groups, and use permissions to allow and deny their access to AWS resources.

Identity Management Simplified

Keycloak Enterprise-grade identity & access management, fully managed! Enable user authentication and authorization in minutes, so you can keep growing.

Teleport

Teleport makes it easy for users to securely access infrastructure and meet the toughest compliance requirements. Teleport replaces shared credentials with short-lived certificates and is completely transparent to client-side tools.

SailPoint

It provides enterprise identity governance solutions with on-premises and cloud-based identity management software for the most complex challenges.

AWS Service Catalog

AWS Service Catalog allows IT administrators to create, manage, and distribute catalogs of approved products to end users, who can then access the products they need in a personalized portal. Administrators can control which users have access to each application or AWS resource to enforce compliance with organizational business policies. AWS Service Catalog allows your organization to benefit from increased agility and reduced costs because end users can find and launch only the products they need from a catalog that you control.

Infra

It enables you to discover and access infrastructure (e.g. Kubernetes, databases). We help you connect an identity provider such as Okta or Azure active directory, and map users/groups with the permissions you set to your infrastructure.

BeyondTrust

It supports a family of privileged identity management, privileged remote access, and vulnerability management products for UNIX, Linux, Windows and Mac OS operating systems.

Key Vault Access Policy

It determines whether a given service principal, namely an application or user group, can perform different operations on Key Vault secrets, keys, and certificates. You can assign access policies using the Azure portal, the Azure CLI, or Azure PowerShell.

GCP IAM

It lets you create and manage permissions for Google Cloud resources. IAM unifies access control for Google Cloud services into a single system and presents a consistent set of operations.

Thycotic Secret Server

It is an enterprise-grade, privileged access management solution that is quickly deployable and easily managed. You can automatically discover and manage your privileged accounts through an intuitive interface, protecting against malicious activity, enterprise-wide.

Related Comparisons

HashiCorp Boundary vs Oathkeeper: What are the differences?

## Introduction

Key differences between HashiCorp Boundary and Oathkeeper:

1. **Authentication Mechanisms**: Boundary provides a comprehensive approach to user authentication, including support for multiple authentication methods such as OIDC, LDAP, and GitHub authentication. On the other hand, Oathkeeper focuses primarily on OAuth2 for securing APIs and services, with less emphasis on traditional user authentication methods.

2. **Access Control Policies**: HashiCorp Boundary emphasizes role-based access control (RBAC) and fine-grained access policies that can be defined at the project, user, or resource level. In contrast, Oathkeeper offers a more simplistic approach to access control with pre-defined rules for enforcing access policies.

3. **Scalability and Performance**: Boundary is designed to handle large-scale deployments and supports horizontal scaling for improved performance. Oathkeeper, while efficient for smaller setups, may face scalability challenges when used in high-traffic environments due to its architecture limitations.

4. **Integration Capabilities**: HashiCorp Boundary offers seamless integration with other HashiCorp tools like Vault and Consul for enhanced security and policy management. Oathkeeper, on the other hand, is more focused on integration with OAuth2 providers and may require additional effort for integrating with other tools in the ecosystem.

5. **Open Source Community Support**: Oathkeeper has a more active open-source community contributing to its development and providing support for users. In contrast, Boundary, being a relatively newer offering, is still building its community and may have limited resources compared to Oathkeeper.

6. **Use Cases and Target Audience**: HashiCorp Boundary is geared towards secure access management for modern infrastructure environments, suited for organizations with complex network architectures. Oathkeeper, with its API-centric approach, is better suited for application developers and teams looking to secure their APIs and services with OAuth2 standards.

HashiCorp Boundary vs Oathkeeper

Overview