Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow to read hashed email from 33across global #95

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

carlosfelix
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

}, {
storeFpid,
storeTpid,
privacyConsent: !!responseObj.envelope,
Copy link
Collaborator

@curlyblueeagle curlyblueeagle Jan 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is the field named privacyConsent? This does not read the consent values does it? Also why are we clearing HEM if response has no envelope?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@carlosfelix carlosfelix Jan 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeah, might not be the best name..

I named like that because, and correct me if I am wrong, 200-responses that don't contain an envelope usually are responses where there's no user privacy consent OR the country is not supported. Under those scenarios, specially if there's no user privacy consent, we should clear any IDs stored by our UIM, including HEMs

perhaps the LaaS response could contain a boolean indicator of the privacy consent/no-consent status? instead of an error message. That simplies the logic and based on that boolean indicator we could clear the stored IDs for non-consented scenarios.

@@ -57,4 +57,5 @@ The following settings are available in the `params` property in `userSync.userI

### HEM Collection

33Across ID System supports user's hashed email, if available in storage.
33Across ID System supports user's hashed emails (HEMs). HEMs could be collected from 3 different
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Make the order of those 3 different sources clear?

@carlosfelix carlosfelix force-pushed the 33across_hem_via_var branch 2 times, most recently from 5694a07 to 158dec7 Compare January 8, 2025 05:20
@carlosfelix carlosfelix force-pushed the 33across_hem_via_var branch from 158dec7 to ae94372 Compare January 8, 2025 17:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants