EU Omnibus narrows consent-free processing, adds six-month do-not-reask, and introduces browser refusal signals, keeping most third-party stacks consent-bound.

The Omnibus & Consent: What Changes and What Doesn’t

The Omnibus & Consent: What Actually Changes - and What Still Doesn’t

Blog Aesirx

 EU Omnibus shifts device access under GDPR, adds browser refusal signals, and keeps third-party analytics and ads firmly consent-required across most real-world stacks.

India’s DPDP Rules strengthen consent on the surface but allow AI training to bypass it through ‘research’ exemptions, creating major accountability gaps.

India weaponizes notice and consent

India weaponizes notice & consent - and then lets AI slip into ‘research’

India’s DPDP Rules build strict consent requirements, yet AI training can skip them under ‘research’, creating a major gap in privacy protection.

India’s Consent Loophole Lets AI Exploit Data

<div class="px-md-40px py-20px border rounded-4 shadow mb-5">
TL;DR
Browser and OS signals are great in the EU for saying “no,” but they’re not enough to give a valid, informed, granular “yes” under GDPR and ePrivacy Directive. The media-services carve-out in the leaked Omnibus makes the whole promise weaker because the biggest trackers can just ignore the signal. And we still need first-party CMPs to actually enforce, log, and prove what the user decided.
This is for DPOs, privacy lawyers, policy people, and anyone maintaining a compliant CMP who now wonders “do we still need this?” (short answer: yes).
</div>
Most people are ready to celebrate: “finally, browser signals will kill consent banners.” But, I'm not celebrating yet.
The <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ronnikc_leaked-gdpr-omnibus-on-simplification-activity-7393503310764433408-47CN" target="_blank" rel="noopener">leaked “Digital Omnibus” draft</a> finally says the quiet part out loud: yes, the EU wants browsers and mobile OSs to send a machine-readable privacy choice - and yes, websites should respect it. Good. That’s long overdue.
But in the same text we see three moves:
<ol>
<li aria-level="1">more terminal-equipment access gets pulled into GDPR logic instead of staying in the very clear ePrivacy Directive 5(3);</li>
<li aria-level="1">there is a specific exemption for media services from having to honour those machine-readable signals;</li>
<li aria-level="1">and nothing actually solves the hardest EU problem: how to express an explicit, informed, granular “yes”.</li>
</ol>
So let’s unpack it.
<h2>Browser signals are perfect for “no”</h2>
What California and Colorado have done is smart: one signal → global opt-out. California even goes further and now requires all browser makers and mobile OS suppliers to support these signals. That’s powerful because it blocks processing at the point of origin - before AdTech, before SDKs, before sharing.
That logic also fits perfectly in the EU context for rejection:
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">ePrivacy Directive 5(3): don’t store/read on the device without consent.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Browser signal says: “don’t.”</li>
<li aria-level="1">Site doesn’t load anything = compliant.</li>
</ul>
So far, so good.
<h2>But browser signals cannot express a valid EU “yes”</h2>
The current and proposed approaches are category-based - “marketing”, “analytics”, maybe “personalisation.” That is not what EU law calls “freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous” consent.
Why?
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">it’s too coarse: a real site has 10–20 different third parties and purposes;</li>
<li aria-level="1">it’s not contextual: GDPR consent is for this controller and this purpose, not a generic “marketing on the whole internet”;</li>
<li aria-level="1">it has no information layer: a signal can’t show what will actually be loaded.</li>
</ul>
Even if, in the future, a browser/OS standard tried to define more granular signals, it still can’t magically know every script, SDK, tracker or conditional load a specific website might trigger at runtime. Consent has to be tied to the actual controller’s stack at that moment - something only a site-level, first-party CMP can present.
So a browser signal that says “accept marketing” would not meet GDPR + ePD 5(3) standards for an explicit, informed, granular yes. In Europe, browser signals are a great “no” - they are not (yet) a lawful “yes.”
“Browser signals are an excellent EU ‘no’. They are not a lawful EU ‘yes’.”
<h2>Consent categories were invented by CMPs, not by law</h2>
Somewhere along the way we all started acting as if EU law said “ask for functional / analytics / marketing.” It didn’t. CMP vendors did, to make banners look tidy.
Also: “consent for technically necessary technologies” is not a legal requirement. If it’s truly necessary under ePD 5(3), you don’t need consent. Asking for it is UX theatre.
So if anyone now imagines that a machine-readable “accept analytics” header suddenly equals valid EU consent, that’s backwards. The law never asked us to group everything into 3 boxes.
“Consent categories were invented by CMP vendors, not by EU law.”
<h2>Processing starts at device access - anonymising later doesn’t fix it</h2>
We still see this pattern in “privacy-friendly” analytics:
<ol>
<li aria-level="1">the script accesses the device → processing has started</li>
<li aria-level="1">the data is sent off</li>
<li aria-level="1">the vendor anonymises / pseudonymises / aggregates</li>
<li aria-level="1">the vendor says: “now it’s compliant”</li>
</ol>
But the legal issue was in step 1–2. If you accessed terminal equipment without valid consent, you can’t wash that away later. This is exactly where browser signals are useful: they can stop step 1 entirely.
<h2>The media-services exemption is the giveaway</h2>
The leaked text says: everyone should honour the machine-readable choice… except media services (with a vague nod to journalistic freedom) as seen in the leaked draft.
Since when did journalistic freedom include the right to collect and share our data with AdTech, data brokers and BigTech?
This is exactly the sector that currently shows “we need consent for our 895 partners so you can read this article.” Under the draft, that sector would be allowed to ignore a browser/OS “no.” That’s not simplification - that’s a lobby carve-out.
“If media can ignore the signal, we didn’t simplify - we just wrote the lobby carve-out into law.”
<h2>Where this leaves first-party CMPs</h2>
Even if the EU ships browser/OS signals:
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">many users will never set a signal;</li>
<li aria-level="1">controllers will still need granular consent for multiple vendors/purposes;</li>
<li aria-level="1">media may be allowed to ignore the signal;</li>
<li aria-level="1">and someone still has to enforce, record, and prove the choice.</li>
</ul>
That’s exactly why our <a href="https://aesirx.io/solutions/consent-management-platform" target="_blank" rel="noopener">data model for consent is first-party</a>; and we already support GPC: so when the browser says “no,” we can actually stop processing; and when the user really wants to say “yes,” we can do it in a way that is contextual, informed, explicit and auditable.
Browser signals don’t kill first-party CMPs - they kill the bad habit of loading everything before consent.
“This is still the right direction - device-level signals + first-party enforcement - but it has to bind everyone.”
If you’re a DPO / privacy counsel looking at this leak: treat browser/OS signals as an excellent rejection mechanism, not as a magic “user accepted everything” flag. Keep your first-party CMP as the authoritative, contextual, auditable layer&nbsp;
Ronni K. Gothard Christiansen Technical Privacy Engineer &amp; CEO, <a href="https://aesirx.io" target="_blank" rel="noopener">AesirX.io</a>

Browser signals are great for saying “no,” but not a valid, informed, granular “yes” under GDPR and ePD. First-party CMPs remain essential for compliance.

