container audit
GTM-MJXXBQ4
6 tags, no hand-written scripts, 1 third-party host — smaller than 81% of the 46,522 containers we have measured, and carrying none of the hand-written JavaScript most of them do.
- 1 third-party host reachable from its tags.
Tags6
Custom scripts0
Third parties1
Delivered380 KB
Versions8
What we observed
A real browser loaded european-athletics.com 2 months ago and recorded every request it made. This is what happened, as distinct from what the container is configured to do. It is one page load — anything that fires only deeper in the site did not fire here.
Container loaded from
googletagmanager.com — GoogleMeasurement sent to
google-analytics.com — GoogleConsent
Usercentrics answered its own API. Nothing measured until it was granted — no analytics or advertising hit left the page beforehand, and 4 fired afterwards. That is the outcome consent is meant to produce. 7 hosts appeared only after consent was granted. Google recorded
gcs=G111 (all granted).Third parties contacted
25 hosts — static.cloudflareinsights.com, web.cmp.usercentrics.eu, cdn.storifyme.xyz, v1.api.service.cmp.usercentrics.eu, european-athletics.directus.app, app.usercentrics.eu, storage.googleapis.com, storifyme.xyz, and 17 more
dataLayer events seen
consent_status, gtm.js, gtm.dom, gtm.load
Where the data goes
Not observed — on the page we loaded, measurement went to Google and nowhere else. observed on european-athletics.com More info »
Findings
Ordered by consequence. review has a concrete cost when it bites; info is real but depends on your setup. Seen is how common it is across the containers we have measured — reported separately on purpose, because common and harmless are different claims.
reviewNo consent signal in the container (1)
Nothing in this container sets, reads, or gates on a consent state.
WhyThe container itself neither sets a Consent Mode default, holds any tag back for consent, nor references a known consent platform. Either enforcement lives entirely outside GTM — where it cannot be audited from here — or tags fire regardless of what a visitor chose.
CheckIf a consent platform blocks scripts before GTM loads, this is fine — confirm that is actually the case. If not, tags are firing on a choice nobody recorded.
Seenseen in 52.1% of 46,522 containers measured
Third parties it can reach
Each host is a party that can execute code or receive data in a visitor's browser. Follow one to see who else loads it. More info »
Detected on
Sites observed loading this container. A container used across many hosts is a shared template; one on a single host is a bespoke build. Follow a site to see every container it loads.
What this audit describes
Containers change. These findings describe one specific artifact, and you can re-fetch it to check this reading.
| Container | GTM-MJXXBQ4 |
|---|---|
| Published version | 8 — the identity of this configuration. It changes only when someone publishes. |
| Read at | 2026-08-23 17:46:45 UTC (2 months ago) |
| Source | https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id=GTM-MJXXBQ4 |
| Body checksum | 4f5ee3536f0a1fa7b236523ca878c7512ad5f71e7c9b9ba95788e9558c77ce50Evidence of the exact bytes we read, not an identity: Google varies the response per request, so re-fetching an unchanged container yields a different checksum. Compare the published version instead. |
Re-audit
This reading is from 2 months ago. A container can be republished at any time, and nothing here updates on its own — a fresh read is the only way to know whether it still says this. Running it again replaces this page in place, so the link keeps working.
Put this container under version control. Tagora exports it to a repository you own, so every change arrives as a pull request. How it works »