Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Prebid Core: Adding support for a global return of consent metadata. #8043
Prebid Core: Adding support for a global return of consent metadata. #8043
Changes from 2 commits
d63074e
f79092f
9cd6231
4d6671c
ba2194c
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For the USP case there does not seem to be a distinction between data and metadata - this just adds a timestamp.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We can further strip this down for consistency, but since this doesn't qualify as personal data, it's OK to reveal.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks like a copy of the test case below it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The setup is the same, but the assertions related to the getConsentMeta() return:
vs.
The checks for
consentStringSize
andtimestamp
are specifically novel.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I may be having a stroke, but I don't see any call to
getConsentMeta
(test case in lines 704-729).diff
tells me it's identical to the test case from lines 730-754.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nope, looks like I had the stroke. You're right, that's an unnecessary copy/paste. Let me pull the 704 block out and commit it. Thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@dgirardi This should do the trick 🤞