Is Automa Safe? — Extension Safety Profile
Quick verdict: Automa earns a safety grade B, 69.9 out of 100, based on 5 of 5 dimensions.
69.9/100
Grade B · 5 of 5 checks
What we found
Automated safety profile from public signals (the extension's manifest & permissions, store listing, publisher, privacy policy). A full review hasn't been published yet.
What this safety grade means
Automa earns a safety grade of B (69.9/100), measured across 5 of 5 dimensions. Its strongest area is Community Reputation (93%). The weakest is Permissions & Access (45%) — what holds its grade back the most.
On the public records we can check, Automa looks broadly trustworthy. 200,000 active users/installs reported on the store. Store rating 4.4/5 from 282 user ratings. Last updated on the store 2026-02-09. This is an automated profile, not a hands-on review — so treat the grade as a starting point: open Automa's own store listing and privacy policy before installing, and weigh it against the other browser extensions we track below.
Safety Signals
Based on 5 of 5 safety dimensions
| Dimension | Score | Bar | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Publisher & Identity | 60% · 4.8/8 pts | Automated signals | |
| Permissions & Access | 45% · 11.2/25 pts | Automated signals | |
| Data & Privacy | 93% · 14.8/16 pts | Automated signals | |
| Maintenance & Ownership | 85% · 6.4/7.5 pts | Automated signals | |
| Community Reputation | 93% · 9.3/10 pts | Automated signals |
In-depth safety analysis
Automa asks for a broad set of powerful permissions, including debugger, scripting, proxy, and host access to . These together allow the extension to read and change page content on any website, intercept and modify network requests, capture keystrokes, and control browser tabs. For a browser automation tool that lets users build workflows, such deep access is expected, but it still means the extension can observe and alter everything you do in the browser.
General safety guidance for automation extensions applies here. Because they can script actions across all sites, a user must be cautious about loading untrusted workflow templates or granting access to sensitive accounts. The line between a legitimate helper and a tool that could be misused if compromised or poorly coded is thin. Users should review hosted workflows and avoid sharing sensitive data through automated routines without encryption.
In the fact sheet, the strongest dimension is Community Reputation, reflecting positive user ratings and a solid store presence. The weakest is Permissions & Access, which highlights the extensive scope the extension needs. The developer declares data is not sold and is used only for core functionality, collecting personally identifiable and authentication information, likely for account-based sync.
AI-assisted analysis of the documented signals above (permissions, store data, privacy practices) — explains what they mean and the risks typical for this category. Not a hands-on test.
What the store listing shows
Who's Behind Automa?
- Publisher https://extension.automa.site/
Public records identify the publisher, but no individual founders or a separate registered company are named — which is what holds the Publisher & Identity score back. Less public information about who operates an extension means less you can verify about their long-term accountability.
How it compares
Among the 345 browser extensions we track, Automa scores higher on safety than 21% of them.
Computed from our own database of assessed browser extensions — updated as we track more.
Evidence on File (12)
Automa FAQ
- Is Automa safe?
- Automa earns a safety grade of B (69.9/100) on our evidence-based assessment, based on 5 of 5 safety dimensions we could verify from public records. This is an automated profile built from public records, not a hands-on review.
- Who is behind Automa?
- Automa is operated by https://extension.automa.site/.
Browse all browser extensions we've checked →