Web analytics, cookies, tag managers, CMPs, ad pixels, and session-replay tools as deployed on websites and apps targeting California consumers. CCPA/CPRA applies to for-profit businesses meeting threshold tests; sectoral overlays (HIPAA, GLBA, FERPA) are addressed only where they intersect with the analytics layer.
Applicable laws
The legal framework that governs personal data processing here.
National addons
Country-specific statutes layered on the EU baseline.
- § 1798.100 Right to know — categories and specific pieces of personal information collected
- § 1798.105 Right to delete — verifiable consumer requests, with standard exceptions
- § 1798.120 Right to opt-out of sale — 'Do Not Sell My Personal Information' link required
- § 1798.135 Notice & opt-out mechanism placement — clear, conspicuous link on homepage
- § 1798.140(t) Definition of 'sale' — broadened by Sephora settlement to include sharing for cross-context behavioral advertising
- § 1798.121 Right to limit use of sensitive PI — precise geolocation, race/ethnicity, religion, biometrics, health, sexuality, etc.
- § 1798.135(b) Opt-out preference signals (GPC) — businesses must honor frictionless browser/device-level signals
- § 1798.185 CPPA rulemaking authority — reportedly issued final ADMT, risk-assessment, and cybersecurity-audit regs in Oct 2025 (verify OAL-approval status against CPPA regulations page)
- § 1798.199.40 CPPA powers — investigations, audits, administrative orders, civil penalties up to $7,500 per intentional violation
- § 7004 Notice at collection + symmetric-choice + no dark patterns — 'reject' as easy as 'accept'
- § 7025 Opt-out preference signals (GPC) — technical specification + honoring obligation
- § 7050-7053 Service-provider and contractor contracting — prescribed CCPA addendum clauses
- § 7150-7157 Risk assessments — required before high-risk processing (selling/sharing, sensitive PI, ADMT, behavioral advertising on minors)
- § 22575 Conspicuous privacy policy — required on every commercial website collecting CA PII
- § 22575(b)(5) Do-Not-Track disclosure — must state how the operator responds to DNT signals
Regulators
Supervisory authorities that interpret and enforce privacy law here.
State / Land DPAs · 2 authorities
| Land / state | Authority | Note | |
|---|---|---|---|
| California — CPPA | CPPA | California Privacy Protection Agency — created by CPRA, 5-member board, enforcement began 1 Jul 2023. First major settlement: Honda $632.5K (Mar 2025). Issues regulations, conducts audits, levies administrative fines. | site ↗ |
| California — DOJ | California OAG | California Office of the Attorney General — concurrent jurisdiction with CPPA. Brought first CCPA action (Sephora $1.2M, Aug 2022) and largest to date (Healthline $1.55M, Jul 2025). Pursues civil penalties up to $2,500 per violation / $7,500 per intentional violation in superior court. | site ↗ |
Notable enforcement
California is the most active US state on analytics-related privacy enforcement. The two-track structure — California Attorney General (civil action in superior court) plus California Privacy Protection Agency (administrative enforcement) — means controllers face both prosecutorial and regulatory pressure. AG actions tend to be larger and headline-grabbing (Sephora, Healthline); CPPA actions are more procedurally detailed (Honda's UX-design and contract-process remediation orders). The Sephora settlement is the canonical analytics case: Sephora's transmission of consumer data to ad-tech partners was deemed a 'sale' because Sephora lacked conforming service-provider contracts and did not honor GPC. This logic was reinforced by Honda (vendor contracting failures) and Healthline (sensitive-data leakage via article titles + non-functional banner). Connected-vehicle data is a 2024-2025 priority area. Children's data triggers parallel COPPA exposure (Tilting Point).
GA4 status
Editorial reading as of 2026-05-06: GA4 is broadly deployable in California with proper opt-out implementation. Default opt-out baseline (CCPA does not require pre-collection consent for adults), but (1) a clear and conspicuous 'Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information' link is required on the homepage, (2) the GPC browser signal must be honored as an opt-out, (3) a conforming service-provider contract with Google (CCPA addendum) is expected, and (4) under-16 users require opt-in. The Sephora case is the cautionary anchor: transmitting GA4 data to Google's advertising features without these safeguards has been treated as a 'sale' under CCPA.
| DPA | Stance |
|---|---|
| CPPA | Active scrutiny of analytics + ad-tech vendor flows. Honda case shows asymmetric opt-out UX and missing service-provider contracts trigger enforcement. |
| California OAG | Sephora-line: GA4 data transmission to ad-tech features is treated as 'sale' absent service-provider contracts and GPC honoring. Healthline-line: sensitive-context article titles cannot be shared even with opt-out toggled. |
Cross-border transfers + Schrems II
Domestic US — no Schrems II issue. Cross-border transfer mechanisms (DPF, SCCs) are not relevant when both controller and California consumer are in the US. Note: CCPA/CPRA still apply to non-US businesses processing California-resident data above the threshold tests, but California does not impose adequacy/transfer-mechanism requirements analogous to GDPR Chapter V.
Not applicable. CPPA does scrutinize vendor data flows under § 1798.140 (service-provider vs. third-party distinction) and § 7051 (prescribed contractual addendum). Failure to execute conforming service-provider contracts converts a 'disclosure' into a 'sale/share' — central holding of Sephora and Honda.
Employee data
Key thresholds
Vendor signals
Red / yellow / green markers are an editorial reading of public regulator guidance and published enforcement actions, applied to vendor behavior we can observe or that the vendor documents. They are not legal conclusions, not endorsements, and not advice about your specific processing. Configuration changes the picture — a "yellow" vendor in one configuration may be defensible in another.
