Authentik vs Authelia on a Mini PC: Which SSO Fits?

The short answer is simple: choose Authelia when you want a small authentication gate in front of reverse-proxied services. Choose Authentik when you want a central identity provider that applications can trust through OIDC, SAML, LDAP, or other supported protocols.

That difference matters more than the feature checklist. Both can add login and multi-factor authentication to a homelab, but they do not occupy the same place in the design. Authelia is built around deciding whether a proxy request should continue. Authentik is built around users, applications, providers, flows, and policies that many services can share.

If you are still choosing the host, our best mini PC for home server guide covers the hardware decisions. This article focuses on the identity layer that runs on it.

Authentik vs Authelia at a glance

The table is a starting point, not a claim that either project is universally lighter or faster. The official Authentik Docker Compose guide publishes a baseline of two CPU cores and 2 GB of RAM for the installation. That is a documented starting requirement, not a total host budget for your reverse proxy, databases, media services, and monitoring.

Authelia does not publish a universal RAM requirement in the documentation reviewed for this article. Its simpler deployment shape can leave more of your mini PC available for other services, but your proxy, storage backend, session settings, and user count still matter.

The difference between forward auth and true SSO

Forward authentication puts a checkpoint in front of an application. A browser requests photos.example.com, the reverse proxy asks the identity service whether the session is valid, and the request continues only after the check passes.

This is excellent for services that have weak authentication, no external login support, or a small private audience. It is not automatically single sign-on. If the application still has its own login screen, you may pass the proxy and then sign in again inside the app.

True application SSO happens when the application delegates login to an identity provider through a protocol it understands. OpenID Connect is common in current self-hosted applications. SAML and LDAP still matter for older software, infrastructure tools, and products designed around directory authentication.

Authelia can perform both roles, but its center of gravity is forward auth. The official documentation describes its OpenID Connect provider as an open beta and says it does not act as an OpenID Connect relying party. That makes Authelia a reasonable OIDC provider for selected compatible services, but it is not the same as having a mature protocol hub for every application in your homelab.

Authentik is designed as that protocol hub. Its official provider list includes OIDC and OAuth2, SAML, LDAP, a generic proxy provider, SCIM, and RADIUS. It can still protect an application through forward auth when the application has no useful native protocol, but it also gives compatible applications a central place to authenticate users and apply policy.

When Authelia is the better mini PC choice

Authelia is the better answer when your requirement sounds like this:

• Put a login page and two-factor check in front of several internal web services.
• Keep the configuration in files that you can version and restore.
• Run one small identity service beside an existing reverse proxy.
• Apply different policies to internal networks, external users, paths, groups, and methods.
• Avoid adding a database-heavy identity platform before you need one.

Its access-control model is direct. Rules match domains, paths, users, groups, networks, or HTTP methods. The policy can deny, bypass, require one factor, or require two factors. Rules are evaluated in order, so the first matching rule wins.

That last point is powerful and dangerous. A broad bypass rule above a protected rule can make the protected rule unreachable. A path exception that is too wide can expose an API or a health endpoint. The right default is deny, followed by narrow exceptions that you can explain line by line.

The file-driven design also makes Authelia easy to move between hosts. You need to protect the configuration, secret values, user database, and storage data. The deployment is not stateless just because the main configuration is YAML. Authelia’s documentation says a local SQLite backend prevents multiple instances and leaves the service stateful. That is perfectly reasonable for one mini PC, but it should shape your backup plan.

Who should skip Authelia

Skip Authelia if several applications need mature OIDC or SAML integration, if you need an LDAP directory served from the identity platform, or if non-technical users need a polished account-management interface.

Also skip it if you are choosing it only because a comparison called it lightweight. A small service is not useful if every application still needs separate credentials and your actual goal is centralized identity.

When Authentik is worth the extra moving parts

Authentik makes sense when your requirement sounds like this:

• Several applications should share one identity and login policy.
• Some apps use OIDC, others use SAML, and older tools require LDAP.
• You want an administrative interface for users, groups, providers, flows, and policies.
• You need per-application access rules rather than one broad proxy rule.
• You expect your homelab to grow into a small internal platform.

The extra capability comes with a real operational cost. The official Compose installation starts a server, a worker, and PostgreSQL. Proxy, LDAP, and RADIUS providers use outposts, although the embedded outpost can simplify a proxy-provider deployment. You now have more containers, more logs, more state to back up, and more upgrades to understand.

That does not make Authentik a poor choice for a mini PC. It means the host should have room for identity services in addition to the applications they protect. A box that is already close to its memory limit will turn an identity upgrade into a scheduling problem.

Authentik’s model is also more expressive. A provider describes how an application authenticates. A flow describes the steps a user follows. Policies decide who can continue. Bindings connect users or groups to applications. This is a better foundation for a growing set of services, but it is more to learn than adding a few ordered YAML rules.

Who should skip Authentik

Skip Authentik when you have two or three private services behind one proxy, one or two users, and no application that needs OIDC, SAML, or LDAP. The extra database and policy model will not improve a setup that does not need those boundaries.

Skip it when you cannot commit to backing up and restoring PostgreSQL. Authentik stores application data, configuration, sessions, and task coordination in PostgreSQL according to its configuration documentation. Treat that database as part of the identity system, not as disposable container data.

Resource planning on a mini PC

The right question is not whether a mini PC can start the container. It is whether the identity layer can remain responsive while the host is also handling your real workload.

Authelia budget

Authelia’s appeal is that the core service can sit beside a reverse proxy without turning the host into an identity cluster. A single-instance setup can use local storage, and the project provides Docker Compose examples for standalone and bundled deployments.

Budget for:

• The Authelia service.
• Your reverse proxy.
• Session storage and the local data store you select.
• Logs and configuration backups.
• Headroom for login bursts after a restart or network outage.

The power difference between one small service and a larger stack depends on the host and the rest of the workload. Use the power cost calculator for the whole mini PC rather than pretending the identity container has a permanent watt figure.

Authentik budget

Authentik’s official Compose documentation gives a baseline of two CPU cores and 2 GB of RAM. Think of that as the floor for the documented installation, not as a recommendation to run a crowded homelab on a 2 GB host.

Budget for:

• The Authentik server.
• The Authentik worker.
• PostgreSQL and its backup space.
• An embedded or separate outpost when your provider type needs one.
• Your reverse proxy and every application being protected.
• Upgrade and recovery headroom.

If the identity service shares a host with several virtual machines or databases, run the numbers through the VM capacity estimator before committing to a small memory configuration. It is better to choose a host with unused capacity than to make authentication compete with a media index or a database checkpoint.

Reverse proxy setup is where most failures happen

Neither identity service can rescue an incorrectly configured proxy. The proxy is the boundary that receives the public request, terminates TLS, forwards identity information, and decides which paths reach the application.

For both choices, start with one protected test application. Do not move every service behind the new identity layer until login, logout, API access, and recovery work.

Authelia checklist

1. Create the identity service on the same private network as the reverse proxy.
2. Configure the session cookie domain and the public authentication URL.
3. Set the access-control default policy to deny.
4. Add the narrowest rule for the test application.
5. Require two factors for any service that contains private or administrative data.
6. Add explicit bypass rules only for paths that must remain public, such as a carefully reviewed health check or machine-to-machine endpoint.
7. Confirm that the proxy sends the original client information that your network rules expect.
8. Test a normal browser login, an expired session, a denied user, and an API request.

Authelia’s proxy integrations use forward authentication. The proxy asks Authelia to authorize the request, then redirects the user to the authentication portal when needed. The application traffic still flows through the proxy to the upstream service.

Authentik checklist

1. Start with the official Compose file and a specific release rather than inventing a stack from scratch.
2. Create the initial administrator and confirm that the server, worker, and PostgreSQL are healthy.
3. Choose the integration by application. Use OIDC or SAML when the application supports it.
4. Use a proxy provider when the application has no useful native protocol.
5. Use the embedded outpost for the simplest proxy-provider layout unless a separate outpost solves a real network or lifecycle need.
6. Create a binding so the application is not accidentally available to every user.
7. Preserve the original Host, X-Forwarded-Proto, and client forwarding headers.
8. Confirm WebSocket upgrades if the outpost or application needs them.
9. Test an allowed user, a denied user, a direct application URL, and the provider’s logout path.

Authentik’s documentation separates single-application forward auth from domain-level forward auth. The former allows different policies per application. The latter reduces repeated configuration across a shared parent domain but cannot apply separate application-level authorization rules in the same way. That is a meaningful design choice, not just a convenience toggle.

Backup and recovery are part of the choice

An identity service is a security dependency. If it fails, you may lose access to every service behind it even when those applications and their data are healthy.

For Authelia, preserve the YAML configuration, secret values, user database, local storage file when used, and any session or notification data that your setup depends on. Keep a recovery copy that is not protected by the identity service it restores.

For Authentik, back up PostgreSQL in a way you can restore independently of the running application. Preserve the deployment secrets and any provider or outpost configuration that is not already stored in the database. A database dump without the keys that let the deployment start is not a complete recovery set.

Our home server backup guide covers the broader backup workflow. Apply the same discipline here: perform a real restore to a test location, confirm that a user can authenticate, and verify that a protected application accepts the resulting session or token.

Do not put the only copy of your identity backup behind the identity service. Keep an emergency administrative path on the local network, a documented recovery account, or a break-glass procedure that does not depend on the failed proxy chain.

Authentik or Authelia by situation

The verdict

Pick Authelia when the problem is access control at the reverse proxy. It is the pragmatic choice for a small homelab that needs a login wall, two-factor authentication, and rules that stay readable in files.

Pick Authentik when the problem is identity across applications. Its server, worker, database, providers, flows, and policies take more care, but that structure is what lets many different services trust the same users and access decisions.

The mistake is choosing based on a vague claim that one is lightweight or the other is more complete. Start by listing every application you want to protect and how each one authenticates. If most need only a proxy gate, use Authelia. If several need a real identity provider, use Authentik. If neither application nor proxy needs centralized login, do not add either system yet.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Authelia or Authentik better for a small homelab?

Authelia is usually the better fit when you need a login wall and two-factor authentication in front of a few reverse-proxied services. Authentik is the better fit when several applications need a central identity provider, an admin interface, OIDC or SAML, LDAP, or richer user and policy management.

Can Authelia provide single sign-on?

Yes, Authelia includes an OpenID Connect provider, but its official documentation still describes that provider as an open beta. Its strongest and simplest use remains forward authentication through a reverse proxy.

Does Authentik need more RAM than Authelia?

Authentik has a documented Docker Compose baseline of two CPU cores and 2 GB of RAM for the installation, and its deployment includes a server, worker, and PostgreSQL. Authelia can use a smaller single-service layout, but neither project publishes a universal workload RAM figure.

Can either one protect an app without built-in login?

Yes. Both can work with a reverse proxy to authenticate a request before it reaches the application. That creates an access gate, but it does not automatically create application-level user accounts or true single sign-on if the application has no compatible identity protocol.

Do I need Authentik and Authelia together?

Usually no. Running both adds another identity system, another set of secrets, and another failure path. Choose the smallest architecture that covers your applications and keep the unused provider out of the request path.

---

Sources and further reading

• Authentik Docker Compose installation
• Authentik providers
• Authentik forward authentication
• Authentik reverse proxy requirements
• Authelia Docker deployment
• Authelia access control
• Authelia OpenID Connect provider
• Authelia OpenID Connect roadmap