3 mins to read
After an increasing number of questions arose in our webinar “IAB TCF 2.0 & Performance Marketing”, our speakers Hanna Waldenmaier, Head of Strategic Partnerships, Denis Brediceanu, Product Manager and Jürgen Weichert, CRO answered open questions for you in this FAQ.
The countdown is on: On August 15, the International Advertising Bureau (IAB) Europe will launch its updated TCF 2.0. This new version intends to create a standard for how companies, publishers, advertisers, agencies and AdTech providers can continue to make use of programmatic advertising without violating the GDPR.
Will TCF 2.0 help to improve the tracking issues for Safari or Firefox?
Not really, as the TC String (the consent information) is still stored in a 3rd party cookie. CMPs may store it differently, but the whole framework relies on 3rd party cookies so that consent information can be shared across CMPs and domains.
Will Usercentrics support layered approach, respectively how granular can the Initial Layer be customized?
The initial layer can be customized in different ways e.g.
- brand color
- font-size
- font-family
- including custom logo
- hide “reject all” button
- hide toggles
We don’t offer extensive customization options for our predefined UI, as we provide full flexibility with our Browser SDK that also supports TCF2. Our customers can create their custom UI and use our TCF2 functionality.
Is there any timeline when any of the providers will stop serving clients without the string?
Not to our knowledge. Please approach the respective providers.
Is data being transferred to third parties even if a user opted-out of TCF purposes?
Yes, as the vendor has to receive the TC String from the CMP and decode it in order to understand that processing of personal data of this particular user is not permitted.
How do you ensure data is not transmitted to third parties?
You can not do that for GVL vendors, as they always have to receive the TC String and therefore their scripts are always triggered.
Where you can see the justification of a legitimate interest? Or where is this implements in de UI?
As a user you don’t see any information on it within the UI. What purpose is used under the legal basis of legitimate interest is completely up to the vendor itself. The vendor decides the legal basis for all purposes during the sign-up process.
Will it be possible to change the consent banner so that it only shows, for instance, “Decline” and “Accept”, as well as “Details”?
The UI has certain criteria to meet that are represented in the TCF2 Policies. Especially Appendix B ( C ) is relevant for the UI: Policies
Is there a Preview of the TCF 2.0 UI on mobile devices?
Yes, we will provide you with an example.
Will you support TCF 2.0 in AMP?
No, as the AMP Framework itself has some limitations, for example AMP only knows two types of consent status: “Accepted” and “declined”. There is no TCF2 support from either IAB’s or Google’s side.
If a company has Usercentrics installed currently: what needs to be done to take advantage of the new framework?
You need to enable the TCF2 feature and then enable the vendors from within the GVL. For those vendors you will need to revert your changes to your script tags or Tag Management system.
Also if you use our old CMP you will have to migrate to our new Browser SDK.
What impact, if any, do you expect on the CMP performance in terms of load times or response times?
If you use our ld CMP, then performance will increase drastically when switching over to our new Browser SDK. Otherwise the TCF2 feature will have a slightly worse performance in comparison to non TCF2 due to the amount of additional data needed (e.g. GVL).
It would be good to have an “IAB certified” badge. Is that something you would consider for UC?
Yes, definitely! We started the certification process with the IAB and are waiting on their feedback. As this can take up some time we expect to be certified end of June.
When you mean by “former TCF String” the Consent String under TCF 1.1 then yes. There is no backwards compatibility from TCF2 to TCF1.1.
The user can not select granular opt-in for “Non-IAB Purposes, Marketing”?
The user can make granular choices for Non-IAB purposes. Each purpose can be disabled (unless it is marked as essential) and each Non-IAB vendor can also be disabled on the “Vendorlist” view.
Does a primary or secondary layer need to be implemented?
Both, as they handle different levels of information.
Definitely it would be important to get guidance on any changes that need to be made to scripts, tags and data privacy declarations?
For vendors in the GVL no changes need to be made to either script tags or tag management systems, as those vendor scripts always need to be triggered in order to receive the TC String.
You could not attend our webinar on the topic “IAB TCF 2.0 and Performance Marketing – Intro, Implementation & Impact”? Please feel free to download our on-demand webinar.
