IAB TCF v2.0 error 1.2

[CLIDOapps]

Moin Moin from Hamburg,

I inserted TCF v2.0 in two existing iOS apps and now I get 1.2 errors.

The number is decreasing from day to day, although I have not changed anything in the settings or the app after the first error.

Does the error come because some users have not updated the app and the advertisement is requested without consent? Both apps have millions of downloads each.

If so, how do you fix it?

If not, what could be the reason for the error?

Best regards,

Nico

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor Prod]

Hi Nico,

Thank you for reaching out to us.

Error 1.2 for TCF means there is No consent for Purpose 1 for EEA countries and the UK. To troubleshoot this error, you can check the troubleshooting TCF V2.0 implementation. There are some suggest action to take that may help you.

Regards,

Princess Pamela Pineda Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2FZc0q:ref

[Peter Rule]

Hi,

I have exactly the same situation.

The troubleshooting TCF V2.0 implementation guide doesn't help 

Fix for 1.2 = "Confirm whether the user intentionally disallowed Purpose 1 or if this is due to CMP implementation errors."

What does this mean?

Can you get this error even if a user has consented?

Really need your help to understand this.

Peter

[CLIDOapps]

Hi Pamela,

how can I check why people decline the consent?

If there is an error, why the number of errors is decreasing? The number of the app downloads is constant.

Can't it be that the users with the old app version, where there is no consent form yet, are included in the calculation?

I use Funding Choices, with this ad setting:

Vendors associated with your app: Google Advertising Products

That's the only vendor I've chosen. Is that the reason?

When installing the code, I did everything as it was in the instructions. Then no error should actually occur.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor Prod]

Hi Peter,

Thank you for reaching out to us.

Purpose 1 is store and/or access information on a device. To handle that kind of scenarios, you can refer to this guide as basis on how you can handle it in your app.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor Prod]

Hi Nico,

Thank you for your response.

With regard to your questions, I'm afraid that the SDK does not have the capability to know why your user declined the consent. It is nothing to do with the users with old app version. As you mentioned, you installed the code and followed the instruction and still error occur means there's a possibility that you have miss something in your implementation.

[Peter Rule]

Thanks,

But are you not able to answer the question "Can you get this error even if a user has consented?"

[CLIDOapps]

You wrote a link with a guide for Peter.

Where I found "If you do not have consent for Google for Purpose 1 (Store and/or access information on a device), you should not call Google’s ad tag."

Does this mean that I can only load ads if the status is UMPConsentStatusObtained?

Will no non-personalized advertising be displayed automatically?

If not, how can I request non-personalized advertising? Do I need an extra AdMob account for this?

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor Prod]

Hi everyone,

Since the SDK doesn't interpret the TCF string we aren't the address to deal with server side granting of ads. What we could do is help with the implementation of the SDK, and what happens on the server needs support from the Ad Manager Forum. 

With that being said, Publisher integration with TCF string from the Ad Manager Forum describes the level of consent necessary for Ad Manager to serve non - personalized ads and personalized ads. It appears that even non personalized ads needs some form of consent.

Regarding UMPConsentStatusObtained, this means that the user responded to the consent form. It doesn't mean the user gave any consent, ie. the response from the user can be that the user pressed the "Do not consent" button and that was the status of consent obtained from the user. To illustrate this, if the impossible happens and every user of the app pressed the "Do not consent" button then you have "obtained consent status" from every user even though you have no consent from any user whatsoever. When you change your message server side and request that consent be updated, then the status changes to UMPConsentStatusRequired.

Regards,

Aryeh Baker Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2FZc0q:ref

[CLIDOapps]

Hi Aryeh,

I don't think we have to post in the Ad Manager forum either.

Maybe it's just a logic mistake in dealing with all of the states. Here is a little structure of how I handle the states:

requestConsent per requestConsentInfoUpdateWithParameters

        if UMPFormStatus is UMPFormStatusAvailable

                loadConsentForm per UMPConsentForm loadWithCompletionHandler

                        if loadError

                                // is here the mistake?

                                request IDFA and load and show ads

                        if consentStatus is UMPConsentStatusRequired

                                show consent form

                                        if consentStatus is UMPConsentStatusObtained

                                                request IDFA and load and show ads

                        else

                                request IDFA and load and show ads

        else

                // consent is not available / not EEA

                request IDFA and load and show ads

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor Prod]

Hi Nico,

Thank you for your response.

For handling UMP request, you may check this documentation for IOS and Android to get the idea on how the form consent flow works.

Regards,

Princess Pamela Pineda Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2FZc0q:ref

[CLIDOapps]

Hi,

I made all adjustments so that everything should be correct now.

But the error 1.2 still exists and the count keeps going up.

Why doesn't Google offer a complete guide on how best to implement logic with UMP and GoogleMobileAds? I implemented everything as in the UMP documentation, but apparently this is wrong.

Why is there no debug console or something else to see whether the consent is passed without errors.

If I include UMP, as in the documentation, and then call up GoogleMobileAds, I assume that the consent will be transmitted without errors.

But what surprises me: If I only select Europe in the statistics, I see that there was a massive drop in income with the switch to UMP. Since then, however, these have increased continuously with the same impressions.

Here are a few UMP stats:

EEA & UK traffic rate: 15.2 %

GDPR consent rate: 83 %

GDPR custom consent rate: 13.3 %

GDPR no consent rate: 3.7 %

To me, this looks like everything is working fine.

So can it be that the problem is with UMP and GoogleMobileAds and not with my apps? If it were a bug in the apps, the number should continue to decrease, as more and more people get the allegedly faulty code through updates.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor Prod]

Hi there,

We understand your frustration of this. As per checking,  other publishers reported that setting up a new funding choices IDFA explainer messages solves the issue. Could you please try it on your end, then let me know how it goes?

Regards,

Teejay Wennie Pimentel Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2FZc0q:ref