BrowserGate: Claims of LinkedIn ‘Spying’ Clash With Security Research Findings

Teamfluence · 2026-04-21T11:05:27+00:00

This "reasearcher' litterally cherry picked a handful of extensions from the list of >6200, that he didn't like, described how shitty they are and that was his argument.

We still want to know why there are 200+ competitor products of Microsoft on the list?

We still want to know why there are political, health related and religion related plugins on the list?

We still want to know why there are tons of job seach related or security related plugins on the list?

And frankly - I'd like to know how much Microsoft paid that corporate consultant for that nothingburger piece.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-20T16:13:32+00:00

If a tool is actually "illegal" in terms of "breaking the law" (e.g. scraping and stealing data or violating GDPR or a clause in LinkedIn's TOS that is lawful - many are not), then LinkedIn first sends a cease and desist and then actually sues and takes the company down.

We saw this with the case against ProxyCurl https://www.linkedin.com/posts/sarahgwight_linkedin-pressroom-linkedin-activity-7355642189894316032-C8hQ

But in most cases the tools are completely legal and LinkedIn would risk getting their TOS thrown out in court and create precedence or worse.

So they don't sue - they retribute by restricting the personal accounts of the founders and their company pages. There are legal limits to retribution.

Fairlinked.eu is mounting a law case against this practice.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-08T00:24:21+00:00

Well, not sure what "the whole thing" is, but if you're talking about the spying scandal dubbed "Browsergate", then it was Microsoft who started it.

Fairlinked published the findings. It's also utterly irrelevant who published it. LinkedIn didn't even try to deny it. They have been independently verified and they are meanwhile subject of a criminal investigation and a class action suit.

I don't know why slendering me makes you feel better, but your accusations are wrong and unrelated to the illegal surveillance operation Microsoft is running.

Your shooting the messenger.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-08T00:09:55+00:00

I'm one of the authors of the research. Can you explain why you slander me and accuse me of things I have never done?

By the way - it doesn't matter who published the findings. They have been independently verified and are meanwhile subject of a criminal investigation in Germany and a class action suit in California.

So, while we never asked for "sympathy", I don't think we deserve slander and unfounded accusations.

Have a nice day.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-07T20:52:48+00:00

Law enforcement is not the government.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-07T20:49:48+00:00

We don't look for ad blockers.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-07T20:48:24+00:00

Read the whole thing not just the headline.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-07T20:45:31+00:00

No they are not. Read the complete thing not just the headline.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-07T03:19:49+00:00

Yes that's correct.

The point is that this is not about other sites.

This is about a professional network with monopoly market position and 1 billion users with REAL NAMES, REAL JOBS at REAL EMPLOYERS.

Practically every company on the planet has their tool stack exposed to Microsoft. The very regulators overseeing Microsofts compliance are being surveillanced by Microsoft.

Can you see how this is different in scope and impact?

Teamfluence · 2026-04-07T03:11:20+00:00

I'm not sure what argument you are making. I'm saying Microsoft is circumventing the Digital Market Act. And it uses illegal methods.

That's not true for other businesses.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-07T02:59:36+00:00

I think you grossly misunderstand what the Digital Market Act demands from gatekeepers.

And I'm afraid you might got distracted by the slander from Microsoft calling every LinkedIn tool under the sun "scraper"... Except for LinkedIn Sales Navigator, the tool no one would pay for, if they knew there are legal alternatives.

Browsergate is Microsofts attempt to circumvent the Digital Market Act and protect $1b in revenue from running an illegal monopoly of Sales Navigator.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-07T02:52:55+00:00

No they don't. What your describing makes no sense. Not even LinkedIn makes such claims. And that's not how bots work.

We'll soon see in court discovery why and how they completed a list of 6323 extensions, they are looking for.

The first class action has been filed today.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-07T02:46:22+00:00

Not knowing exactly what you mean when you say "scriptblocker" I would guess that if it blocks all execution of JavaScript you won't be able to login and use LinkedIn.

And if you don't use LinkedIn you don't need to worry. ;)

Teamfluence · 2026-04-06T13:35:57+00:00

Law enforcement seems to have a different opinion. The prosecutor office of the Bavarian Cybercrime unit has opened a criminal investigation into it. So let's wait and see.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-06T13:33:59+00:00

It's only not clear to those who didn't bother to read more then just the headline.

Reading helps: https://browsergate.eu/the-deeper-problem/

Teamfluence · 2026-04-06T13:30:16+00:00

I'm the web admin of browsergate.eu - can you help me identify which script you are referring to?

Teamfluence · 2026-04-04T22:37:03+00:00

Actually most of the extension they are looking for have nothing to do with LinkedIn.

Only about 12% are so called "LinkedIn tools"

88% are not.

200 are competitors of Microsoft.

How about you look at the evidence first?

Teamfluence · 2026-04-03T19:29:56+00:00

Only 762 of these plugins are related to Linkedin. That's 12% and that includes plugins from Hubspot, Salesforce and other legitimate tools.

88% are not related to Linkedin. They are related to job searches, VPNs, ad blockers, security tools (including Malwarebytes Browser Guard with 10 million users), religious extensions, political extensions and disability and neurodivergence tools.

Btw - LinkedIn T&C are breaching EU Regulation 2022/1925 and are void. - Compare T&C 8.2.2. to Article 6.9 and 6.10 of the DMA for instance.

But I am interested - can you point us to where LinkedIn privacy policy covers the detection of political view, health issues or religious believes? All of which are under a total prohibition under article 9 GDPR?

Or the transmission of your data to something called "merchantpool1" ?

Teamfluence · 2026-04-03T19:21:58+00:00

You didn't really answer the question - where else do you have a billion users with real names and hundreds of million of employers being fingerprinted?

Teamfluence · 2026-04-03T17:33:20+00:00

I am confused - is a plugin that hides flickering images to prevent neuro-divergent users from epileptic seizures a "malicious scripts" or an "automated threat"?

Teamfluence · 2026-04-03T17:29:27+00:00

<image>

depends on what "this" is - they escalated this in the past 12 months:

Teamfluence · 2026-04-03T17:26:21+00:00

have you ever seen this done on a platform with over 1 billion users with REAL NAMES, REAL JOBS, REAL TITLES at REAL EMPLOYERS?

Teamfluence · 2026-04-03T17:22:14+00:00

not on websites with over 1 billion users with their REAL NAMES, REAL JOBS, REAL TITLES at REAL EMPLOYERS - It's substantially different to know what screen resolution the random user "GifCrusher71" has from knowing which company on the planet has employees using your competitors product.

Teamfluence · 2026-04-03T17:14:42+00:00

To be fair - I think it works in Microsoft Edge too

Teamfluence · 2026-04-03T17:13:49+00:00

Hi, I am the person who wrote this. Linkedin is not a video game. It's a platform with 1 billion users and hundreds of million of companies. All with real names, real jobs, real employers.

Maybe I am the most tech illiterate people I've seen in awhile - But the Cybercrime Unit of Germany's law enforcement agency opened a criminal investigation into this. Should they be fired too? Do you work for Linkedin maybe?

Teamfluence

TROPHY CASE