Analytics tools · 12 · 8 green · 3 yellow · 1 red
| Vendor | Status | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Adobe Analytics | GREEN | Visitor ID cookie + cross-suite stitching with Experience Platform. DPIA strongly recommended; configure ECID + IP obfuscation. US baseline more permissive. |
| Amplitude | GREEN | EU residency available on paid plans; default cloud is US. Persistent user IDs require config + DPA + DPF chain. US baseline more permissive. |
| Fathom | GREEN | Cookieless and aggregate-only — no PI sale/share trigger. |
| Matomo (self-hosted) | GREEN | Self-hosted with cookieless config — no third-party data flow, no sale/share. |
| Matomo Cloud | GREEN | Cloud version with appropriate controls; Matomo not classed as ad-tech. |
| Pirsch | GREEN | Cookieless privacy-first analytics; no PI sale/share trigger. |
| Plausible | GREEN | Cookieless, no PI sale/share, no third-party transmission. Outside CCPA 'sale' definition. |
| Umami | GREEN | Open-source self-hosted; default cookieless. |
| Google Analytics 4 | YELLOW | Legal with Do-Not-Sell-or-Share link + GPC honoring + Google CCPA service-provider addendum + Google Signals/Ads-features disabled or gated. Sephora case is the anchor. |
| Mixpanel | YELLOW | Service-provider contract + opt-out implementation required; product-analytics vs. advertising boundary matters for 'sale' analysis. |
| PostHog | YELLOW | EU cloud helps but session recording + autocapture default to PII collection. Disable autocapture and recordings or self-host for green. |
| Heap | RED | Auto-capture grabs every click and form value — broad PII risk under GDPR Art 5(1)(c) data minimization. |
Consent management platforms · 5 · 5 green · 0 yellow · 0 red
| Vendor | Status | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Cookiebot | GREEN | Danish-based, EU-hosted. Auto-blocks third-party scripts pre-consent — verify your manual scripts also gate. |
| Iubenda | GREEN | Italian-based, EU-hosted. Free tier limits 5k pageviews/mo; granular per-vendor controls require paid plan. |
| Klaro | GREEN | Open-source, self-hosted. No managed updates — site owner maintains vendor list. |
| OneTrust | GREEN | GDPR + CCPA + multi-region templates available. Common config error: GDPR/CCPA mode mismatch — verify per-region defaults. US baseline more permissive. |
| Usercentrics | GREEN | German-based, EU-hosted. v3 SDK required for Consent Mode v2; TCF flow can over-collect for non-AdTech sites. |
Tag managers · 1 · 0 green · 1 yellow · 0 red
| Vendor | Status | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Google Tag Manager | YELLOW | Container only — verdict depends on tags. Gate ad-tech tags behind GPC + Do-Not-Sell signal. |
Session replay · 3 · 0 green · 3 yellow · 0 red
| Vendor | Status | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| FullStory | YELLOW | Session capture is high-risk under § 7150 risk-assessment rules; sensitive-page exclusion + GPC honoring required. |
| Hotjar | YELLOW | Less restrictive than EU (no §25-style opt-in). But sensitive-context page recording (health, finance, employee dashboards) heightens AG/CPPA risk; Healthline lesson applies. |
| Microsoft Clarity | YELLOW | Session replay + Microsoft data flows; honor GPC, run risk assessment under § 7150, exclude sensitive pages. |
Ad pixels · 3 · 0 green · 3 yellow · 0 red
| Vendor | Status | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| LinkedIn Insight Tag | YELLOW | Loads pre-consent if naively placed; cross-device matching broad. Block until consent + IAB TCF string set. US opt-out baseline relaxes the verdict, but GPC + CCPA opt-out signals must still be honoured. |
| Meta Pixel | YELLOW | Less restrictive than EU (no Schrems II issue domestically). BUT clearly a 'share' for cross-context behavioral advertising — must honor GPC, expose Do-Not-Sell-or-Share link, execute conforming contract. Healthline's article-title-leak pattern is the cautionary tail. |
| TikTok Pixel | YELLOW | Same 'share' analysis as Meta Pixel; ByteDance/PRC ownership not yet a CCPA-specific issue but federal scrutiny adds risk. |
Server-side · 3 · 2 green · 1 yellow · 0 red
| Vendor | Status | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Addingwell | GREEN | EU-only datacenters strong for FR/DE compliance; per-event pricing scales steeply at high traffic. |
| Stape | GREEN | EU server containers handle the routing — but server-side tagging does NOT auto-fix consent. CMP must still gate browser-side pings. |
| Server-side GTM (Google Cloud) | YELLOW | "EU server" ≠ EU data — clients still transmit to Google ad backends downstream. Use only for Google-ecosystem first-party-routing. |
Compare with neighbors
Side-by-side rule comparison.
Common questions
Is Google Analytics usable in California in 2026?
Is a 'Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information' link required?
Must I honor the Global Privacy Control (GPC) signal?
What did the Sephora case actually establish?
Who enforces CCPA — the AG or the CPPA?
Does CCPA apply to my employee or B2B data?
What counts as 'sensitive personal information' under CPRA?
Do I meet the CCPA thresholds?
Are children's data rules different?
What about the 30-day cure period?
// EDITORIAL · NOT LEGAL ADVICE This page summarises California's privacy framework as of 2026-05-06. Rules vary by sector, establishment, and DPA position. For binding interpretation, consult counsel admitted here.