Browser Signals Won’t Replace Consent

Browser Signals Won’t Replace Consent (and the Omnibus Draft Shows Why)

Browser privacy signals help block unwanted tracking but can’t give valid, informed consent under GDPR or ePD. Site-level, first-party CMPs remain crucial.

A standalone JavaScript version that gives every platform full first-party compliance control.
NEW YORK, NOVEMBER 7, 2025 – AesirX has launched the standalone JavaScript version of its Consent Management Platform (CMP), expanding first-party compliance beyond WordPress. With AesirX CMP JS 1.0.0, businesses and developers can now deploy the same trusted AesirX consent framework on any platform, including Shopify, Magento, Next.js, Drupal, or custom stacks.
This release extends AesirX’s first-party architecture to every environment, giving full control over consent data, logic, and analytics while keeping everything stored securely within the domain owner’s infrastructure. The result is faster performance, transparent data flows, and supports compliance with global privacy regulations such as GDPR, ePrivacy Directive, CCPA, and PDPL.
The update introduces a suite of tools that make compliance faster, simpler, and more accurate, designed for teams managing multiple sites or agencies maintaining client privacy setups across regions.
What’s new for AesirX CMP JS 1.0.0
<h2>1.&nbsp;First-Party Control&nbsp;</h2>
Stay in control of your data, directly from your own domain.
<a href="cmp_js_hardlink" target="_blank" class="undefined text-success">AesirX CMP JS</a> stores all consent data within your own infrastructure via the AesirX First-Party Server. This means your consent and analytics events never leave your domain, giving you faster load times, privacy-first compliance, and complete transparency over every data flow.&nbsp;
Why it matters: By removing third-party dependencies, you reduce legal exposure under laws like the ePrivacy Directive 5(3) and GDPR, while maintaining accurate insights for analytics and performance.
<h2>2.&nbsp;Admin CMP PWA</h2>
Manage every aspect of your CMP securely, all in one place.
A new dashboard to manage everything – from banners to logic, ID Verification, and automated compliance text. Built with a familiar, modern interface, so you can navigate and configure consent settings intuitively. It also includes User Handling for secure access and smoother team collaboration.
Why it matters: It transforms consent management from a technical task into an accessible, user-friendly process that fits naturally into everyday workflows.
<img src="https/api.aesirx.io/images/2-manage-every-aspect-of-your-cmp-securely-all-in-one-place.png" alt="2-manage-every-aspect-of-your-cmp-securely-all-in-one-place.png" width="942" height="512" />
<h2>3.&nbsp;AI Privacy Advisor</h2>
Understand what’s really happening on your site and automatically generate privacy documentation based on real scan data.
The AI Privacy Advisor analyzes your website before and after consent to detect cookies, trackers, and beacons. It then creates draft documentation – including Domain Categorization, Cookie Declaration, Privacy Policy, and Consent Request – ready for review and publishing.&nbsp;
Why it matters:&nbsp;This turns hours of manual compliance work into a guided process you can validate in minutes. Every scan reflects your actual setup, giving you a transparent, privacy-first overview that supports global privacy laws, including GDPR, ePrivacy Directive, and CCPA frameworks.
<h2>4.&nbsp;Consent Modal</h2>
Deliver compliant user consent experiences.
The new <a href="cmp_js_hardlink" target="_blank">Consent Modal in AesirX CMP JS </a>offers two configurable modes for modern privacy needs:
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Default Consent Mode enforces full pre-consent blocking, preventing data from being processed prematurely (a common issue in Google Consent Mode 2.0 setups).</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Decentralized Consent Mode takes this a step further by extending control to users through decentralized consent records, giving individuals transparency.</li>
</ul>
You can then customize text, from consent messages and cookie declarations to rejection responses, ensuring consistent brand language and legal accuracy across all client projects.
Why it matters: It simplifies compliance across regions while preventing data collection before consent, helping you deliver a consistent and trustworthy user experience.
<h4>Default Consent Mode improves on Google Consent Mode 2.0…”</h4>
<ol style="list-style-type: lower-alpha;">
<li aria-level="2">That’s a strong statement and you’ve been publicly telling people Consent Mode sends data on first hop.</li>
<li aria-level="2">I’d rephrase to something like: “Default Consent Mode enforces pre-consent blocking end-to-end, unlike typical Consent Mode 2.0 setups that allow initial pings.”</li>
<li aria-level="2">Same idea, less likely to trigger “prove it” comments.</li>
</ol>
<h2>5.&nbsp;Consent Log</h2>
Gain full visibility into user consent activity with audit-ready reporting.
The Consent Log provides a detailed history of every user’s consent action, including approvals, rejections, withdrawals, and timestamps so you always have verifiable proof for regulators or client audits. Each record is automatically stored and can be easily exported for documentation or compliance review. The dashboard view offers flexible filters by day, week, or month, along with visual charts that display revoked, accepted, rejected, opt-out, and granular consent trends.&nbsp;
Why it matters: This makes it simple to track changes over time, demonstrate accountability, and deliver transparency to your clients.
<h2>6.&nbsp;Consent Logic &amp; GPC Compliance</h2>
Configure how consent behaves under each legal framework without coding.
Consent Logic gives you control over when tracking activates based on regional privacy laws:
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Opt-In Mode (EU) – No tracking runs until explicit consent is given, supporting GDPR and ePrivacy Directive 5(3).</li>
<li aria-level="1">Opt-Out Mode (California) – Tracking is active by default but easy to opt out, aligned with CCPA and similar frameworks.</li>
</ul>
The same interface includes GPC Compliance, which detects and respects Global Privacy Control signals. When enabled, it automatically disables non-essential cookies for users sending a “Do Not Sell or Share” preference.
You can enable or disable GPC support, upload the gpc.json file, and update your Privacy Policy with the built-in templates for quick setup.
Why it matters: It applies the correct privacy rules automatically and honors browser-level privacy signals, reducing manual work while meeting global compliance standards.
<h2>7.&nbsp;Geo-Handling</h2>
Automatically apply the right consent mode for each visitor’s region.
The Geo-Handling feature uses browser language and time-zone detection to decide which consent logic should apply automatically – Opt-In or Opt-Out. Runs fully client-side, no third-party geo-lookup before consent.
Enable Geo-Handling for Consent Mode to adapt consent behavior across countries in real time. The rule builder supports AND / OR logic, allowing precise combinations such as applying EU Opt-In for en-GB visitors and U.S. Opt-Out for en-US. You can also allow local overrides for more complex deployments.
Why it matters: It removes the need for separate regional setups, so that every visitor automatically receives the correct consent experience for their location, saving time, reducing errors, and keeping every client site globally compliant.
<img src="https/api.aesirx.io/images/7-automatically-apply-the-right-consent-mode-for-each-visitors-region.png" alt="7-automatically-apply-the-right-consent-mode-for-each-visitors-region.png" width="942" height="512" />
<h2>8.&nbsp;ID Verification</h2>
Add privacy-preserving verification gates for age and country without handling personal data.
The ID Verification feature uses zero-knowledge proof (ZKP) technology to confirm user age or residency through the <a href="https://www.concordium.com/wallet/end-users" target="_blank" rel="noopener" class="undefined text-success">Concordium ID wallet</a>. Visitors can verify eligibility for access or content restrictions while keeping their personal information private — the website never sees or stores identity details.
Users without a wallet can easily create a Concordium ID using a passport or driver’s license, with verification completed instantly through cryptographic proof.
The interface includes a message preview, allowing teams to customize how verification requests appear to users for a clear, compliant, and consistent experience.
Why it matters: It enables privacy-safe verification without collecting sensitive data, helping sites meet age and regional access requirements while maintaining user trust and legal compliance.
<h2>9.&nbsp;Consent Analytics</h2>
Track and visualize how users interact with your consent settings.
The Consent Analytics dashboard provides clear insights into consent behavior across categories and regions. View accepted and rejected consents per category, analyze trends by country, and monitor user overrides over time.
For a deeper view, reports can be filtered by region and consent type, helping teams understand user preferences and adjust consent strategies for better compliance and engagement.
Why it matters: It turns compliance data into actionable insight, helping you measure transparency, improve consent UX, and demonstrate accountability across every domain.
AesirX CMP JS 1.0.0 redefines how businesses and agencies manage privacy compliance across platforms. It gives teams full control of consent and data handling within their own infrastructure, streamlining setup, ensuring consistency across client sites, and enabling faster, compliant deployments at scale, all with a first-party foundation built for performance and trust.
Download AesirX CMP JS 1.0.0: Bring first-party consent control to any platform and experience the future of compliant, privacy-first web development.
<a href="https://github.com/aesirxio/consent#readme" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" class="fw-semibold py-13px px-4 lh-sm text-white btn btn-success text-success">Download CMP JS 1.0.0</a>

