惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

罗磊的独立博客
Y
Y Combinator Blog
Recent Announcements
Recent Announcements
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
V
Visual Studio Blog
MyScale Blog
MyScale Blog
M
MIT News - Artificial intelligence
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
T
The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss
Martin Fowler
Martin Fowler
博客园 - 【当耐特】
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
Google DeepMind News
Google DeepMind News
C
Check Point Blog
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
F
Fortinet All Blogs
博客园 - 聂微东
Blog — PlanetScale
Blog — PlanetScale
H
Help Net Security
GbyAI
GbyAI
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG

Privacy & Cybersecurity Law Blog

EU Cyber Resilience Act Reporting Obligations Take Effect for Manufacturers Delaware Expands State Privacy Law Dutch DPA Fines Uber Over Automated Decisions Affecting Drivers European Commission Designates ChatGPT, Reddit, and Roblox Under the Digital Services Act China Issues New Rules on Cyberspace Security Inspection Court Approves Meta Settlement With 29 States Over Alleged Harms to Children and Teens FTC Proposes Enforcement Policy Statement on Personalized Pricing New Jersey Enacts the Kids Code Act with Privacy-by-Default and Safety-by-Design Obligations White House Memorandum Establishes Framework for Government-Directed Private-Sector Cyber Operations FTC, California and Utah Sue Telehealth Company Hims & Hers for Deceptive and Unlawful Privacy Practices CalPrivacy Settles with Two Data Brokers over Registration Failures and Privacy Violations New York Attorney General Releases Final Rules for SAFE for Kids Act EDPB Adopts Guidelines on Anonymous Data, Web Scraping, and Blockchain China Publishes Official Q&A on Administrative Policies for Cross-Border Data Transfers Hawaii Enacts AI Companion Disclosure and Safety Law EDPB Calls for Review of EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework After U.S. Supreme Court Decision on FTC Independence European Commission Issues Guidance on the Cyber Resilience Act European Commission Issues EU AI Act Transparency Guidelines EU Digital Omnibus on AI Enters Into Force Connecticut AG Leads Multistate Settlement With 23andMe Over 2023 Data Breach CalPrivacy Targets Gig Economy Tech Platforms in First CCPA Compliance Audit New Jersey Adopts New Data Broker Registration Regime and Sensitive Data Sale and Licensing Restrictions CISA Plans to Finalize Cyber Incident Reporting Regulations in September 2026 Illinois Governor Signs Frontier AI Model Law New Hampshire Amends the NHDPA to Prohibit the Sale of Children’s Personal Data Canada’s Proposed Social Media Ban for Children and Chatbot Regulation: Bill C-34’s Impact on Platforms European Commission Unveils Cybersecurity and AI Action Plan European Commission Refers Four Member States to CJEU Over NIS2 Transposition Delays EDPB Opens Public Consultation on New Personal Data Breach Notification Template European Commission Advances New Proposal to Expand Cloud Capacity and AI Infrastructure
CNIL Issues FAQs on Recommendation for Tracking Pixels in...
2026-08-04 · via Privacy & Cybersecurity Law Blog

On July 22, 2026, the French Data Protection Authority (“CNIL”) published frequently asked questions (“FAQs”) on its recommendation regarding the use of tracking pixels in emails (the “Recommendation”). The Recommendation explains how Article 82 of the French Data Protection Act applies to tracking pixels in emails and aims to help organizations that use tracking pixels in emails to analyze and understand their role and obligations.

Key Takeaways from the Recommendation

The Recommendation was adopted on March 12, 2026, and became applicable once published in the French Official Journal on April 14, 2026.

In the Recommendation, the CNIL clarifies that tracking pixels in emails generally require the recipient’s prior consent unless they fall within a limited exemption, including where they are used exclusively for security measures linked to user authentication or, in certain cases, for deliverability purposes. The CNIL states that consent is required for uses such as measuring and optimizing campaign performance through personalization or frequency adjustment, creating recipient profiles for targeting in other contexts, detecting suspected fraud and deliverability measurement that does not satisfy the conditions of the exemption.

The Recommendation also makes clear that the consent regime for tracking pixels is separate from the rules governing the sending of the email itself. As a result, a tracking pixel may require consent even where the underlying email does not.

In practical terms, the CNIL recommends collecting consent when the relevant email address is collected, with clear information about the purposes of the pixels and the scope of the choice. The CNIL also recommends that refusal be as easy as acceptance and that users be able to withdraw consent at any time, including through a link in the footer of each email. If consent cannot be collected when the email address is collected, the Recommendation contemplates requesting it later through an email that does not itself contain a consent-requiring tracking device.

Key Takeaways from the FAQs

The FAQs provide additional guidance on how the Recommendation applies in practice. Among other points, the CNIL explains that deliverability-only pixels are exempt only if they are limited to what is strictly necessary and, in principle, the only data needed for that purpose is the date of the last opening (unless the sender can document a need for more). The FAQs also state that collecting additional data, such as an Internet Protocol address or user-agent, beyond what is strictly necessary for deliverability prevents reliance on the exemption, even if that data is later anonymized or deleted.

The FAQs further clarify that a single pixel may pursue both exempt and non-exempt purposes, but the non-exempt purposes may be pursued only after valid consent has been obtained. They also emphasize that pixels cannot be placed without a defined purpose and cannot be deployed merely in anticipation of possible future consent.

In addition, the FAQs confirm that the Recommendation applies broadly to the use of trackers in emails regardless of the type of sender or recipient, although whether consent is required depends on the circumstances, including the purposes pursued and the category of email involved. The FAQs also note that for deliverability purposes, whether an email can benefit from the exemption depends in part on whether it was expressly requested by the user or is tied to a requested service.

Timing

The FAQs are particularly notable because they address timing for email addresses collected before the Recommendation was published. For those email addresses, the Recommendation allowed organizations to continue using pixels during a transition period provided they sent clear and accessible information to recipients within a period that should not, in principle, exceed three months from publication and gave recipients the ability to object for future emails. That period expired on July 14, 2026.

The FAQs indicate, however, that a reasonable extension may be possible where the volume of the database or deliverability issues made compliance within that period impracticable, provided those difficulties are objectively justified and documented. The FAQs also state that if the required notice was not sent by July 14, 2026, and no justified extension applies, organizations must apply the Recommendation in full, including obtaining consent where required, or stop using pixels that require consent.

The FAQs further clarify that where users whose email addresses were collected before April 14, 2026, were informed of their right to object in accordance with the Recommendation, organizations may continue to rely on the absence of an objection for later emails, so long as the conditions under which those emails are sent remain unchanged and no new consent is otherwise required.

Review the Recommendation in French and in English and the CNIL’s Press Release here. Read the FAQs.