India’s Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023 is the country’s first comprehensive law to regulate how personal data is collected, processed, and shared. In simple terms, it gives individuals (called data principals) more control over their digital data and imposes duties on organizations (data fiduciaries) that handle that data. The law was passed in August 2023 and aims to replace older IT privacy rules with a modern framework. A unique feature of the DPDP Act is the introduction of Consent Managers – a new, user-focused role designed to make it easy for people to manage their data consents across multiple services. This blog breaks down what the DPDP Act and Consent Managers are, why they were introduced, and how they work in practice.
What is India’s DPDP Act?
The DPDP Act is essentially India’s version of a data protection law, similar in spirit to the EU’s GDPR. It applies to any company or app (in India or abroad) that handles “digital personal data” of people in India. It requires that data can only be processed with the person’s consent or for certain legal reasons, and it grants people rights (like access, correction, erasure) over their data. Importantly, the Act is an “umbrella” framework: it sets out the main rules, but many details are filled in by rules (drafted in 2025) that specify how those rules work in practice. For example, the DPDP Act establishes a Data Protection Board of India to oversee enforcement.
The Act defines key terms: a data principal is you or any individual whose data is being processed, and a data fiduciary is a company or person that decides how and why the data is used (similar to “controller” under GDPR). The DPDP Act requires data fiduciaries to notify users and obtain consent before collecting data, and it sets strict standards for what counts as valid consent (it must be “free, specific, informed, unconditional and unambiguous”). To make these rules user-friendly, the law also introduces the Consent Manager role – a trusted intermediary between people and data-collecting organizations.
What is a Consent Manager?
A Consent Manager (CM) is a new role defined by the DPDP Act. In practice, a Consent Manager is usually a company or platform (it could be a tech startup, nonprofit, or other entity) that is registered with the Data Protection Board. This entity operates a secure dashboard (a website or app) through which data principals can give, review, modify, or withdraw their consent for various data uses. Think of it as a “control panel” for your online permissions. For example, instead of visiting each company’s site to update your preferences, you could log into the Consent Manager and manage all your consents in one place.
By law, a Consent Manager is a single point of contact for managing consent. The DPDP Act explicitly defines it as “a person registered with the Board who acts as a single point of contact to enable a data principal to give, manage, review, and withdraw their consent through an accessible, transparent and interoperable platform”. The Act also makes Consent Managers accountable to the data principals and acting on their behalf. In other words, the Consent Manager represents you in giving permission to data-using services, and must faithfully implement your choices. The Consent Manager itself does not get to see or store your actual personal data – only the “consent artefacts” (the records of your yes/no decisions). This ensures the manager is essentially “data-blind” and only handles permission records.
Why Were Consent Managers Introduced?
The idea of a Consent Manager was first discussed years before the Act was passed. A government expert committee in 2017 noted that people could suffer “consent fatigue” by repeatedly giving permissions to different apps. The committee proposed a unified consent dashboard so users could manage all their consents together. This concept was carried into various drafts of India’s data law, and ultimately codified in the DPDP Act. The goal was to bridge the gap between users and companies: instead of fragmented consent forms scattered across the internet, there would be a streamlined, user-controlled system.
Reports like NITI Aayog’s Data Empowerment and Protection Architecture (DEPA) further shaped the design. They emphasized that Consent Managers should only handle consent records and not the data itself, preserving user privacy. In effect, Consent Managers are envisioned as “trusted intermediaries” – somewhat like account aggregators in the finance sector – but applied broadly across all sectors. By making consent management easier and more transparent, lawmakers hope Consent Managers will empower individuals to take control of their data choices without heavy technical know-how.
Key Responsibilities of Consent Managers
Under the DPDP Act and the draft rules (2025), a registered Consent Manager has several specific duties. In plain language, these include:
- Provide a user-friendly interface: The consent manager must build and maintain an accessible website and/or mobile app as the primary means for data principals to manage their consents. This interface should clearly show what data uses each consent covers and allow easy updates.
- Register with the Data Protection Board: Before operating, an entity must meet criteria (like minimum net worth, technical capacity) and apply to the Board for registration as a Consent Manager. Only registered managers can legally offer consent services.
- Manage and record consent decisions: The manager must enable principals to grant, deny, or withdraw consent, and maintain a record of each decision. This includes logging every time a consent is requested, given, or revoked, and noting which organization (data fiduciary) was involved.
- Ensure transparency to principals: Principals must be able to access their own consent records. The rules require consent managers to give people their data (the consent records) in a machine-readable format upon request.
- Preserve data security and privacy: Consent managers must implement strong safeguards so that no personal data is exposed or misused. In fact, the way sharing is set up, the consent manager should never see the actual personal data being transferred. Its role is limited to passing on encrypted data only if consent exists.
- Maintain records long-term: Consent records must be stored for at least seven years (or longer, if legally required). This helps both users and regulators audit past consent actions.
- Avoid conflicts of interest: The manager must stay independent of the companies whose data it touches. The rules forbid key personnel of a consent manager from having controlling financial stakes or employment with any data fiduciary.
- Undergo audits and compliance checks: The manager must have regular audits of its security and processes, and report findings to the Board. The Board has power to check compliance, instruct fixes, and even suspend a manager if it fails its duties.
In summary, a Consent Manager’s job is to build the consent dashboard, keep precise records of all consent choices, protect that information, and obey the rules laid out by the law and regulators. It acts on behalf of the user to ensure that data sharing only happens as intended.
How Consent Managers Work with Data Principals and Fiduciaries
Consent Managers form a bridge between data principals (users) and data fiduciaries (companies). Here’s how they typically interact with each group:
- With Data Principals: The user logs into the Consent Manager platform to set or change their preferences. For example, you might see a list of companies that want to use your data, along with the specific purposes. You can click “allow” or “deny” (or withdraw a previous consent). The Consent Manager records your choice and enforces it. If you later want to revoke consent, you can do it through the same dashboard. Essentially, the Consent Manager acts as your authorized representative in handling data permissions.
- With Data Fiduciaries: Companies that wish to process user data can either integrate with a Consent Manager or continue their own consent collection. If they use a Consent Manager, they will route consent requests through it. When a fiduciary needs proof that a user consented, it can check with the Consent Manager. In practice, the manager will ensure that data only flows to the company if consent is on record. Even if a company does not sign up with a manager, it must still keep machine-readable logs of the consents it gathered. Using a Consent Manager can help companies easily fulfill this obligation.
- Example Workflow: Imagine a fitness app (data fiduciary) wants to access your health records from a hospital. The app sends a request to the Consent Manager. The manager notifies you (the data principal) through its interface (perhaps as a push notification or dashboard message). You review and give permission. The Consent Manager then sends a notice to the hospital (the data provider) to share the specified data. The hospital sends only the data you allowed, via a secure API, to the fitness app. Throughout, the Consent Manager has logged your consent and ensured no data beyond what you agreed to is shared.
In this way, Consent Managers empower you to control the flow of your data across different services without needing to interact separately with each company. They keep everyone accountable: businesses must either accept the manager’s records or keep equivalent proof, and users have one place to see all their consents.
Why Consent Managers Matter for Privacy and User Control
Consent Managers are critical for strengthening data privacy and user empowerment in several ways:
- Simplifying Consent: By offering a single portal for permissions, they reduce “consent fatigue.” Instead of scrolling through a dozen websites to change privacy settings, you can do it all from one app. This convenience encourages users to pay attention to their privacy choices rather than hurriedly clicking “agree”.
- Empowering Data Principals: Acting “on behalf of” the user, the consent manager ensures that only the data you have explicitly allowed gets shared. You gain a clear view of which companies have your data and for what purpose. This transparency boosts trust: you can see and modify consents easily, and even file grievances through the manager if something goes wrong.
- Helping Businesses Comply: For data fiduciaries, using a consent manager can streamline compliance. The manager keeps detailed, machine-readable records of all consent interactions, which companies can access if needed (for audits or legal proof). This means businesses don’t have to individually invent their own systems to track consents. They can plug into the consent manager ecosystem instead. In effect, consent managers act as compliance enablers that ensure firms meet the DPDP Act’s rules on consent without reinventing the wheel.
- Improving Data Flows: Industry experts note that a good consent management system makes data sharing faster and more secure. Because the consent manager only relays data between parties when permission exists, it prevents unauthorized data leaks. The entire data transfer can happen via encrypted channels set up by the manager, which never holds the data itself.
Overall, Consent Managers can democratize data control. They shift some privacy responsibility from individuals (scanning every privacy policy) and businesses (building complex consent tools) to an independent intermediary whose job is to respect and enforce user choices. This is a powerful way to give users real ownership over their digital data.
Consent Managers vs GDPR and CCPA Roles
India’s Consent Manager is a novel concept that doesn’t have an exact counterpart in many other privacy laws, but we can draw some comparisons:
- GDPR (EU): Under the EU’s GDPR, organizations often appoint a Data Protection Officer (DPO) – an internal compliance role responsible for overseeing data protection efforts. However, a DPO is not the same as a Consent Manager. The DPO is an employee or consultant of the company and ensures the company follows GDPR rules; they do not manage individual user consents across different services. The GDPR does require businesses to obtain valid consent for many processing activities, but it does not mandate a central, user-facing consent portal. Instead, companies typically obtain consent through website pop-ups or forms. By contrast, India’s Consent Manager is meant to be an external, user-centered intermediary. It’s designed to let you manage consents in one place, whereas GDPR’s focus is more on how companies handle consent internally. (Both laws agree on high standards for consent – e.g. it must be clear, unambiguous and freely given.)