AesirX CMP JS v1.0.0: First-Party Consent for Every Website

Blog Press Release Aesirx

AesirX CMP JS 1.0.0 brings first-party consent control to any platform, delivering faster, compliant, and privacy-first data management for all websites.

AesirX CMP JS v1.0.0 – First-Party Consent Tool

<div class="px-md-40px py-20px border rounded-4 shadow mb-5">
TL;DR:
ISO 27001 may be risk-based, but pre-consent tracking is binary - if your site loads non-essential third parties before consent, you’re simply non-compliant, and because that’s externally visible and repeatable it can undermine your ISMS, so real compliance in 2025 means enforcing consent-before-access in code, keeping it first-party, scanning continuously, and fixing findings before an auditor sees them.
</div>
Too many organizations still treat <a href="https://www.iso.org/standard/27001" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ISO/IEC 27001</a> like a force field: “we have our ISMS, we passed the audit, so we’re covered.” That illusion breaks the moment someone can technically document that your public website is loading third parties, setting non-essential cookies, or transmitting identifiers to vendors before you have a valid legal basis.
That’s the uncomfortable truth: ISO 27001 is risk-based, but ePrivacy/GDPR device access is binary. And when you have a binary failure that is reproducible, visible from the outside, and contradicts your stated controls, it stops being “just marketing tech” and starts being a potential nonconformity.
This is the gap we need to close.
<h2>Binary vs. Risk-Based Compliance</h2>
ISO 27001 lives in a world of risk appetite, likelihood, impact, and corrective actions. You can accept certain risks, defer others, and show auditors you have a plan.
<a href="https://www.edpb.europa.eu/system/files/2024-10/edpb_guidelines_202302_technical_scope_art_53_eprivacydirective_v2_en_0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ePrivacy Directive 5(3)</a> does not live in that world.
If your site accesses or stores information on a user’s device for non-essential purposes before consent, you’re non-compliant. Not “partially,” not “until next sprint,” not “accepted by management.” It’s simply a violation.
So when a website:
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">fires a marketing pixel too early,</li>
<li aria-level="1">lets a CMP vendor phone home for geo/billing before consent,</li>
<li aria-level="1">loads GTM and lets tags run regardless of the user choice,</li>
</ul>
…that’s a binary fail. You can’t paperwork your way around it.
<h2>Why That Matters for ISO 27001</h2>
“Okay, but ISO 27001 is about information security, not cookie banners.” Yes - but 27001:2022 is also about whether your ISMS actually works.
If your policies say “consent before tracking,” and your implementation says “we block,” but a simple scan shows your production site doing the opposite, what you have is a control that is not operating as designed.
Auditors don’t need to become data protection authorities to see that. They only need to see:
<ol>
<li aria-level="1">You defined a control (no non-essential device access pre-consent),</li>
<li aria-level="1">Evidence shows the control not working (third-party calls before consent),</li>
<li aria-level="1">It’s repeatable and has not been corrected.</li>
</ol>
That’s enough to trigger findings. And if the pattern is systemic across multiple sites/brands or ignored over time, it can put pressure on your certification.
“If your policy says ‘consent before tracking’ but the site doesn’t, the control is not operating as designed.”
<h2>How This Gets Exposed&nbsp;</h2>
The scary part is how easy it is to prove.
Anyone - a regulator, a customer doing due diligence, or even a competitor - can:
<ol>
<li aria-level="1">Load your homepage in a clean browser.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Capture network traffic before any consent choice.</li>
<li aria-level="1">List all third-party endpoints, pixels, SDKs, beacons, and cookies.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Compare with what your privacy notice and CMP claim.</li>
</ol>
If what your site does and what your policies say don’t align, the technical reality wins.
Once it’s documented and reproducible, it’s no longer “a small marketing misconfiguration.” It’s evidence that your ISMS isn’t monitoring an actual entry point where personal data leaves your control.
“When a scan can repeatedly show third-party loads pre-consent, it’s no longer a misconfiguration - it’s a systemic failure.”
<h2>The Usual Culprits</h2>
Most organizations don’t fail on purpose - they fail because the web stack is messy. The patterns repeat:
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">CMPs that do their own non-essential requests (geo-IP, telemetry, billing, “is banner needed?”) before consent.</li>
<li aria-level="1">GTM containers that allow tags to fire regardless of consent state.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Chat/UX/CS tools that inject their own trackers.</li>
<li aria-level="1">A/B testing or personalization tools that need to load early to “work.”</li>
<li aria-level="1">Multiple business sites where one is configured correctly and the others are forgotten.</li>
</ul>
Each of these is enough to flip you from “we claim consent-first” to “we actually don’t.”
And yes - if you can scan it once, you can scan it every day. That makes it very hard to argue it’s a one-off.
You can use our free <a href="https://aesirx.io/services/privacy-scanner">Privacy Scanner</a> to test your website before consent and see if you have a problem.
<h2>“We Did a Risk Assessment” Is Not a Shield</h2>
A classic pushback is: “we assessed it, and we accepted the risk.”
That works for information security trade-offs. It does not work for legal prerequisites.
You can’t “risk-accept” unlawful device access just because marketing needed a dashboard. You can’t accept the risk of sending personal data to a third country without a legal basis and expect ISO 27001 to cover it. That’s not residual risk - that’s doing something you’re not allowed to do.
“You can’t risk-accept unlawful device access just because marketing needed a pixel.”
So the only real answer is: fix the technical behavior.
<h2>What Real Compliance Looks Like in 2025</h2>
Let’s make it operational - this is what a grown-up model looks like:
<ol>
<li aria-level="1">Consent-before-access, enforced in code Non-essential scripts, pixels, beacons, storage, and third-party calls are blocked or queued until the user opts in. Not simulated, not “we set denied,” but actually blocked.</li>
<li aria-level="1">First-party by design The consent UI and enforcement live on your domain or in your own first-party infrastructure, so you don’t introduce a new third party just to manage consent.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Continuous web-facing scanning Run automated scans (pre-consent and post-consent) to see what is actually loading. This catches when someone in marketing “just tests something” on Friday.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Closed loop into the ISMS Findings from those scans go straight into your ISMS as incidents / nonconformities → assigned → remediated → verified. That’s what auditors love to see.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Evidence on demand When a DPO, CISO, or auditor asks “are we blocking pre-consent?”, you can show a last-scan report - not only a policy document.</li>
</ol>
This way, your public website becomes part of the monitored surface, not a rogue marketing island that quietly undermines the certification the rest of the company worked for.
<h2>The Strategic Point</h2>
Why push this now? Because the modern stack - AI embeds, server-side GTM, edge/CDN logic, Measurement Protocol, third-party CMPs that “optimize” - all of that can silently re-introduce technical non-compliance even while your policies and DPIAs are still correct.
If you don’t have continuous visibility, your ISO story can be true on paper and false in production.
“In 2025, production wins: what the site actually loads matters more than what the policy says.”
<h2>Turn It Into Evidence</h2>
If you’re responsible for ISO 27001, DPO work, or web privacy, do one thing this week:
Run an external, pre-consent scan of your main site and compare it with what your CMP and policies claim.
If it’s clean - perfect. Document it. If it’s not - don’t argue with it. Treat it like any other nonconformity: log → fix → re-scan → prove.
Do the same the next day, and then the day after again and every day because ISO/IEC 27001:2022 expects continuous performance monitoring of controls, treating web-facing scans as part of that monitoring closes the gap between the ISMS on paper and the behavior of the live site.
That is how we do it in AesirX with <a href="https://aesirx.io/services/privacy-monitoring" target="_blank" rel="noopener">continuous privacy monitoring</a> of our websites and web-facing solutions.
ISO 27001 still matters. It just can’t protect you from a browser that shows the truth.
Ronni K. Gothard Christiansen Technical Privacy Engineer &amp; CEO, <a href="https://aesirx.io">AesirX.io</a>

ISO 27001 isn’t a shield against illegal tracking. Real compliance means first-party consent control, continuous scanning, and fixing issues fast.

ISO 27001 Not Get-Out-of-Jail Card for Illegal Tracking

ISO 27001 isn’t enough—true compliance needs first-party consent, real-time scanning, and fast issue fixes.

Beyond ISO 27001: Real Compliance Starts with Consent

ISO 27001 Is Not a Get-Out-of-Jail Card for Illegal Tracking

Blog Consent Management Platform

ISO 27001 certification doesn’t excuse illegal tracking. Learn why real compliance means enforcing consent-before-access and continuous first-party scanning.

An Agency playbook to help your clients say “yes”
By Ronni K. Gothard Christiansen, Technical Privacy Engineer &amp; CEO @ <a href="http://aesirx.io" target="_blank" rel="noopener">AesirX.io</a>
<div class="px-md-40px py-20px border rounded-4 shadow mb-5">
TL;DR
Customers don’t buy cookie banners; they buy trust, control, and results. A first‑party consent platform delivers real compliance, cleaner data, faster sites, and predictable cost.
Here are the five strongest benefits your agency can use to move customers from third‑party CMPs to AesirX.
</div>
<h2>1. Real Compliance &amp; Lower Legal Risk (not just “cookie theater”)</h2>
Outcome: reduce exposure to fines, complaints, and data‑protection disputes.
Most banners still allow device access (pixels, SDKs, telemetry) before consent. AesirX enforces consent‑before‑tracking from first paint, blocking all non‑essential storage and access by default. That means no pre‑consent leakage and a clear audit trail.
<h4>Customer benefits</h4>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Fewer audit headaches; an enforcement model that aligns with ePrivacy/GDPR.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Audit‑ready logs of consent versions, choices, and activations.</li>
<li aria-level="1">No geo‑gating gimmicks - global readiness, including GPC support.</li>
</ul>
Agency talk‑track: “We’re replacing banner theater with real enforcement that stands up in audits.”
<h2>2. Data You Can Trust (first‑party by design, analytics after consent)</h2>
Outcome: cleaner customer insights, improved ROAS/ROMI, and higher confidence in decisions.
Third‑party CMPs and remote tag managers can corrupt signals or send data out of your control. With AesirX, consent and analytics run on first‑party infrastructure. <a href="https://aesirx.io/solutions/analytics" target="_blank" rel="noopener">AesirX Analytics</a> only activates after opt‑in, delivering privacy‑safe, high‑quality data you can actually use.
<h4>Customer benefits</h4>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">First‑party analytics with no fingerprinting or dark data collection.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Less tag noise and fewer rogue scripts → more accurate conversion paths.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Easier DPA/vendor risk management.</li>
</ul>
Agency talk‑track: “Better privacy gives you better data - and better growth decisions.”
<h2>3. Faster, Safer Websites (and fewer broken experiences)</h2>
Outcome: improved Core Web Vitals, conversion rates, and user satisfaction.
System‑level blocking (AesirX Consent Shield on WordPress) prevents heavy trackers from loading until needed; Permanent Block &amp; Data‑Minimization keep risky vendors in check even after opt‑in.
Customer benefits
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Faster first paint; reduced CPU/network overhead from unnecessary tags.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Less breakage when new tools are added - guardrails instead of guesswork.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Consistent UX across regions (no vanishing banners outside Europe).</li>
</ul>
Agency talk‑track: “We’ll speed up your site and stabilize your stack while staying compliant.”
<img src="https/api.aesirx.io/images/images/improved-site-speed-and-stability-through-consent-protection.png" alt="improved site speed and stability through consent protection" width="942" height="520" />
<h2>4. Predictable Cost &amp; Simpler Ops</h2>
Outcome: lower TCO and easier planning - no surprises when traffic scales.
AesirX pricing is $9 per domain per month&nbsp;with no traffic/pageview overages&nbsp;and lower rates as you scale (down to $5 per domain for bulk licensing). Centralized policy, automated scanning, and exportable logs reduce operational churn.
<h4>Customer benefits</h4>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Flat, transparent pricing - success doesn’t become a penalty.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Less time firefighting consent bugs; more time on growth.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Clear procurement and legal sign‑off (no joint‑controller data siphons).</li>
</ul>
Agency talk‑track: “You’ll know the bill every month - and you’ll spend less time on compliance tickets.”
<h2>5. Privacy‑Preserving Growth Features (built for real‑world use)</h2>
Outcome: unlock regulated markets and campaigns without over‑collecting data.
AesirX supports ID Verification using zero‑knowledge proofs (ZKPs) for age/country gates across WordPress and JS deployments - verify what’s necessary without exposing sensitive identity data.
<h4>Customer benefits</h4>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Access to age‑restricted or region‑restricted campaigns compliantly.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Reduce identity risk - verify claims without storing raw IDs.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Works on any stack: 1‑click on WordPress or standalone JS for any CMS, ecommerce, app, or dApp.</li>
</ul>
Agency talk‑track: “We help you say yes to more campaigns - safely.”
<h2>Objection‑Handling (Quick Answers)</h2>
1. “We already have a consent banner.” Most banners don’t actually block anything before consent. They still load pixels, SDKs, or localStorage on page load. AesirX enforces true consent-before-tracking at the system level, proven by network logs in under two minutes.
2. “Won’t our analytics stop working?” No. AesirX activates analytics only after consent. Your data remains accurate, lawful, and under your control. Other third-party tools can still run via opt-in triggers, so you don’t lose insights, just risk.
3. “Is this only for WordPress?” No. WordPress offers 1-click install with extra features like Consent Shield and Permanent Block, but AesirX CMP JS works on any CMS, ecommerce site, app, or dApp with the same compliance model.
4. “Will it slow our site?” Quite the opposite. Blocking unnecessary third-party scripts before consent reduces CPU load, improves Core Web Vitals, and stabilizes the stack. Faster load times, better UX, and higher conversions.
5. “How hard is migration?” Setup takes minutes: connect your Shield of Privacy ID, import existing tags, and choose consent templates. No redesign or developer rebuild needed, just cleaner, safer data collection from day one.
<h2>Proof You Can Show Customers (Fast Demos)</h2>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Compliance in Practice: Demonstrate that AesirX blocks all tracking until consent. Customers see transparency and control in real time, building immediate trust.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Better Data, Better Decisions: Show how analytics activate only after opt-in, producing verifiable, privacy-safe insights clients can rely on.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Measurable Results: Share before-and-after outcomes – faster sites, higher conversions, and clear compliance alignment. Tangible proof that privacy pays off.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Call to Action (for Customers)</h2>
Upgrade to first‑party consent for trust, control, performance, and predictable cost.
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Price: $9/domain/month (flat - no traffic tiers, and down to $5 per domain for bulk licensing)</li>
<li aria-level="1">Deploy fast: WordPress 1‑click or standalone JS for any stack</li>
<li aria-level="1">Next step: Schedule a 15-minute demo to show clients how first-party consent delivers faster, safer, and more compliant websites.</li>
</ul>
Privacy that actually works → data you can trust → growth you can defend.
<h3>About AesirX</h3>
AesirX builds first‑party consent and analytics solutions that enforce privacy at the system level - so you can stay compliant, earn user trust, and still get the insights you need.

AesirX CMP empowers businesses with real compliance, transparent pricing, faster performance, and privacy-first data control — delivering trust, growth, and measurable results.

5 Reasons to Choose a First-Party CMP for Trust, Speed, and Growth

5 Customer Benefits: Why Your Brand Should Switch to a First‑Party CMP

AesirX CMP delivers trust, control, and results with real compliance, first-party data, faster sites, predictable pricing, and privacy-preserving growth.

