Obtain, record and manage explicit permission for every processing purpose — across every channel, in every jurisdiction, from a single record of truth.
Primary DPDP sectionsSec. 5, 6, 9
23
Notice languages served
< 1s
Consent check at query time
100%
Purposes with a receipt
0
Blanket consents possible
Figures illustrative.
How consent moves
Consent is collected wherever your customers already are, normalised into a single purpose-scoped record, and pushed to the systems that touch personal data — each of which acknowledges it before it processes.
Withdrawal runs the same path in reverse. Every hop — the notice served, the choice made, the policy version applied and each downstream acknowledgement — lands in an append-only trail you can replay.
Capability
Plain-language notice at the point of collection, plus a self-service centre where an individual can see and change every consent given.
Purpose-level opt-in rather than a single blanket toggle — and withdrawal made exactly as easy as the original consent.
One consent store, updated in real time, that every downstream system must query before it processes.
Consent that is not merely recorded but enforced — every downstream system checks before it processes, and withdrawal actually stops the processing.
DPDP alignment
What the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 requires, and the control that satisfies it.
| Section | What the Act requires | How the product satisfies it |
|---|---|---|
| Sec. 5 | Itemised notice describing the personal data, the purpose, how to exercise rights and how to complain to the Board — in English or any Eighth Schedule language. | A templated notice engine renders per purpose, versioned and localised into all 22 scheduled languages. Every notice served is stored and replayable against the Principal who saw it. |
| Sec. 6(1) | Consent must be free, specific, informed, unconditional and unambiguous, by clear affirmative action, limited to data necessary for the specified purpose. | Consent is captured as a purpose-scoped object with an affirmative-action event, an immutable timestamp and a binding to the exact notice version displayed. Blanket consent is structurally impossible. |
| Sec. 6(4)–(6) | Withdrawal must be as easy as giving. Processing must cease within a reasonable time, and processors must be made to cease too. | One-click withdrawal with click-parity enforced against the give-flow. Revocation fans out to every processor that inherited the consent; cessation is tracked to an SLA and evidenced. |
| Sec. 6(7)–(9) | A Consent Manager registered with the Board must give the Principal an accessible, transparent and interoperable platform to manage consent. | Consent artefacts are emitted in an interoperable format with Consent Manager-ready APIs, so registration and integration are configuration rather than a rebuild. |
| Sec. 9 | Verifiable parental consent for children and persons with a guardian; no tracking or behavioural advertising directed at children. | Age-band assurance gates the flow into a guardian consent path, and a child flag suppresses tracking and behavioural advertising downstream automatically. |
Sec. 9 failures carry up to ₹200 Cr under the Schedule. Consent defects also invalidate the lawful basis for every downstream processing activity — one control gap becomes estate-wide exposure.
Solutions by industry
The sectors carrying the most DPDP exposure for this control, each with its own threat model and regulators.
A DPDP readiness walkthrough maps your obligations to the controls that already exist, and names the gaps that do not.
