Comparisons
COMPARISON
Locke vs Generic Browser Content Blockers
Ad blockers, tracker blockers, and site blockers work at the network layer — they stop connections or scripts from loading. What they can't do is read the text inside a chat box, tell a privileged document from a harmless one, or mask sensitive data while letting the rest of a prompt through.
When Generic browser content blockers fits
- You need to block whole categories of sites or trackers across the entire browser.
- Your goal is to prevent a tool from being used at all rather than to govern what is sent.
When Locke fits
- AI tools are part of the workflow and a blanket block is not realistic.
- You need fine-grained control: allow general use, intercept specific data categories.
- You want users to see why something was flagged and to choose mask, redact, or override per case.
Side-by-side
| Dimension | Locke | Browser blockers |
|---|---|---|
| Granularity | Field-level: detects categories within free-form text. | Page- or request-level. |
| Action | Mask, tokenize, redact, or block — chosen per match. | Block or allow. |
| Visibility | Traffic-light widget shows current risk state. | Usually invisible until something breaks. |
| Use case | Govern AI prompts without breaking AI workflows. | Block ads, trackers, or whole domains. |
Bottom line
Content blockers and Locke solve different problems. Want to block connections outright? Use a blocker. Want people to keep using AI while keeping specific data off the wire? That's Locke.
