container audit
GTM-PFTQ6J6
15 tags, 1 custom scripts, 0 third-party hosts — an ordinary container, near the middle of what we measure (median: 39 tags, 4 custom scripts).
- 1 custom HTML tag carrying 0 KB of JavaScript. This runs on every page the container loads on.
- Measurement runs through a server container on its own domain — the mark of a mature setup, and rarer than the tooling vendors imply.
Tags15
Custom scripts1
Third parties0
Delivered421 KB
Versions10
What we observed
A real browser loaded novaramedia.com a month 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
nvrmd.novaramedia.com — the site's own hostMeasurement sent to
nvrmd.novaramedia.com — not GoogleBoth wires run through infrastructure the site controls.
Forwarded to
GA4 — read from the measurement id, not the hostname
Consent
no consent gate responded on this page, so there was nothing to hold measurement back (banners are often shown only to visitors in certain regions, and this was not a European visit).
Third parties contacted
7 hosts — use.typekit.net, w.soundcloud.com, widget.sndcdn.com, dwt.soundcloud.com, api-widget.soundcloud.com, www.youtube.com, wave.sndcdn.com
dataLayer events seen
gtm.js, gtm.dom, gtm.load
Where the data goes
Confirmed — a browser watched this site send measurement data to nvrmd.novaramedia.com, not to Google. observed on novaramedia.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
infoUses browser storage (2)
2 pieces of custom code read or write localStorage or sessionStorage.
WhyBrowser storage persists across visits and is not covered by cookie consent tooling, so it is easy to overlook when auditing what you keep on a visitor's device.
CheckConfirm nothing personal is being kept there, and that it is covered by your privacy notice.
Seenseen in 23.3% 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 »
No third-party hosts were found in this container's tags.
What the custom templates can do
Custom templates are third-party code shipped inside the container. Injecting scripts and running page globals is ordinary for them — most tag templates need it to work — so this is an inventory, not a warning. It lists the capability each template declares so you can match it against templates you meant to install.
__cvt_MBTSV gallery injects code from stapecdn.com · runs page-level globalsDetected 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-PFTQ6J6 |
|---|---|
| Published version | 10 — the identity of this configuration. It changes only when someone publishes. |
| Read at | 2026-08-23 18:02:05 UTC (a month ago) |
| Source | https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id=GTM-PFTQ6J6 |
| Body checksum | 86c2f5a60412121db21f354baa28ce652b06bc21c853ae0e7009991d801346cdEvidence 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 a month 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 »