5 Customer Benefits: Why Switch to a First‑Party CMP

A guide for digital, ecommerce, and martech agencies
By Ronni K. Gothard Christiansen, Technical Privacy Engineer &amp; CEO @ <a href="http://aesirx.io">AesirX.io</a>
<div class="px-md-40px py-20px border rounded-4 shadow mb-5">
TL;DR
Third‑party, cookie‑centric CMPs keep exposing your clients (and you) to compliance, data‑leakage, and cost‑overrun risks.
AesirX is first‑party by design, $9 per domain per month, with no traffic‑based overages, and it blocks all tracking technologies (not just cookies) until there’s explicit consent.
With the launch of the AesirX CMP JavaScript version next week, you can now deploy true first-party consent management on any platform. You keep control, you keep the margin, and your clients keep the data.
</div>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJX_O9wfF48">Watch the 5-minute AesirX CMP for WordPress - Walkthrough Video</a>

<video controls="controls" width="834" height="472" class="w-100 h-auto rounded-4" type="video/mpeg"> Your browser does not support the video tag. <source src="/video/aesirx_cmp_walkthrough_august_2025.mp4" type="video/mp4" /></video>

<h2>1. Real compliance in one move (not just cookie theater)</h2>
Most “cookie banners” don’t actually enforce ePrivacy Directive 5(3)/GDPR in practice - they allow device access (pixels, SDKs, localStorage, telemetry) before consent, rely on remote tag managers, or hide behind ad‑tech frameworks. As the agency, that liability bounces to you.
With AesirX: consent‑before‑access is enforced at the system level, first paint. All non‑essential storage/access is blocked until the user opts in. One platform, one policy - less time arguing with auditors.
<h2>2. Predictable pricing that protects your margin</h2>
Flat $9 USD per domain per month. with lower rates as you scale (down to $5 per domain for bulk licensing). No hidden fees, usage-based billing, or “pageview” tiers, just transparent pricing you can plan around. Save 20% with annual billing and quote with confidence, package into care plans, and never get blindsided by success penalties.
Did you know that telemetry for invoicing purposes by a SaaS consent provider is not covered under technical necessity? The business model of a supplier can not be covered by a data subject's technical needs under neither GDPR or ePrivacy Directive 5(3).
Agency win: easy bundling into retainers, clean P&amp;L, and scalable rollout across your portfolio - and the business model is compliant with no telemetry for invoicing.
<h2>3. Coverage for all tracking technologies - not just cookies</h2>
Beacons, pixels, SDKs, fingerprinting, localStorage, telemetry - if it touches the device, it’s gated. Your team doesn’t need to hunt down every rogue script or CDN included; AesirX handles it by default.
Outcome: fewer regressions, fewer emergency hotfixes, happier clients.
<h2>4. First‑party data architecture (no third‑party joint controller)</h2>
Stop piping client user data through a third‑party CMP that monitors and collects it. With AesirX, consent UI and enforcement live on first‑party infrastructure. Your clients keep control of their data - and you avoid joint‑controller entanglements.
Trust benefit: better data governance, easier DPA/DTIA conversations, cleaner vendor risk profiles.
<h2>5. Frictionless deployment on any stack</h2>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1"><a href="https://github.com/aesirxio/wordpress-consent-plugin/releases/download/2.0.2/plg_aesirx_consent.zip" target="_blank" rel="noopener">1‑click install</a> for WordPress.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Standalone JS for all CMSs, ecommerce platforms, SPAs, PWAs, mobile apps, and even dApps (released next week).</li>
</ul>
Roll out in minutes, not sprints. Standardize your process across mixed client stacks.
Partners can deploy client sites directly through the AesirX Partner Portal, triggering an automated email for the client to activate and pay for their license in minutes, while the partner handles implementation.
<h2>6. Consent Shield for WordPress (system‑level blocking)</h2>
AesirX Consent Shield stops scripts, beacons, and pixels before consent - reliably. No more whack‑a‑mole tag rules or fragile workarounds in remote tag managers.
Result: true prior consent, fewer breakages when marketers add tags.
<img src="https/api.aesirx.io/images/images/consent-shield-for-wordpress-system-level-blocking.png" alt="consent shield for wordpress system level blocking" width="948" height="499" />
<h2>7. Permanent Block &amp; Data‑Minimization (WordPress)</h2>
Lock high‑risk vendors behind Permanent Block. Even after opt‑in, you can enforce data minimization rules per purpose/vendor - ideal for sensitive industries and stricter client policies.
Agency angle: productize safer defaults and charge for governance, not firefighting.
<h2>8. Privacy‑preserving ID Verification (ZKPs) for age/country gates</h2>
Need age verification or country‑based gating? AesirX offers zero‑knowledge proof–based checks ID powered by <a href="https://www.concordium.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Concordium technology</a> so you can verify claims without collecting or exposing raw identity data.
Use cases: regulated content, alcohol, gambling, regional legal constraints - without building risky custom flows or becoming a data controller or processor.
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGFr_XppKqg">Watch the 1-minute video : AesirX CMP ID Verification with ZKPs in WordPress</a>

<video controls="controls" width="834" height="472" class="w-100 h-auto rounded-4" type="video/mpeg"> Your browser does not support the video tag. <source src="/video/blog/id_verification_with_zkp_in_wordpress.mp4" type="video/mp4" /></video>

<h2>9. Global compliance out‑of‑the‑box (no geo‑gating gimmicks)</h2>
Stop hiding consent outside the EU. AesirX supports a global policy model (EU/UK/US state laws, etc.) and respects user signals (e.g., GPC). One setup, global readiness.
Did you know that collecting and processing the visitors IP address for Geo IP fencing of consent banners is not covered by technical necessity and is a violation of both GDPR and ePrivacy Directive 5(3).
Client value: consistent UX and reduced multi‑region complexity - no Geo IP lookups.
<h2>10. Operations your PMs will love (and your lawyers will too)</h2>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Transparent audit logs of choices, versions, and activations.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Automated scanning &amp; monitoring services to catch regressions.</li>
<li aria-level="1">AI Privacy Advisor for assistance with setup and ongoing adjustments.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Clean handoff to analytics (AesirX Analytics activates after consent).</li>
<li aria-level="1">Alliance for Compliance (managed option) to offload day‑to‑day enforcement.</li>
</ul>
Why agencies care: fewer escalations, faster compliance reviews, measurable SLA delivery.
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLEeJUUb1pE">Watch the 1-minute video : AI Privacy Advisor - AesirX CMP for WordPress - Introduction</a>

