Consent that survives an audit
A consent record has to answer four questions years later. Most consent flows can answer two of them.
Outline. Each heading below carries one line saying what the section has to establish. Expand each into two to four paragraphs, put at least one number or worked example in the piece that nobody else could publish, then delete this note.
Consent is collected once and has to be defended for years. The test is not whether the box was ticked; it is whether you can reconstruct what the person was actually agreeing to.
The four questions an audit asks
What exactly, when, in what words, and how was withdrawal made available. Say which are usually missing.
Storing the wording, not just the timestamp
A consent flow that changed last year makes an old timestamp unreadable without the text that went with it.
Special categories change the shape of the question
Health, biometric and political data. Say what additional record each needs.
Withdrawal has to actually do something
A route that suppresses without deleting is not withdrawal. Describe what deletion means against an append-only ledger.
Consent does not travel down a supply chain
What a partner can and cannot inherit, and what has to be re-asked.
What our signup records, field by field
Concrete and checkable. This is the section that makes the piece worth citing.
-
Fraud and inattention are not the same problem
One is somebody trying to take money from you. The other is somebody answering your survey on a phone at a bus stop. Treating them alike costs you the second one.
5 min read -
Device signals: what they prove and what they only suggest
The same signal that catches an operator running forty accounts also flags a family sharing one laptop.
1 min read -
Recruitment sources, ranked by how much fraud they carry
Where a panel member came from predicts their behaviour better than almost anything you can measure once they are inside.
1 min read
