container audit
GTM-WX2VV79
28 tags, 6 custom scripts, 5 third-party hosts — an ordinary container, near the middle of what we measure (median: 39 tags, 4 custom scripts).
- 6 custom HTML tags carrying 3 KB of JavaScript. This runs on every page the container loads on.
- 5 third-party hosts reachable from its tags.
Tags28
Custom scripts6
Third parties5
Delivered500 KB
Versions76
What we observed
A real browser loaded medit.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
googletagmanager.com — GoogleMeasurement sent to
google-analytics.com — GoogleConsent
Complianz answered its own API. Measurement fired beforehand but carried no identifier —
analytics_storage was denied, which is Consent Mode working as designed rather than a gap. 1 host appeared only after consent was granted. Google recorded gcs=G100 (all denied).Third parties contacted
16 hosts — hcaptcha.com, cdn.weglot.com, www.googletagmanager.com, cdn.brandfolder.com, 0961c28d68e0.w.hcaptcha.com, newassets.hcaptcha.com, 301a629117cb.w.hcaptcha.com, api.hcaptcha.com, and 8 more
dataLayer events seen
gtm.js, default_consent, cmplz_event_functional, gtm.dom, gtm.load
Where the data goes
Not observed — on the page we loaded, measurement went to Google and nowhere else. observed on medit.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.
infoConsent configuration detected (3)
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
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.googleadservices.com ×9www.google-analytics.com ×6connect.facebook.net ×1tags.srv.stackadapt.com ×1www.facebook.com ×1
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_10190830_185 private 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-WX2VV79 |
|---|---|
| Published version | 76 — the identity of this configuration. It changes only when someone publishes. |
| Read at | 2026-08-23 18:22:40 UTC (a month ago) |
| Source | https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id=GTM-WX2VV79 |
| Body checksum | 108ec2d8ee89b060da680c55ba7208ec9f4daa82a69a95b28681e9e11b2bc45aEvidence 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 »