<video controls="controls" width="834" height="472" class="w-100 h-auto rounded-4" type="video/mpeg"> Your browser does not support the video tag. <source src="/video/blog/ai_privacy_advisor_cmp_integration.mp4" type="video/mp4" /></video>

<h2>Pricing, packaging, and how to sell it</h2>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Price: $9 USD per domain/month flat (down to $5 per domain for bulk licensing).</li>
<li aria-level="1">No overages: performance and traffic do not change your bill.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Bundle options: include with hosting/care plans; upsell AesirX Analytics / AesirX First-Party Server, Privacy Monitoring and other services.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Roadmap‑friendly: use the standalone JS (released next week) to unify policy across mixed stacks, then migrate high‑value clients to WordPress features where relevant.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Deployment checklist for agencies</h2>
<ol>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Add <a href="https://aesirx.io/solutions/consent-management-platform" target="_blank" rel="noopener">AesirX CMP</a> to the base stack template (WP 1‑click or JS snippet).</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Enable Consent Shield&nbsp;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLEeJUUb1pE" target="_blank" rel="noopener">with AI Privacy Advisor</a>: analyzes scans to detect trackers and misconfigurations (includes 1-Click AI Auto-Blocking on WordPress to set default‑deny for all non‑essential tech.).</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Map purposes/vendors. Turn on Permanent Block for high‑risk categories.</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Configure regional policies + GPC. Stop any geo‑gating.</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Plug in ID Verification (ZKPs) where age/country gates are needed.</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Connect <a href="https://aesirx.io/solutions/analytics" target="_blank" rel="noopener">AesirX Analytics</a> to fire only after consent (optional).</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ <a href="https://aesirx.io/services/privacy-monitoring" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Schedule ongoing scans</a> &amp; regression alerts; export audit logs for reviews.</li>
</ol>
<h2>The bottom line for agencies</h2>
Your clients pay you to remove risk, not add it. AesirX replaces third‑party CMP uncertainty with first‑party control, real compliance, and pricing that scales with your business - not your bandwidth bill.
<a href="https://aesirx.io/solutions/consent-management-platform#pricing" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Start now</a> at $9/domain/month. Ship faster, sleep better, and keep more margin or get started with our 2 week free trial by downloading and installing the <a href="https://github.com/aesirxio/wordpress-consent-plugin/releases/download/2.0.2/plg_aesirx_consent.zip" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WordPress plugin</a>.
Agencies: want commission + co-marketing / benefits? Join the <a href="https://aesirx.io/partner" target="_blank" rel="noopener">AesirX Partner Channel</a>!
<h3>About AesirX</h3>
AesirX builds first‑party consent and analytics solutions that enforce privacy at the system level - so you can stay compliant, earn user trust, and still get the insights you need.

10 Reasons Agencies Should Switch to a First‑Party CMP (and Stop Bleeding Margin)

10 reasons agencies should switch to a first-party consent management platform to regain control, cut hidden costs, and stay compliant with privacy laws.

