• Supabase: Self-hosting Supabase can indeed be quite resource-intensive, requiring significant server resources. While it comes with built-in PostgreSQL, this might not be ideal for all users who might prefer other databases or already have existing PostgreSQL clusters. Additionally, querying and managing error logs in Supabase might not be as convenient as with some other dedicated solutions.
• Keycloak: Keycloak does not inherently offer a clear, out-of-the-box passwordless login feature. Although it's highly customizable and passwordless login might be achievable through custom configurations or extensions, it's not a directly supported option.
• SuperTokens: The documentation for SuperTokens has some errors and lacks comprehensiveness, potentially missing detailed explanations for certain configurations or features. A significant drawback is that the Python SDK's source code lacks comments, making it very difficult for developers to understand the code logic and troubleshoot issues.
• Casdoor: Casdoor utilizes a webhook-based approach for communicating user information, which differs from your ideal scenario. I prefer a system where the client receives a token directly and can then use this token to communicate with the verification server to retrieve user details, rather than relying on a webhook callback mechanism.
• Logto: Similar to Casdoor, Logto also employs a webhook method for handling user information.
• Lucia: Lucia, being a lightweight authentication library, lacks built-in support for Docker deployment and passwordless authentication. Furthermore, it too simple, potentially lacking the more advanced authentication features required for complex applications.
• Authelia: Authelia has a rather specific architecture, typically requiring deployment as a reverse proxy in front of applications. It also mandates the use of HTTPS and appears to primarily function as an authentication gateway by intercepting and processing requests through the proxy.