- CCPA/CPRA (California, USA): California’s privacy law is largely opt-out based (consumers can tell companies not to sell their data). It does not require a “consent” process for general processing, and there is no formal “Consent Manager” role. Under CCPA/CPRA, companies must publish a privacy notice and handle consumer requests (like deletion or access). Consumers can appoint an authorized agent to submit requests on their behalf, but that agent only handles specific requests (and is often a lawyer or family member, not a tech service). In other words, CCPA emphasizes compliance by businesses and the right to opt-out, rather than proactively collecting opt-in consent. There is no CCPA requirement analogous to a centralized consent dashboard. So India’s model is quite unique: it introduces a dedicated third-party platform for consent management, whereas GDPR/CCPA rely more on in-house processes and do not mandate such a user portal.
- Account Aggregators (India, Finance): For context, India does have a similar intermediary idea in finance: Account Aggregators (regulated by RBI) let you share financial data between institutions with your consent. The Consent Manager under the DPDP Act is inspired by this model, but it is broader and applies to personal data in any sector (health, e-commerce, etc.), not just finance. Like account aggregators, consent managers must be interoperable and ensure data privacy, but consent managers will be sector-agnostic.
In summary, while GDPR and CCPA focus on corporate obligations (often with roles like DPOs or privacy officers), India’s Consent Manager is a new concept placing more emphasis on a centralized, user-friendly consent interface. This reflects a policy choice: India wants a formal mechanism to simplify consent for users, even though it means adding another regulated player in the data ecosystem.
Challenges and Opportunities in Implementing Consent Managers
Challenges: Implementing consent managers at scale will not be easy. Observers note several potential hurdles:
- Interoperability: For consent managers to work, they must integrate with a vast number of companies and systems. Ensuring a common technical standard (APIs, data formats, security protocols) across all sectors will be complex. If standards are lacking, consent managers could struggle to connect with some services.
- Adoption by Companies: Data fiduciaries are not legally forced to use consent managers. Large companies with their own systems might see no benefit in switching. Without broad adoption, users might have to deal with multiple consent dashboards (one per manager), defeating the “single point of contact” goal. In short, fragmentation is a risk: different companies might work with different managers, or none at all, creating confusion for users.
- User Awareness and Trust: For consent managers to be effective, people must trust and use them. Building awareness that such platforms exist (and that it’s safe to give them their preferences) will take time. There may be initial skepticism: users might wonder, “Why should I trust a third party with my consent data?” Education and transparency will be key.
- Business Model: It’s unclear who pays for consent managers. Will data principals (users) need to subscribe? Will companies pay to connect with managers? Finding a sustainable model is a challenge. If users have to pay and companies don’t see value, adoption could stall.
- Regulatory Clarity: The DPDP Act has left many details to the rules (some still in draft form). Consent managers must await final regulations on exactly how to operate, how to handle disputes, timelines for responding to user queries, and so on. Early entrants may have to adapt as rules evolve.
- Data Security: Even though consent managers aren’t supposed to see personal data, they will handle sensitive consent records. They must be extremely secure to prevent breaches. Any failure could undermine the entire system’s credibility.
Opportunities: Despite challenges, consent managers offer many potential benefits:
- User Empowerment: They can dramatically increase users’ control over data. By simplifying consent, individuals (including those not tech-savvy) can make informed privacy choices. This transparency can build trust in the digital economy.
- Innovation and New Services: Tech companies and startups can innovate by building consent management platforms or enhancing related services. For example, a company could create a consent-management app that integrates loyalty programs or personal data vaults. Indeed, some experts point to existing digital initiatives like DigiLocker (for documents) as a model, suggesting consent managers could quickly become part of popular tech services.
- Compliance Efficiency: Businesses that embrace consent managers may benefit by offloading the heavy lifting of consent tracking. Smaller companies, especially, might rely on consent managers instead of building their own systems. This could reduce compliance costs and improve consistency.
- Ecosystem Growth: Over time, a consent manager system might foster a new industry. Think of how app stores and content aggregators created ecosystems – similarly, consent platforms could become hubs for user consent data. This could lead to innovations we don’t yet foresee, like personalized privacy dashboards or cross-industry data marketplaces (always with user consent, of course).
- Tighter Privacy Culture: Ultimately, successful consent management could lead to a stronger privacy culture in India. When people know they have a central way to control data, they may feel more confident sharing it for beneficial services (like personalized healthcare). Companies, in turn, may see higher user trust and willingness to share data when they know consent is properly managed.
In conclusion, Consent Managers are poised to play a transformational role in India’s data privacy future. They introduce a novel mechanism for user empowerment that goes beyond what many other countries have tried. If implemented well, they can streamline consent for everyone involved – individuals, businesses, and regulators – making the digital ecosystem both safer and more user-friendly. However, realizing this vision will require coordination, clear regulations, and ongoing trust-building.