10 Reasons Agencies Should Switch to a First‑Party CMP

A guide for actual compliance in consent management
<div class="px-md-40px py-20px border rounded-4 shadow mb-5">
TL;DR
Most cookie consent tools were never designed to enforce the ePrivacy Directive (Article 5(3)) or modern privacy laws beyond the EU. They often load tracking technology before consent, misclassify “technical necessity” purposes, geo‑gate banners with pre-consent IP lookups in ways that ignore laws outside Europe and rely on non‑compliant third‑party infrastructure (like GTM/Consent Mode).
Below are the five most common failure patterns we see - and how to fix them with a first‑party, consent‑before‑tracking approach.
</div>
<h2>Reason 1: It treats privacy as “just cookies” (ignoring device access)</h2>
Most CMPs focus on dropping/reading cookies after the page has already executed third‑party scripts.&nbsp;
But ePrivacy Directive <a href="https://www.edpb.europa.eu/system/files/2024-10/edpb_guidelines_202302_technical_scope_art_53_eprivacydirective_v2_en_0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Article 5(3)</a> covers any storage or access to information on the user’s device - that includes beacons, pixels, SDKs, localStorage, fingerprinting and telemetry.&nbsp;
If your tool doesn’t strictly gate all non‑essential device access until the user says yes, it’s not compliant.
<h3>Symptoms</h3>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Banners look right, but tags fire in the background.</li>
<li aria-level="1">“Cookie categories” exist, yet scripts for pixels/SDKs run before choices are saved.</li>
<li aria-level="1">A tag manager is considered “essential,” so nothing is actually blocked.</li>
</ul>
<h3>What good looks like</h3>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Block all non‑essential scripts, pixels, and telemetry by default (not just cookies).</li>
<li aria-level="1">Ask for informed, explicit consent before any device access.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Load the consent layer from first‑party infrastructure.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Reason 2: It loads tracking or telemetry before consent (including CMP pixels)</h2>
Some consent tools embed their own pixels, SDKs, or call home for usage‑based billing and dashboards.&nbsp;
If those calls include IP address, identifiers, or other device signals before a user agrees, that’s pre‑consent tracking - no matter what the UI says.
<h3>Symptoms</h3>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Network logs show requests to CMP or analytics domains on first paint.</li>
<li aria-level="1">“Metering”/“usage”/“pageview” requests fire even when users reject.</li>
<li aria-level="1">The CMP’s dashboard shows traffic counts without consent.</li>
</ul>
<h3>What good looks like</h3>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Make no third-party calls before consent (including invoicing/telemetry).</li>
<li aria-level="1">Limit logging to strictly necessary first-party data for service delivery.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Store consent choices locally/first-party until a lawful basis exists to transmit.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Reason 3: It geo-gates consent with Geo-IP lookups (and ignores non-EU laws)</h2>
Geo-IP gating - “show the banner only in Europe” - assumes only EU rules matter and quietly processes IP addresses to decide who sees controls. That IP lookup itself is pre-consent data processing, non-compliant and often inaccurate or blocked. With 140+ jurisdictions having privacy laws that require consent, notice, or opt-out, hiding your banner outside the EU risks unlawful tracking and erodes trust.
<h3>Symptoms</h3>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Banner appears in the EU, disappears elsewhere.</li>
<li aria-level="1">U.S./UK/ROW traffic gets tracked without any notice or control.</li>
<li aria-level="1">IP-based location checks run pre-consent and may be logged or shared with third parties.</li>
</ul>
<h3>What good looks like</h3>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Adopt one consent model that respects regional rules globally.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Avoid pre-consent IP lookups for gating access.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Do not rely on imprecise IP detection to decide whether users deserve consent.</li>
</ul>
IP addresses are personal data under GDPR - see Art. 4(1); <a href="https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=8B8D0D233286A4B49CC65C8D06166ABD?text=&amp;docid=184668&amp;pageIndex=0&amp;doclang=EN&amp;mode=lst&amp;dir=&amp;occ=first&amp;part=1&amp;cid=4351590" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CJEU Breyer C-582/14</a> confirms even dynamic IPs can identify a person in context.
<h2>Reason 4: It relies on remote GTM and/or Consent Mode 2.0</h2>
Loading a tag manager from a third‑party domain (e.g., googletagmanager.com) or deferring to “Consent Mode 2.0” does not prevent pre‑consent access.&nbsp;
The moment GTM is fetched, your user’s device and referrer/IP are already exposed; many sites still initialize tags and transmit signals in “denied” states. That violates consent-before-access.
<h3>Symptoms</h3>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">GTM is injected in the and executes before the banner.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Third‑party domains initialize regardless of the user’s choice.</li>
<li aria-level="1">“Assume consent” defaults or data pings occur in denied/unknown states.</li>
</ul>
