Onetrust, LLC

Patrick Whitney

Jonathan Blake Brannon

Sharath Chandra Chavva

Kevin Jones

Jeffrey Baucom

Mithun Babu

Casey Hill

Subramanian Viswanathan

Anand Balasubramanian

Madhusudhan Kunhambu

Rajneesh Kesavan

Mohamed Kabad

Jayamohan Puthenveetil

Brian Kelly

Sathish Gopalakrishnan

Pratik Doshi

Spencer Wyckoff

Alex Cash

Stephanie Hanson

Santosh Kumar Koti

Santhosh Kumar Koti

Embodiments of the present invention provide methods, apparatus, systems, computing devices, computing entities, and/or the like for permitting or blocking tracking tools used through webpages. In particular embodiments, the method involves: scanning a webpage to identify a tracking tool configured for processing personal data; determining a data destination location that is associated with the tracking tool; and generating program code configured to: determine a location associated with a user who is associated with a rendering of the webpage; determine a prohibited data destination location based on the location associated with the user; determine that the data destination location associated with the tracking tool is not the prohibited data destination location; and responsive to the data destination location associated with the tracking tool not being the prohibited data destination location, permit the tracking tool to execute.

Systems and methods for automatically blocking the use of tracking tools

In particular embodiments, a consent notice configuration determination system may be configured to: (1) scan a particular website from a plurality of different locations; (2) identify one or more types of technologies available on the particular website for individuals accessing the particular website from each of the plurality of different locations; (3) determine, for each of the plurality of different locations, based on a global set of databases, legal/regulatory guidance, etc. and the one or more types of technologies, particular legal and industry requirements for each of the plurality of different locations; and (4) automatically configure, for each of the plurality of different locations, a consent interface for the particular website for each of the plurality of different locations based at least in part on the one or more types of technologies and the global set of databases.

Data processing systems and methods for dynamically determining data processing consent configurations

Data processing systems and methods, according to various embodiments, are adapted for determining a categorization for each tracking tool that executes on a particular webpage based on a variety of criteria, such as the purpose of the tracking tool and its source script. The system may compare the characteristics of tracking tools on a webpage to a database of known tracking tools to determine the appropriate categorization. When a user visits the webpage, the system analyzes these categories and determines whether the tracking tool should be permitted to run based on the categories and/or other criteria, such as whether the user has consented to the use of that type of tracking tool.

Data processing systems and methods for automatically blocking the use of tracking tools

A privacy-related consent extension and data processing system may be configured to automatically extend one or more privacy-related consents for a user of a first computing device to a second computing device. In various embodiments, the system is configured to provide a computer-readable indicium (indicia) on a previously unknown computing device upon initiation of a transaction between a user and an entity collecting and processing privacy data. In response to a user using a known computing device to scan the computer-readable indicium, in various embodiments, the system may provide the ability to share user consent data provided by the first known device to the second unknown device, allowing the user to provide consent without manually re-entering privacy and consent preferences.

Data processing systems and methods for synching privacy-related user consent across multiple computing devices

In various embodiments, a data processing consent capture system may be configured to prompt the data subject to consent to one or more types of data processing (e.g., to provide a desired consent) in response to identifying particular cookies (e.g., or types of data processing) that a data subject has not consented to. The system may, for example, substantially automatically prompt the data subject to consent for one or more particular types of data processing in response to determining that the user (e.g., data subject) has requested that a website or other system perform one or more functions that are not possible without a particular type of consent from the data subject. The system may, for example, prompt the user to consent in time for a certain interaction with the website, application, etc.

Data processing consent capture systems and related methods

A privacy-related consent extension and data processing system may be configured to automatically extend one or more privacy-related consents for a user of a first computing device to a second computing device. In various embodiments, the system is configured to provide a computer-readable indicium(indicia) on a previously unknown computing device upon initiation of a transaction between a user and an entity collecting and processing privacy data. In response to a user using a known computing device to scan the computer-readable indicium, in various embodiments, the system may provide the ability to share user consent data provided by the first known device to the second unknown device, allowing the user to provide consent without manually re-entering privacy and consent preferences.

Various aspects involve forgoing updates to consent data for at least one consent rejection generated by an automated consent rejection tool. For instance, a consent management system can be communicatively coupled to a user device. The user device can detect invocations of a consent rejection function, such as when browser states of a browser application indicate requests for web pages or other online content. The consent management system can document a consent rejection for one or more of the invocations. The consent management system can also prevent documentation of consent being rejected for at least one invocation initiated by an automated consent rejection tool.

Data processing systems and methods for preventing execution of an action documenting a consent rejection

Aspects of the present disclosure provide methods, apparatuses, systems, computing devices, computing entities, and/or the like for protection of system software, or data from destruction, unauthorized modification, and/or unauthorized disclosure securing by, for example, detecting the transfer and/or processing of target data. Accordingly, a method is provided that involves: scanning a software application to identify functionality configured for processing target data; identifying fields associated with the functionality; identifying metadata associated with a field; generating, from the metadata, an identification of a type of data associated with the field; determining a location based on the processing of the target data by the functionality; determining a risk associated with the functionality processing the target data based on the location and the type of data; determining that the risk satisfies a threshold level of risk; and in response, causing an action to be performed to mitigate the risk.

Data processing systems and methods for automatically detecting target data transfers and target data processing

Systems and methods are disclosed detecting whether calls to consent rejection functions originate with an automated tool or a human user. The system can determine that a calls to a consent rejection function are likely from an automated tool by determining that a rate and/or number of calls to a function exceeds a threshold and/or that the calls are received before the interface requesting user consent preferences has been rendered to the user. The system can also require that a function call include a token that an automated tool would not have knowledge of or access to and reject function calls without this token. The system can also use private consent rejection function calls with obfuscated names and/or provide a follow up consent rejections confirmation interface requiring human user input before process a consent rejection.

Data processing systems and methods for detecting tools for the automatic blocking of consent requests

In particular embodiments, a consent conversion optimization system is configured to test two or more test consent interfaces against one another to determine which of the two or more consent interfaces results in a higher conversion percentage (e.g., to determine which of the two or more interfaces lead to a higher number of end users and/or data subjects providing a requested level of consent for the creation, storage and use or cookies by a particular website). The system may, for example, analyze end user interaction with each particular test consent interface to determine which of the two or more user interfaces: (1) result in a higher incidence of a desired level of provided consent; (2) are easier to use by the end users and/or data subjects (e.g., take less time to complete, require a fewer number of clicks, etc.); (3) etc.

Growing community of inventors

Atlanta, GA, United States of America

Patrick Whitney