ClearFlask
Self-HostedOpen-source alternative for polls, surveys, and event feedback
Overview
ClearFlask is an open-source tool for creating polls, surveys, and event feedback forms. It supports customizable templates with branding, anonymous responses, and real-time analytics to track engagement. Deployable via Docker or Kubernetes, it ensures data privacy by keeping user information on your servers. Integrations with Slack and GitHub streamline feedback collection, making it ideal for teams avoiding SaaS costs while maintaining data control.
Self-Hosting Resources
Below is a reference structure for docker-compose.yml.
⚠️ Do NOT run blindly. Replace placeholders with official values.
version: '3'
services:
clearflask:
image: <OFFICIAL_IMAGE_NAME>:latest
container_name: clearflask
ports:
- "8080:<APP_INTERNAL_PORT>"
volumes:
- ./data:/app/data
restart: unless-stopped Key Features
- Customizable polls & event feedback forms
- Self-hostable via Docker/Kubernetes
- Real-time response analytics & reporting
Frequently Asked Questions
? Is ClearFlask hard to install?
ClearFlask is easy to install using Docker Compose—just pull the image and run with minimal config. A Helm chart is available for Kubernetes. Basic container familiarity helps, but docs offer step-by-step guides for beginners.
? Is it a good alternative to Typeform?
Yes! It offers core poll/survey features plus self-hosting for privacy. While it lacks some advanced design tools, it’s cost-effective for teams prioritizing data control over SaaS bells and whistles.
? Is it completely free?
Absolutely. ClearFlask is MIT licensed, so it’s 100% free to use, modify, and self-host. No paid tiers or hidden costs exist for the self-hosted version.
Top Alternatives
People Also Ask about ClearFlask
Tool Info
Pros
- ⊕ Privacy-focused (self-hosted data control)
- ⊕ No subscription fees (MIT licensed)
- ⊕ Integrates with Slack & GitHub
Cons
- ⊖ Requires basic server/container knowledge for setup
- ⊖ Fewer advanced features than SaaS tools like Typeform
- ⊖ Limited third-party integrations compared to proprietary alternatives