ShellNewHandler VS Bannerproof.app

Bannerproof.app's answer:

It came out of repeatedly finding the same thing while auditing client sites for agencies: the cookie banner looked compliant — nice "Accept/Reject" buttons — but trackers were already firing in the background before anyone clicked anything. Existing tools didn't catch this because they check configuration, not actual browser behavior.

Bannerproof.app's answer:

Instead of checking your CMP's configuration or a static policy, Bannerproof loads your site the way a real visitor would and watches the actual network requests. It also specifically catches Google Consent Mode v2 misconfigurations — a gap most consent tools don't check at all.

Bannerproof.app's answer:

Most cookie-consent tools help you build and manage the banner, but don't verify what actually happens in the browser. Bannerproof audits real runtime behavior — the gap between "the banner looks compliant" and "trackers already fired" — and is fast enough for agencies to run across an entire client portfolio.

Bannerproof.app's answer:

Web agencies managing multiple client sites, and SMB website owners who need a quick compliance check without hiring a privacy consultant.

Bannerproof.app's answer:

Bannerproof runs on a real browser engine — the same kind a visitor's browser uses — so it sees actual network requests and cookies firing, not just a static config or policy check. The rest of the stack is just whatever keeps that fast and reliable to run across hundreds of client sites at once.