CEaaS and Consent Management Platforms (CMPs)
Modern privacy compliance depends on both operational consent tools and durable evidence. These responsibilities are related — but they are not interchangeable.
This page explains the difference between consent execution and consent evidence, and why both are required under GDPR and modern regulatory scrutiny.
Two regulatory questions, two different layers
Consent Management Platforms (CMPs) and Consent Evidence as a Service (CEaaS) exist to answer two distinct regulatory questions.
- CMPs ask: “What choice did the user make right now, and how should systems behave as a result?”
- CEaaS asks: “Can the organisation prove what lawful basis or consent existed at the moment data was processed — even years later?”
Both questions matter. They operate at different layers of accountability.
What Consent Management Platforms are designed to do
Consent Management Platforms operate at the execution layer. They exist to:
- present consent choices to users
- block or allow scripts and processing in real time
- record preference changes
- support day-to-day operational compliance
CMPs are essential for live consent enforcement and user experience.
What CEaaS is designed to do
CEaaS operates at a different layer: evidence and accountability.
It preserves time-fixed, verifiable records of:
- consent states and lawful basis decisions
- consent text and versioning
- timing, scope, and context of consent
- governance judgement at the moment it was exercised
These records are preserved independently, in a form suitable for audits, complaints, investigations, and legal scrutiny.
Why CEaaS does not replace CMPs
CEaaS does not render consent interfaces, block scripts, or manage real-time execution. Nor should it.
Regulators expect organisations to provide users with clear, accessible consent choices. That expectation is best met by dedicated consent tooling.
CEaaS strengthens — rather than undermines — this model by preserving independent evidence of how consent and lawful basis were handled.
Why CMPs alone are often insufficient under scrutiny
In disputes, audits, and investigations, organisations are rarely assessed on whether a banner existed.
Instead, scrutiny focuses on:
- what lawful basis was relied upon
- what consent text was shown
- what the organisation knew at the time
- whether records have been altered or reconstructed
CEaaS exists to meet this evidentiary burden directly.
How CEaaS and CMPs work together
In a robust compliance architecture:
- CMPs handle live consent execution
- CEaaS preserves independent consent evidence
- Evidence remains valid even if CMP vendors or tools change
This separation reduces risk, improves defensibility, and avoids over-reliance on any single operational system.
CEaaS as the system of record for consent evidence
Consent Management Platforms may change. Vendors may be replaced. Interfaces may evolve.
CEaaS remains constant — acting as a durable system of record for consent and lawful basis evidence across time, tooling, and vendors.
For organisations primarily focused on data protection rather than AI-specific regulation, see CEaaS and GDPR.