Technology & Software Engineering Top 100 / #40ARD = Agentic Resource Discovery · A2A = Agent2Agent · MCP = Model Context Protocol

Browser agent · MIT · GitHub; Browser Use Cloud

Browser Use

One of the largest browser-agent projects; active and widely integrated. Publisher: Browser Use. Also ranked in Supply Chain, Manufacturing & Logistics (#71), Sales, Marketing & Customer Experience (#73), Cybersecurity (#82).

Vendor page ↗+ CompareExport JSON

Trust profileas of 2026-10-26

Publisherlikely · Repository ownership or inferred publisher domain — repository or Hub account ownershiplikely

Complianceno evidence about this agent · 4 vendor-level records (inherited)T5

SecurityNo CVE linked to this agent in the CVE registry — none linked in the products checked, not a findingnone

ProtocolsModel Context Protocol (MCP) claimed — named in the resource's own tags; no endpoint at the publisher's well-known paths sourceAgent2Agent (A2A) probed, not foundAgentic Resource Discovery (ARD) probed, not found1 / 3

TracesNone found — nobody has published what this agent does under attacknone

Issues found0 regulator actions · 0 incidents · 0 withdrawn certificates · CVEs: see Securitylinks only

Publisher unconfirmed: the evidence below is shown but not counted in the governance score, because nothing yet ties this listing to Browser Use beyond repository or Hub account ownership. A vendor-domain page, marketplace listing, ARD manifest or A2A card would confirm it.

Evidence available — not a safety certification. Suitability depends on your task, deployment and permissions. Rows marked vendor-level describe Browser Use, not this agent specifically.

Traces — under attack, in defence, in incidents

none public · what a trace is

No public trace found. Nobody has published what Browser Use does when its inputs carry instructions it should not follow, when a tool asks for credentials, or when a task invites a destructive command. Defenders can't learn from what they can't see: run it in a sandbox before the pilot and keep the transcript, or ask the vendor to publish one.

● third-party or vendor report · ◎ this registry's own probe transcript · ⚠ data left the environment. A trace describes one version on one date; it is evidence of behaviour, never a certification. Rows marked unreviewed have not yet been checked against their source by the maintainer.

CVEs — on the official record

none linked · the registry

No CVE in the registry names this agent or its listed product. That reads "none linked in the products checked", never as a finding: a product that is not on the registry's list, or a record that names it differently, is not seen. The vendor's own advisories remain the source of truth.

Compliance evidence

Jurisdiction: EU + US · 7 frameworks shown

–

ISO 27001

T5 Unknown

Nothing found in the sources checked.

Scope: — · registries, marketplaces, vendor pages

ask the vendor

–

ISO 42001

T5 Unknown

Nothing found in the sources checked.

Scope: — · registries, marketplaces, vendor pages

ask the vendor

–

CSA STAR

T5 Unknown

Nothing found in the sources checked.

Scope: — · CSA STAR Registry

ask the vendor

"Unknown" means nothing was found in the sources checked — registries, marketplaces and the vendor's own pages. It is not a finding of non-compliance; ask the vendor.

About the vendor — inherited, not agent-specific

4 records matched at organisation level

○

GDPR · DPA available

T4 Vendor-claimed · vendor-level

Vendor-claimed

Scope: entity · vendor page · 2026-10-26

re-check 2026-11-02

○

HIPAA

T4 Vendor-claimed · vendor-level

BAA available

Scope: entity · vendor page · 2026-10-26

re-check 2026-11-02

○

SOC 2 · SOC 2 Type I

T4 Vendor-claimed · vendor-level

Vendor-claimed

Scope: entity · vendor page · 2026-10-26

re-check 2026-11-02

○

SOC 2 · SOC 2 Type II

T4 Vendor-claimed · vendor-level

Vendor-claimed

Scope: entity · vendor page · 2026-10-26

re-check 2026-11-02

A vendor-level registry entry proves the organisation was assessed; whether this agent is inside that scope is a question for the vendor. These rows do not count toward the agent's evidence tier.

✔ found · ○ claimed · – not found · ⚠ expired, stale or revoked. Every row links to its source.Dispute or correct this dossier

GDPR, assembled from checks

GDPR● 0 found in registries or documents○ 1 vendor-claimed⚠ 0 issues linkedas of 2026-10-26

○ ClaimedDPA available: Vendor-claimed (vendor page, 2026-10-26). A DPA is a contract you still have to sign and review.

– Not foundNo Article 42 GDPR seal. "GDPR certified" is never shown without one.

☐ You checkYour lawful basis, DPIA, and whether this agent is inside the certificate scope.

News and chatter

last 90 days · linked with confidence ≥ 0.85

2026-10-15

browser-use: 0.13.13: OpenAI browser tools and Cloud fixes

GitHub releases · This release includes the OpenAI browser-tool driver and fixes two integration issues. - Handle temporary empty Cloud tab URLs during navigation. - Keep screenshots, crops, and pointer coordinates aligned on scaled displays. - Provide 18 d

Product update

2026-10-15

browser-use: 0.13.12: OpenAI browser tools

GitHub releases · Add OpenAI browser tools backed by Browser Use Actor. - Import `BrowserUse` from `browser_use.integrations.openai`. - Install `browser-use[openai-tools]` to enable OpenAI Python 3.31+. - Use local browsers, Browser Use Cloud, or an existin

Product update

Headline, link and a summary attributed to the outlet. News never changes trust or domain scores.

Technology & Software Engineering score

technology profile · sar-score-2.0 · #40 of 100 in the curated list

Adoption / usage29 / 30

Trust & security17 / 25

Project / product health20 / 20

Ecosystem / interoperability14 / 15

Domain expertise / fit35 / 100

Governance / compliance evidence0 / 100

Docs / transparency9 / 10

Raw component / maximum, then weighted by the technology profile (adoption 30, trust 20, project 20, ecosystem 15, domain 10, governance 0, docs 5). Trust and governance are computed from the evidence on this page (vendor-level rows at half credit); the other components come from the curated workbook, whose order is the rank. Unknown components count as 0 and are never imputed.

Before you deploy

Derived from the evidence ledger. This agent is not yet in the reference set, so deployment questions (credentials, approval, data handling) are not answered here — ask the vendor.

Evidence supporting this use (4)

GDPR DPA available — vendor-claimed, vendor-level source

HIPAA — vendor-claimed, vendor-level source

SOC 2 Type I — vendor-claimed, vendor-level source

SOC 2 Type II — vendor-claimed, vendor-level source

Unknowns to check (5)

Your lawful basis and DPIA for PHI and personal data the agent will touch

That the SOC 2 report period covers the components you will use; request the report under NDA

That the HIPAA BAA is offered for this product tier and region

The transfer mechanism you will rely on; DPF covers EU-to-US transfers only

Ask the vendor for ISO 27001, ISO 42001, CSA STAR evidence; none was found in the sources checked

Suggested restrictions for a pilot (1)

No public trace of this agent under adversarial input was found. Run it in a sandbox against your own prompt-injection and tool-abuse scenarios before the pilot, and keep the transcript; the enterprise edition records one.

Rules: config/deploy_rules.json. Advice for a bounded pilot, not a verdict.

Provenance

seed workbookscores, rank, category

GitHubrepository signals, license

vendor pageclaims

NVDsecurity (CVE keyword search)

Hacker News, GDELT, vendor feedsnews and chatter

First seen2026-10-26

Recordres_0c4b61d6fa09ecbc

Open the full record (JSON) →