LW IT Solutions
« Blog Overview /Data Privacy/Tutorials / Tutorial: Configuring Geolocation Rules in Usercentrics
This post in other languages:

Tutorial: Configuring Geolocation Rules in Usercentrics

Tutorial: Configuring Geolocation Rules in Usercentrics
Contents
  1. Step 1: Creation of Settings IDs
  2. Step 2: Configuration of the GDPR Profile
  3. Step 3: Configuration of the Rest of World (RoW) Profile
  4. Step 4: Geolocation Mapping in the Admin Interface
  5. Step 5: Testing and Verification
  6. Sources

Adapting consent banners to regional privacy laws is a fundamental requirement for global websites. While the European Union enforces strict opt-in rules under the GDPR, other regions often permit opt-out models or informational notices, which significantly reduces friction for users. This guide explains how to properly configure Geolocation Rules using different Settings IDs in Usercentrics.

Step 1: Creation of Settings IDs

The implementation requires at least two separate configurations within the Usercentrics platform. One configuration acts as the primary profile (e.g., for the GDPR region), while a secondary configuration is created as an alternative profile (e.g., for the Rest of the World).

Diagram for the article: Creation of Settings IDs, Configuration of the GDPR Profile, Configuration of the Rest of World (RoW) Profile …
The sequence from the article in 5 steps: Creation of Settings IDs, Configuration of the GDPR Profile, Configuration of the Rest of World (RoW) Profile, Geolocation Mapping in the Admin Interface ….
  • Primary Settings ID: Designed for strict compliance (EU/EEA).
  • Alternative Settings ID: Designed for regions with fewer restrictions.

Step 2: Configuration of the GDPR Profile

The GDPR profile requires an explicit “Opt-in” setup. In the Admin Interface for this specific Settings ID, all data processing services (like Google Analytics or Meta Pixel) must be set to require explicit user consent before any tracking scripts are activated. The banner must provide clear “Accept” and “Deny” options.

Step 3: Configuration of the Rest of World (RoW) Profile

For the alternative Settings ID, a looser configuration is applied. Depending on internal legal guidelines, an “Opt-out” model can be selected. In this setup, services are activated by default, and the banner merely informs visitors about the tracking, providing a link to privacy settings where tracking can be disabled. Alternatively, the banner display can be completely deactivated for specific regions.

Step 4: Geolocation Mapping in the Admin Interface

Once both configurations are ready, the geographic routing must be established. This ensures the correct banner is served based on the visitor’s IP address.

  1. The navigation is directed to the Configuration menu, followed by the Geolocation Rules tab.
  2. The primary Settings ID (GDPR) is linked to the core website script.
  3. A new Geolocation Rule is created.
  4. The alternative Settings ID is selected from the dropdown menu.
  5. The target regions are assigned. For a “Rest of World” setup, it is highly efficient to define the GDPR profile as the default for EU/EEA countries and assign all non-European countries (e.g., USA, Canada, Australia, Asia) to the alternative Settings ID.

Step 5: Testing and Verification

Verification is crucial to ensure the correct logic is applied. A VPN connection is necessary for this step. The website is visited first with a European IP address (to verify the strict opt-in banner) and subsequently with an IP address from the United States or Asia (to verify the opt-out banner or the absence of the banner). The browser cache must be cleared between the tests.

Lukas Wojcik

Lukas Wojcik

Systems architect and technology enthusiast specializing in scalable tracking solutions, GMP Stack (GA4 & GTM), and robust backend architectures. Advocate for clean code and privacy-first design.

Get in Touch

Briefly describe your project or inquiry for a tailored response. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA.

2 comments

  1. Ewald Grabowski

    two separate configurations instead of one with exceptions is the version that is still comperhensible a year later — the exception approach always collapses under the second special case.

    The cost is duplication, though. When a new tool is added to the site, both profiles need it. How is that kept from drifting apart?

    1. Lukas Wojcik Author

      By treating one profile as the source and the other as a documented delta — not by trying to keep two full configurations equal from memory.

      The drift always runs the same way: a new service is added while working on one region, the other profile is not open at that moment, and nothing complains. Both banners keep working, and the service is simply governed by consent in one region and not in the other. That is precisely the error the setup exists to prevent, arriving through the back door.

      The cheap guard is a quarterly diff of the two service lists — most platforms can export them, and comparing two text files takes a minute. Where a service belongs to only one profile deliberately, a one-line note next to it turns a difference into a decision, and the next reviewer stops re-investigating it.

Write a comment

The email address is not published. Required fields are marked with an asterisk.

ALL ARTICLES & CATEGORIES

CCTV

Follow this category by RSS

Cloud & AI

Follow this category by RSS

Data Privacy

All 11 articles in this category Follow this category by RSS

Digital Analytics

All 44 articles in this category Follow this category by RSS

Digital Marketing

All 25 articles in this category Follow this category by RSS

IT & Networks

All 15 articles in this category Follow this category by RSS

Raspberry PI

Follow this category by RSS

Smart Home

All 11 articles in this category Follow this category by RSS

Web Development

Follow this category by RSS

WordPress Plugins & Tricks

Follow this category by RSS