Should you try BrowserOS neo?
BrowserOS neo imports Chrome logins and saves replayable agent sessions locally, according to its README. Consider a supervised trial when those features solve a specific workflow problem. Our sandbox result does not verify the browser experience, so start by checking the installer and agent connection on the machine you intend to use.
Neo complements your daily browser. The README describes it as a secondary browser for agents, while BrowserOS is the browser a person drives with an AI agent built in. Both ship from the same repository. Choose between those roles before choosing an installation or development path.
What did our run establish?
Installation completed in 51 seconds; the build exited 1 after 7 seconds. Our run took place on September 29, 2026, at commit 94cd7f6, selecting packages/browseros, the Chromium fork's Python build tooling.
Our sandbox used Python 3.12 on Debian Bookworm with 3 CPUs and 8 GB RAM. The harness records each command step's success flag, exit code, elapsed time and timeout status. Installation returned zero; the build returned 1 without timing out. Its saved log tail is empty, leaving the cause unresolved. Tests were skipped with the recorded reason "no script". Skipped tests are not failures, and the detection result does not establish that the repository contains no tests elsewhere.
The attached stored parser summaries report 64 dependency packages occupying 117 MB. They do not establish exhaustive unique test coverage. Pip-audit recorded zero advisories, but the supplied record does not establish scan coverage. Neither that zero nor a successful install proves browser security or working automation.
We did not compile the full Chromium browser, launch either product, import Chrome data, connect an MCP client or run an authenticated task. The README says browser development requires about 100 GB of disk; the dependency footprint above is not a full browser build requirement.
The MrKeyoor testing methodology explains the publisher's approach to recording command outcomes and its limits. That page was supplied in its October 31, 2026 form; it does not establish which methodology revision governed our September run. This correction uses the stored run and includes no new execution.
Does neo support Linux?
The current README lists macOS, Windows and Linux, with x64 Linux builds. The README pinned to our measured commit listed only macOS and Windows for neo. Linux availability in today's documentation therefore should not be read as something our September sandbox verified. Check the current installer on your target distribution.
What needs checking on Windows?
Issue 2424 reports Windows MCP listeners bound to all interfaces while remote access was disabled. The original reporter also found that remote peers were rejected before HTTP parsing and that spoofing the Host header did not bypass the filter. The report explicitly describes a hardening issue, not demonstrated remote tool access.
An October 16 comment reports similar listener behavior on a newer installation but says remote bypass was not tested. These are upstream observations, not findings from our sandbox. Before deployment, inspect the actual listeners and access controls on the version installed; do not assume the reported port numbers apply to every release.
Which alternatives fit different needs?
Browser Use supports local automation as well as hosted options. Its README distinguishes a CLI for existing agents, a Python library for application code and a fully hosted service. Consider it instead when you want to build browser automation into your own application. It also documents reuse of a local Chrome profile, so authenticated browsing is not exclusive to BrowserOS neo.
Playwright MCP supports persistent profiles, isolated contexts and connections to an existing browser through its extension. Consider it instead when your workflow needs Playwright automation with an explicit choice of session model. Its documentation says it is not a security boundary; choosing an isolated context does not by itself secure an agent deployment.
These are alternative automation approaches, not benchmarks against neo. We did not run comparative workloads. Your coding agent remains a complement to neo: it supplies the tasks and connects through MCP.
How to read the ratings
Assessed scores use a five-point evidence rubric: 1 means a documented blocker prevents the evaluated task; 2 means an initial step succeeds but a required next step fails; 3 means the basic evaluated path works with material limitations; 4 means the supplied evidence covers the main documented paths and their limits; 5 requires broad corroboration across the dimension. Documentation scores assess explanation, not working software. Unknown dimensions remain unassessed.
Setup earns 2 because installation succeeded and the selected build failed. Documentation earns 4 because the supplied README distinguishes the products, installation paths, platforms, privacy settings and development subsystems. Community health and operational maturity remain unassessed: the supplied extracts do not establish representative maintenance responsiveness or successful workload execution.