<h3>What good looks like</h3>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Do not load remote GTM or any third‑party tag frameworks before consent.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Gate all marketing/analytics until the user opts in.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Use a first‑party consent shield that blocks at the system level.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Reason 5: It outsources lawfulness to ad frameworks instead of enforcing blocking</h2>
Pointing to industry frameworks like IAB TCF consent strings or GPP vendor signals isn’t compliance if scripts still execute and device access occurs before a choice. Consent must be prior, informed, freely given, and technically enforced - consent strings are metadata, not a gate; UI without real blocking is theater.
<h3>Symptoms</h3>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">A valid-looking IAB TCF consent string or GPP signal exists, yet trackers initialize pre-choice</li>
<li aria-level="1">“Essential” is overused to whitelist ad/measurement tags that aren’t truly necessary</li>
<li aria-level="1">Banner toggles flip, but a CDN/tag manager still lets rogue pixels fire</li>
</ul>
<h3>What good looks like</h3>
<ul>
<li aria-level="1">Enforce hard blocklists/allowlists from first paint so nothing non-essential runs pre-consent.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Activate purposes granularly only after a recorded, valid consent signal.</li>
<li aria-level="1">Maintain audit-ready logs proving when consent was obtained and exactly which vendors/tags activated.</li>
</ul>
“If your banner says ‘no,’ but your network tab still shows third-party requests, that’s pre-consent access. Full stop.”
<img src="https/api.aesirx.io/images/images/Consent-first_load_order.png" alt="Consent first load order" width="1280" height="728" />
Consent-first load order (no device access pre-choice).
<h2>So - what does compliant look like in practice?</h2>
→ Pre-consent handling: Obtain consent before any non-essential device access (scripts, pixels, telemetry, storage, SDKs).
→ First-party by design: Load the consent UI and enforcement from your own domain or dedicated first-party infrastructure.
→ System-level blocking: Enforce hard blocks until opt-in; do not assume or simulate consent.
→ Granular purposes &amp; transparency: Provide clear descriptions, offer specific switches, and enable friction-free revocation.
→ Global readiness: Honor regional rules (EU GDPR/ePrivacy, UK PECR, US state laws - e.g., CCPA/CPRA, Vietnam/India PDPL, Norway Ekom Act) and signals like Global Privacy Control (GPC).
→ Proof: Maintain audit-ready logs of choices, purposes, versions, and activations.
Notice: If you want to check if you have a problem on your website or e-commerce solution you can test your site in our <a href="https://aesirx.io/services/privacy-scanner" target="_blank" rel="noopener">free privacy scanner</a>.
<h2>Action checklist</h2>
<ol>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Scan your site for pre‑consent access (scripts, pixels, telemetry, SDKs).</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Eliminate remote GTM/Consent Mode pre-consent; gate all tags post‑opt‑in.</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Remove CMP telemetry (usage‑based calls) until after consent - or move to first‑party.</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Stop geo‑gating: implement a global policy that respects regional rules and GPC.</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Adopt a first‑party CMP; enable system-level blocking; keep audit logs.</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Document purposes &amp; third parties in plain language; enable granular toggles and instant revocation.</li>
<li aria-level="1">✅ Schedule ongoing monitoring (daily/weekly) to catch regressions and rogue tags.</li>
</ol>
“Don’t bankroll fake consent. If ‘no’ doesn’t stop access, you’re paying for non-compliance.”
Ronni K. Gothard Christiansen, Technical Privacy Engineer &amp; CEO @ <a href="http://aesirx.io" target="_blank" rel="noopener">AesirX.io</a>
<h3>About AesirX</h3>
AesirX builds first‑party consent and analytics solutions that enforce privacy at the system level - so you can stay compliant, earn user trust, and still get the insights you need.

Learn the top 5 compliance failures in cookie consent tools and how to meet GDPR requirements with true consent-before-tracking & safer data practices.

5 Reasons Your Cookie Consent Tool Fails Compliance

5 Reasons Your Cookie Consent Solution Isn’t Compliant

Many global sites hide consent banners outside Europe, adding tracking and legal risk. Learn why true compliance means global opt-in consent, not EU-only privacy theatre.

Ignorance or Arrogance? Why Hide Consent Outside Europe

Many websites only show consent in Europe, creating hidden tracking risks abroad. See why real compliance requires global consent controls, not EU-only settings.

Press and Blogs

POPULAR TOPICS

The Omnibus & Consent: What Actually Changes - and What Still Doesn’t

India weaponizes notice & consent - and then lets AI slip into ‘research’

Browser Signals Won’t Replace Consent (and the Omnibus Draft Shows Why)

AesirX CMP JS v1.0.0: First-Party Consent for Every Website

ISO 27001 Is Not a Get-Out-of-Jail Card for Illegal Tracking

5 Customer Benefits: Why Your Brand Should Switch to a First‑Party CMP

10 Reasons Agencies Should Switch to a First‑Party CMP (and Stop Bleeding Margin)

Top 5 Reasons Your Cookie Consent Solution Isn’t Compliant

Ignorance or Arrogance? Why Hide Consent Outside Europe

Join the AesirX Partner Program

Solutions

Resources

Support

Partnership Opportunities