container audit
GTM-WSMFHNK
34 tags, 17 custom scripts, 10 third-party hosts — an ordinary container, near the middle of what we measure (median: 39 tags, 4 custom scripts).
- 17 custom HTML tags carrying 4 KB of JavaScript — more than 70% of the 46,522 containers we have measured. This runs on every page the container loads on.
- 10 third-party hosts reachable from its tags — more than 80% of the 46,522 containers we have measured.
inner-htmlis uncommon — under 6% of the containers we have measured have it. That is context rather than a verdict: a server container is rarer still and is a sign of a mature setup. What it means is in the finding itself.
Tags34
Custom scripts17
Third parties10
Delivered488 KB
Versions101
What we observed
A real browser loaded serverspace.ru 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 — GoogleMeasurement sent to
google-analytics.com — GoogleConsent
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). 10 hosts appeared only after consent was granted. Google recorded
gcs=G111 (all granted).Third parties contacted
16 hosts — dev.visualwebsiteoptimizer.com, www.googletagmanager.com, widget.happyfoxchat.com, www.google-analytics.com, mc.yandex.ru, www.clarity.ms, connect.facebook.net, www.google.com, and 8 more
dataLayer events seen
gtm.js, gtm.dom, gtm.load, gtm.timer
Where the data goes
Not observed — on the page we loaded, measurement went to Google and nowhere else. observed on serverspace.ru 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.
reviewWrites innerHTML (2)
2 pieces of custom code assign to innerHTML.
WhyAssigning innerHTML parses the string as HTML. If any of it comes from the URL, the page or a cookie, that is a script-injection route into your own site.
CheckCheck whether the assigned value is a fixed template or built from something a visitor can influence.
Seenseen in 5.7% of 46,522 containers measured
reviewUniversal Analytics tags still shipped (2)
2 Universal Analytics tags are still in the container.
WhyUniversal Analytics stopped processing data in July 2023. These tags still download and execute on every matching page, and send to an endpoint that discards them.
CheckNothing is being collected from these. Confirm the equivalent GA4 tag exists, then delete them.
Seenseen in 23.2% of 46,522 containers measured
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
infoLoads JavaScript from another host (6)
6 pieces of custom code fetch and run JavaScript from another host.
WhyWhatever that host serves executes with full access to the page — it can read the DOM, cookies and form fields. The code is not in this container, so it can change at any time without any change here.
CheckConfirm you recognise every host below and that someone owns the relationship. A host you cannot name is the one to chase.
Seenseen in 54.4% of 46,522 containers measured
infoVendor IDs written into custom code (1)
1 vendor ID is pasted directly into custom HTML rather than held in a variable or template.
WhyChanging a property, pixel or account then means editing every tag that mentions it, and any one that gets missed keeps sending to the old destination indefinitely.
CheckFine if the ID never changes. If you have ever migrated a property, check that none of these still point at the old one.
Seenseen in 31.4% 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 ×8mc.yandex.ru ×2top-fwz1.mail.ru ×2vk.com ×2widget.happyfoxchat.com ×2www.clarity.ms ×2app.getresponse.com ×1connect.facebook.net ×1www.facebook.com ×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.
What this audit describes
Containers change. These findings describe one specific artifact, and you can re-fetch it to check this reading.
| Container | GTM-WSMFHNK |
|---|---|
| Published version | 101 — the identity of this configuration. It changes only when someone publishes. |
| Read at | 2026-08-23 18:21:42 UTC (a month ago) |
| Source | https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id=GTM-WSMFHNK |
| Body checksum | 3f7e85f1b4f51bfa0c6cc0189310ffb76bec61abbfbc7c469616aa5ff0e24e7cEvidence 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 »