Before comparing two options, let’s be clear about what they’re both options for.

When you want a copy of a repository hosted on GitHub downloaded onto your own computer, you perform an action called cloning. To do this, Git needs to know exactly where that repository lives and how to reach it — this address is called the clone URL. On every GitHub repository page, you’ll typically find two different clone URLs offered for the very same repository: one starting with “https://” and another starting with “git@” that represents an SSH connection.

Both URLs point to the exact same underlying project. The repository’s files, history, and content are identical no matter which one you use. What differs entirely is the method of proving who you are to GitHub’s servers when your computer connects — and that single difference cascades into everything else covered in this post.

With that foundation set, let’s define the vocabulary behind each of these two authentication approaches.

A handful of terms make the whole comparison click into place.

With this vocabulary settled, let’s trace exactly what happens the moment each type of connection is made.

This is the heart of the comparison — how each protocol actually proves you are who you say you are.

sequenceDiagram
    participant You as Your Computer
    participant GitHub as GitHub Server
    Note over You,GitHub: HTTPS Path
    You->>GitHub: Connect with username + personal access token
    GitHub->>GitHub: Verify token validity and scope
    Note over You,GitHub: SSH Path
    You->>GitHub: Connect, respond to cryptographic challenge with private key
    GitHub->>GitHub: Match response against registered public key
        

Zooming out from a single connection, let’s see how the setup effort and daily experience actually differ over time.

The most meaningful practical difference between these two approaches isn’t security in the abstract — it’s how often you’re asked to prove your identity, and how that proof is stored. HTTPS access is often paired with a credential manager on your computer that remembers your token for a while, but tokens are frequently scoped and time-limited, meaning you’ll periodically generate new ones. SSH, once configured, tends to keep working indefinitely without repeated setup, since the key pair itself doesn’t expire the way many tokens do.

flowchart LR
    A[Choose HTTPS] --> B[Generate personal access token]
    B --> C[Use token for each remote operation]
    C --> D[Token eventually expires, regenerate]
    E[Choose SSH] --> F[Generate key pair once]
    F --> G[Upload public key to GitHub once]
    G --> H[Key keeps working indefinitely]
        

With the mechanics covered, a direct comparison makes the practical trade-offs easy to scan at a glance.

Neither method is universally “better” — the right choice depends heavily on your situation.

Each approach brings genuine strengths, alongside real costs worth weighing.

Whichever method you choose, a few real risks deserve careful attention.

A few consistent habits keep either authentication method safe and hassle-free.

This choice plays out constantly across individual developers, teams, and automated systems alike.

Yes, the remote address a local repository uses can be updated at any time, letting you switch between HTTPS and SSH without needing to re-clone the whole project.

Both are strong, encrypted methods when configured correctly. The meaningful differences are usually about convenience and credential management rather than one being fundamentally less secure than the other.

It’s common and recommended to use a separate key per machine, so losing access to one device doesn’t require rotating credentials everywhere else you work.

Operations requiring authentication will simply fail until you generate a fresh token and update it wherever it’s used, similar to a badge needing renewal at the front desk.

HTTPS is often the gentler starting point due to its simpler setup, though many beginners eventually move to SSH once they’re comfortable and want to avoid repeated token renewals.

HTTPS and SSH clone URLs lead to the exact same repository — the entire difference lies in how your identity is proven to GitHub’s servers. HTTPS relies on a personal access token presented with each connection, while SSH relies on a cryptographic key pair set up once and reused indefinitely. Neither approach is universally superior; the right choice depends on your setup, how often you connect, the network you’re working from, and how you prefer to manage credentials over time. Understanding this distinction turns what looks like an arbitrary button choice on a repository page into an informed, deliberate decision.