Is Grammarly Dark Safe? — Extension Safety Profile
Quick verdict: Grammarly Dark earns a safety grade A, 81.3 out of 100, based on 5 of 5 dimensions.
81.3/100
Grade A · 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
Grammarly Dark earns a safety grade of A (81.3/100), measured across 5 of 5 dimensions. Its strongest area is Permissions & Access (100%). The weakest is Publisher & Identity (60%) — what holds its grade back the most.
On the public records we can check, Grammarly Dark comes through cleanly. 10,000 active users/installs reported on the store. Store rating 3.8/5 from 72 user ratings. Last updated on the store 2026-02-18. This is an automated profile, not a hands-on review — so treat the grade as a starting point: open Grammarly Dark'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 2 of 5 checks verified | Automated signals | |
| Permissions & Access | 100% · 25/25 pts 3 of 3 checks verified | Automated signals | |
| Data & Privacy | 83% · 13.2/16 pts 4 of 5 checks verified | Automated signals | |
| Maintenance & Ownership | 60% · 4.5/7.5 pts 1 of 2 checks verified | Automated signals | |
| Community Reputation | 66% · 6.6/10 pts 2 of 4 checks verified | Automated signals |
In-depth safety analysis
Grammarly Dark requests a single, narrowly scoped permission: access to the web domain grammarly.com. This means the extension can read and modify content exclusively on Grammarly's own website, not on other sites you visit. For a general browser extension designed to alter the appearance of a specific service, this is a highly focused and minimal permission request.
General browser extensions that modify website appearance are typically low-risk, but users should be aware that even limited host permissions allow an extension to see whatever is visible on that specific page, including text you are editing or credentials you enter. A careful user should verify that such an extension is truly limited to the intended site and consider that style-modifying extensions could theoretically be updated later to request broader permissions.
This extension's permissions and access model is its strongest dimension, reflecting a minimal and appropriate scope for its function. Its weakest dimension relates to publisher and identity, as well as maintenance, which are areas where users might want to look for a transparent developer presence and consistent updates to ensure long-term reliability.
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 Grammarly Dark?
- Publisher Bart Zalewski
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 838 browser extensions we track, Grammarly Dark scores higher on safety than 68% of them.
Computed from our own database of assessed browser extensions — updated as we track more.
Evidence on File (12)
Grammarly Dark FAQ
- Is Grammarly Dark safe?
- Grammarly Dark earns a safety grade of A (81.3/100) 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 Grammarly Dark?
- Grammarly Dark is operated by Bart Zalewski.
Browse all browser extensions we've checked →