Transparency Performance Reporting (TPR) is a novel approach to digital transparency and data control reporting , pioneered by the same group that specified Notice and Consent Receipts at the Kantara Initiativeand has just been submitted as a Kantara Recommendation for public comment by the Anchored Notice and Consent Receipts (ANCR) Work Group. TPR uses 4 transparency performance measures (TPIs) to measure the transparency of the PII Controller notice of risk to the personal data of the PII Principal. This represents a significant advancement for decentralising decentralizing digital identification and data surveillance governance within data flows.
The initial Transparency Performance Report v0.9 is posted for comment at the ANCR Wiki. Focused on evaluating the validity, security, sovereignty, and accountability of digital consent. The first tool to see secret surveillance, follows up the consent receipt specification by offering standard transparency over data sovereignty of consent and its validity in conjunction with digital identification systems.
“Transparency reporting is a revolution in digital governance. While we've had the standard for a consent receipt since 2014, standard transparency over whether consent is valid is now essential for using consent in international data transfers. Transparency reporting is crucial to scale meaningful consent, making it more than just another compliance tool,” says Mark Lizar, Editor of the ANCR v1. Transparency Performance Valid Consent Report, recently posted on Feb 14 for public review by the Kantara Initiative Community.
The ANCR TPR was developed through volunteer work over three years in the ANCR workgroup and represents a means of understanding and addressing ubiquitous platform and application surveillance and promotes glass-box security and privacy legal standards.
The ANCR WG transparency and consent work has a 'bottom-up' history, originating as in the Notice and Consent Receipt brought to Kantara in 2013 by the Open Notice Initiative, and before that, . It stemmed from the Identity Commons in California . This initiative just before that, an endeavor that aimed to create standards addressing to address “the Biggest Lie on the Internet,” a campaign against terms and conditions in support of do-not-track. Transparency performance reporting clarifies when a notice and consent receipt is required.The Notice and Internet”. In 2019 Kantara published the Consent Receipt v1.1 specification has been influential, eventually being drafted in conjunction with , which in 2020 was drafted into ISO/IEC 29184:2020 Online privacy notice and consent standard (29814), also known as , under JTC 1, SC 27, WG 5 – the international standards ISO work group focused on privacy and identity management. Beginning at Identity Commons, the project reached the international stage through the Kantara Initiative. The Notice and Consent receipt schema itself has now become an ISO/IEC technical standard, currently called The schema from the consent receipt is incorporated into the ISO/IEC 27560 Consent record information structure which may become freely available, as is the case with the ISO/IEC 29100:2024 Privacy framework.
The ANCR specification for Transparency Reporting introduces four transparency performance indicators (TPIs) to assess the validity of consent for digital identification management.
This TPR report, developed through volunteer work over three years in the ANCR workgroup, led by Gigi Agassani, Secretary and Sal D’Agostino, represents a significant step towards addressing big-tech surveillance and tracking, and promotes the glass-box Commonwealth security and privacy legal standards.
The timing of this announcement is significant, as the expected 2025 ratification of the international Commonwealth treaty, Convention 108+, will create the only global rules set Transparency performance reporting clarifies when a notice and consent receipt is required and its validity and provides a litmus test for valid consent.
The initial Transparency Performance Report is focused on evaluating the validity, security, sovereignty, and accountability of digital consent. It is a tool to expose dark patterns and secret surveillance. It builds on the consent receipt specification by adding standardized transparency with regards to the sovereignty of data and consent and its validity in conjunction with digital identification systems.
The four TPIs used in reporting measure:
Timing of notice
Regarding the initiation of surveillance
Content of notice
PII Controller required disclosures (.. Controller Record)
PII Controller Reverse Cookie (could be captured in a receipt and record for the PII Principal)
Who, where, what, why, how, when
Access and usefulness of notice
Taste of the Cookie
How good were the answers including their veracity to the above
Sovereignty of authority and security
Jurisdictions (Legal) of Principal and Controller
Cryptographic (Technical)
Linked by policy (objects)
The TPR document includes mapping to privacy frameworks including Convention 108+, a commonwealth data governance framework that cover 2.5 billion people and with it an interoperable set of requirements for security and privacy, that is rights, common-law , and Commons-based. This technical record foundation is suitable for a common set of rules allowing people to have their own authoritative records of digital identification relationships. Records of based. The mappings show how the TPIs address the requirements for records of processing activities (GDPR Article 30) that and enable services to be accountable to international (internet) standards for data governance. It creates a technical record foundation in a common set of rules allowing people to have their own authoritative records of digital identification relationships.