Standalone vs Integrated Authentication: Which is Better?

Honestly, just integrate the auth with your backend. Most mature frameworks have solid built-in user management. It's surprising to see people reinvent the wheel for something that has been well established for years.

If you're already comfortable with Better-Auth, I'd say stick with it. It's a mature solution and probably won't limit you. Just a heads up: make sure to use argon2 for encryption instead of bcrypt since the latter is a bit outdated. If you're open to alternatives, Pocketbase could work just for auth, but it's a bit less stable right now.

For self-hosted options, Keycloak is another solid choice if you're considering. And regarding the whole running-your-own-auth debate, it really boils down to your specific needs. If you foresee needing multiple projects to use the same auth, then a third-party provider might work better.

I’ve implemented both options in production and here’s what I think: Better-Auth as a standalone service is great when you need multiple apps accessing the same auth. You’ll have a singular point for user identity which simplifies adding new applications. That said, you do introduce more complexity since you'll need a dedicated deployment pipeline for that service.

For a single app, you might be overcomplicating things. Keeping it integrated would reduce latency and potential failure points.

I recommend avoiding building your own auth solution. It can take time away from your main product, and if it breaks, it can seriously impact your app. Check out services like Auth0 or Supabase. Auth0 has a free plan that could work for you initially. Just assess your needs based on your future plans.