Heap · Heap Terms of Service · View original document ↗

Customer Obligation to Block Non-Permitted Personal Data

High severity High confidence Explicitdocumentlanguage Unique · 0 of 352 platforms
Get alerted the next time Heap changes these terms. Get same-day alerts →
Share 𝕏 Share in Share 🔒 PDF
Monitor governance changes for Heap Monitor emails you the same day this changes. The archive stays free.
Get same-day alerts →

Get the weekly research letter

Companies change their terms quietly. We read every version and catch what actually changed. One email a week on the changes that matter and what they mean. No account.

Document Record

What it is

The agreement places an affirmative technical obligation on Customer to prevent the transfer of any visitor Personal Data beyond the defined Permitted Personal Data categories (IP address, cookie ID, behavioral data, technical data) to Contentsquare, using blocking Scripts or other available tools across all relevant areas of Customer Sites and Apps.

This analysis describes what Heap's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology

ConductAtlas Analysis

Why it matters (compliance & governance perspective)

This provision places the technical and operational responsibility for data minimization on the Customer rather than Contentsquare, covering keystroke data, prefilled form data, HTML-displayed data, and API error logs. Failure to implement blocking mechanisms creates both contractual liability under Section 9.2 and potential regulatory exposure under applicable data protection laws.

Consumer impact (what this means for users)

Under this clause, Customer bears the affirmative obligation to configure and maintain technical controls that prevent Contentsquare from receiving visitor Personal Data beyond IP addresses, cookie identifiers, and behavioral data. The agreement states that if non-Permitted Personal Data is processed, Contentsquare may delete broader Visitor Data in the remediation process.

Cross-platform context

See how other platforms handle Customer Obligation to Block Non-Permitted Personal Data and similar clauses.

Compare across platforms →

Monitoring

Heap has changed this document before.

Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.

Get Monitor Or create a free account →
▸ View Original Clause Language DOCUMENT RECORD
"
Customer agrees and acknowledges that the CS Service is not intended for the processing of any Personal Data of Visitors other than the Permitted Personal Data. Therefore, Customer shall prevent the transfer of any Personal Data of Visitors (other than the Permitted Personal Data) to Contentsquare, including, but not limited to, by implementing the appropriate blocking Scripts as stated in the CS Documentation or by using other available tools and methods, on such relevant areas of the Customer Site(s) and browser back-end where Personal Data of Visitors (other than the Permitted Personal Data) may be: (a) collected through Customer's use of the CS Service (e.g., via cookies, JS or API Error logs or other network communication);(b) inputted by a Visitor (e.g., through keystrokes); or (c) displayed (e.g., prefilled, data within the HTML).

Excerpt from Heap's Terms of Service

ConductAtlas Analysis

Institutional analysis (regulatory & governance intelligence)

1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: This provision directly engages GDPR data minimization obligations (Article 5(1)(c)) and purpose limitation requirements, as well as the e-Privacy Directive's requirements regarding cookies and similar technologies. The UK GDPR, Singapore PDPA, and Japan APPI impose analogous obligations. Enforcement authorities include EU data protection authorities, the UK ICO, and their counterparts in Singapore and Japan. The allocation of technical compliance responsibility to Customer may affect joint or separate controllership analysis under GDPR. 2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The obligation to implement blocking Scripts on all relevant areas of Customer Sites and Apps (including form fields, keylogged areas, and prefilled data zones) requires ongoing technical maintenance. The document specifies that if non-Permitted Personal Data is inadvertently processed and cannot be selectively deleted, broader Visitor Data may be deleted, creating operational data loss risk. 3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU and UK customers face the highest exposure given GDPR and UK GDPR data minimization enforcement posture. Session replay and behavioral analytics tools have attracted regulatory scrutiny from EU data protection authorities regarding inadvertent capture of sensitive personal data (including health information, financial data, and authentication credentials entered into web forms). Customers in regulated sectors (healthcare, financial services) should assess sector-specific obligations. 4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Implementation teams must review all Customer Sites and Apps against the blocking Script requirements in the CS Documentation prior to deployment. Ongoing site changes (new form fields, new pages, updated APIs) require reassessment of blocking configurations. The contract allocates liability to Customer under Section 9.2 for claims arising from the nature, origin, or content of Customer Data processed by the CS Service. 5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Compliance teams should establish a deployment checklist referencing the CS Documentation blocking requirements, and implement a change management process to reassess blocking configurations when Customer Sites or Apps are modified. Data protection impact assessments (DPIAs) may be warranted for deployments involving sensitive data categories or vulnerable user populations. Customer-facing privacy notices should accurately describe the data collection and processing that occurs through Contentsquare's Scripts.

Full institutional analysis

Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.

Get same-day alerts when this changes → Get Analyst

Monitor: same-day alerts on the platforms you choose. Analyst: full institutional analysis.

Applicable agencies

  • FTC
    The FTC holds jurisdiction over unfair or deceptive data practices under Section 5 of the FTC Act, including failures to implement adequate technical controls to prevent collection of personal data inconsistent with disclosed privacy practices.
    File a complaint →

Provision details

Document information
Document
Heap Terms of Service
Entity
Heap
Document last updated
May 5, 2026
Tracking information
First tracked
July 12, 2026
Last verified
July 12, 2026
Record ID
CA-P-074349
Document ID
CA-D-00705
Evidence Provenance
Source URL
Wayback Machine
Content hash (SHA-256)
2473664e4d72b3895db4decc2c14bf585534ef5a947445a906324608eafc4131
Analysis generated
July 12, 2026 15:50 UTC
Methodology
Evidence
✓ Snapshot stored   ✓ Hash verified
Citation Record
Entity: Heap
Document: Heap Terms of Service
Record ID: CA-P-074349
Captured: 2026-07-12 15:50:23 UTC
SHA-256: 2473664e4d72b389…
URL: https://conductatlas.com/platform/heap/heap-terms-of-service/provision/CA-P-074349/customer-obligation-to-block-non-permitted-personal-data/
Accessed: July 23, 2026
Permanent archival reference. Stable identifier suitable for legal filings, compliance documentation, and research citation.
Classification
Severity
High
Categories

Other risks in this policy

Compliance Governance Intelligence

Need to monitor specific governance provisions?

Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.

Arbitration clauses AI governance Data rights Indemnification Retention policies
Get Compliance

Or start with Monitor →

Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does Heap's Customer Obligation to Block Non-Permitted Personal Data clause do?

This provision places the technical and operational responsibility for data minimization on the Customer rather than Contentsquare, covering keystroke data, prefilled form data, HTML-displayed data, and API error logs. Failure to implement blocking mechanisms creates both contractual liability under Section 9.2 and potential regulatory exposure under applicable data protection laws.

How does this clause affect you?

Under this clause, Customer bears the affirmative obligation to configure and maintain technical controls that prevent Contentsquare from receiving visitor Personal Data beyond IP addresses, cookie identifiers, and behavioral data. The agreement states that if non-Permitted Personal Data is processed, Contentsquare may delete broader Visitor Data in the remediation process.

Is ConductAtlas affiliated with Heap?

No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Heap.