2c6ac4d2be8902a9d1629150c1f9a196a8a1c760
2
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 synAdminandClaude Opus 5
|
955049eac9 |
fix(privacy): separate analytics consent from email consent (#56)
The previous commit widened the marketing consent sentence to cover the Brevo tracker, so one checkbox carried both purposes. That is the specific pattern GDPR rejects: consent has to be granular, and current EDPB guidance treats bundling tracking consent with subscription consent as invalid because the customer cannot accept one purpose and refuse the other. Quebec's Law 25 s.8.1 is stricter again — profiling technology has to be off until the person switches it on, with no pre-ticked box and no consent inherited from agreeing to something else. Building to both standards was the decision, since the storefront is publicly reachable and anyone can register. So the marketing sentence is restored to exactly what it was, which leaves every existing email consent valid and untouched, and analytics gets its own column, its own sentence, its own checkbox at registration, its own toggle in the account page and its own endpoint. A customer can now hold either, both, or neither, and withdrawing one does not disturb the other. The migration defaults analytics_consent to false, which is both the honest answer — none of the existing customers was ever asked — and what Law 25 requires. Nothing about this change opts anybody in. Two details that are compliance requirements rather than wording preferences. The sentence names Brevo instead of saying "our email provider", because informed consent means the customer can tell who receives their data and a description they cannot act on is not disclosure. And the account toggle is as prominent and as easy to switch off as it is to switch on, because withdrawal has to be as easy as consenting. The analytics endpoint is separate from the marketing one rather than a second field on it, so that a single call cannot change an answer the customer did not touch — the bundling problem moved from the form into the API. The unit tests now assert the two consents stay apart in both directions, including that the marketing sentence still says nothing about tracking, because re-bundling them would otherwise pass silently and is the mistake this project already made once. Verified: backend tsc clean, both lint suites 0 errors with no new warnings, 478 unit tests passing across 33 suites, frontend production build green. Not verified: the migration has not been run against a database, and integration and e2e need a Node this machine does not have active. None of this is legal advice and the wording is worth a lawyer's eye before it ships. Refs #56 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
synAdminandClaude Opus 5
|
ac3f6e91f5 |
feat(analytics): report consenting customers' activity to Brevo (#56)
Loads Brevo's web tracker for a signed-in customer who has consented, reports route changes as page views, and tracks the three events the issue asked for: added_to_cart, favorited, and checkout_completed. The four design questions were settled on the issue in August and this implements those answers. The consent gate is the part worth reading. The decision recorded on the issue was "gate it behind consent", but the sentence customers actually agreed to named only email: "I want to receive occasional emails about new one-of-a-kind items". Gating a tracker on `marketing_consent` while that was the stored wording would have treated "email me about new items" as authorisation to send someone's browsing to a third party, which it does not say — and this project stores the wording verbatim against each customer precisely so that a record says what the customer saw. So the sentence is widened here, and the tracker is gated on `analytics_consent`, a field the server computes by comparing the wording stored against a customer with the current constant. Changing the sentence therefore does not retroactively widen anybody's consent: everyone who agreed to the old text keeps their email consent and is not tracked until they re-consent through the account page. A boolean alone could not tell those two populations apart, which is the whole reason the text is stored per customer. `analyticsConsent` is exported and has its own unit test, because "agreeing to the old wording does not authorise tracking" is the rule that silently tracks people if it regresses — their flag really is true. QA stays out of the live Brevo account by construction rather than by remembering. The key is per-environment, the tracker never loads without one, and `docker-compose.qa.yml` sets an empty literal with no stack variable behind it, so nothing can inherit a value from the host or be pasted in from production's stack. Same reasoning as QA_DB_PASSWORD and the QA_SMTP_ names beside it. Events are reported from the API layer rather than the UI call sites, so no caller can add to the cart or favorite an item without it being counted, and each fires only after the response was accepted — a refused add is not reported as one. The two checkout completions each name their processor, because a demo purchase charges nothing and counting it as a sale would overstate revenue. The privacy policy gains an analytics section in this change rather than a follow-up, since the published policy previously described none of this and would otherwise have lagged the code. It is deliberate about the limits: withdrawing consent stops further reporting, but anything already sent stays with Brevo, and a script already injected cannot be un-injected — `stopBrevoTracking` stops calls, it does not unload sa.js. That is said in the code too, because "tracking stops" reads as a stronger promise than any web tracker can make. Verified: backend tsc clean, both lint suites 0 errors with no new warnings, 474 unit tests passing across 33 suites, and the frontend production build green including the compose-environment guard. Not verified: integration and e2e, which need a database and a Node this machine does not have active, and no real Brevo key was exercised — the tracker has never been observed reporting to an actual account. Closes #56 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |