tagora
container audit

GTM-WPKSM53

12 tags, 1 custom scripts, 4 third-party hosts — an ordinary container, near the middle of what we measure (median: 39 tags, 4 custom scripts).

Tags12
Custom scripts1
Third parties4
Delivered486 KB
Versions36

What we observed

A real browser loaded konami.jp 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 googletagmanager.com — Google
Measurement sent to google-analytics.com — Google
Consent OneTrust answered its own API. Nothing measured until it was granted — no analytics or advertising hit left the page beforehand, and 1 fired afterwards. That is the outcome consent is meant to produce. 1 host appeared only after consent was granted. Google recorded gcs=G111 (all granted).
Third parties contacted 7 hosts — www.konami.com, webfont.fontplus.jp, www.googletagmanager.com, cdn-apac.onetrust.com, geolocation.onetrust.com, privacyportal-apac.onetrust.com, www.google-analytics.com
dataLayer events seen gtm.js, gtm.dom, OneTrustLoaded, OptanonLoaded, gtm.load, gtm.triggerGroup, gtm.click

Where the data goes

Not observed — on the page we loaded, measurement went to Google and nowhere else. observed on konami.jp 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.

reviewdocument.write (1)
1 piece of custom code call document.write.

Whydocument.write blocks the HTML parser while it runs, and browsers ignore it entirely once the page has finished parsing — so an async-loaded tag using it can silently do nothing.

CheckIf these tags fire on page load they are costing render time; if they fire later they may not be working at all. Worth confirming the tag still does what it was added to do.

Seenseen in 18.4% of 46,522 containers measured

infoConsent configuration detected (1)
The container declares one or more consent signals.

WhyConsent handling is present in the container. This describes what the artifact declares; what actually happened on the page is measured separately, above.

CheckConfirm these settings match the consent policy you intend to enforce, and compare them with the before-and-after observation.

Seenseen in 44.6% 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 »

www.google-analytics.com ×7cdn-apac.onetrust.com ×1googleads.g.doubleclick.net ×1www.googleadservices.com ×1

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.

konami.jp

What this audit describes

Containers change. These findings describe one specific artifact, and you can re-fetch it to check this reading.

ContainerGTM-WPKSM53
Published version36 — the identity of this configuration. It changes only when someone publishes.
Read at2026-08-23 18:20:45 UTC (a month ago)
Sourcehttps://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id=GTM-WPKSM53
Body checksuma501147caf0697337c273211d7dba0496d22e297f210d8ee45e8c5db938c76f6
Evidence 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.

Re-audit GTM-WPKSM53

Check another container

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 »