Crystallize logo

What Are Google Tag Manager Security Risks?

Google Tag Manager (GTM) is powerful precisely because it can inject and orchestrate third-party JavaScript at scale. That power is the attack surface. Real-world incidents have shown that GTM containers are being abused for e-skimming and data exfiltration, and research has documented privacy leaks and undeclared data sharing within the tag ecosystem.

The GTM Risks (What Can Go Wrong, and Why it Matters)

Google Tag Manager (GTM) is a potent tool, but like any powerful tool, it also comes with potential security risks. Understanding these risks can help you put measures in place to mitigate them.

Arbitrary JS via Custom HTML tags. Custom HTML runs with the privileges of your page. If a container (or user with publish rights) is compromised, attackers can keylog, skim cards, or inject malware—Magecart-style campaigns have done precisely this through GTM.

Custom HTML misuse is not hypothetical. In e-commerce, attackers have already used GTM containers to host e-skimmers, which steal credit card data without altering the source site code. Because GTM provides infrastructure for deploying arbitrary JavaScript, misuse is tempting to attackers.

Third-party tag supply chain. Even “template” tags often load external scripts. If a vendor or CDN is compromised, your site runs their malicious JS. SRI and CSP reduce blast radius but must be engineered deliberately.

Vendor compromise and supply-chain abuse make third-party tags dangerous. Because third-party tags often come from external domains, served via unverified external JS, they can be modified by attackers, or include dependencies that become compromised. Tag infrastructure gives attackers a stealthy path: once a malicious tag is accepted, it inherits the site’s trust (i.e., it looks like part of analytics or marketing).

Data layer leakage and consent gaps. Pushing PII or identifiers to the dataLayer (or firing tags before consent) can violate the law and trust. A 2023 study found widespread undeclared data sharing and potential legal violations in GTM tags. Consent Mode must be wired correctly and tested.

Performance as a security-adjacent risk. Tag sprawl slows Core Web Vitals, erodes UX, and forces risky shortcuts. GTM itself is light; what you load through it isn’t. Audits and “tags-last” policies measurably help.

Server-side containers = new surface. Server-side (sGTM) improves privacy/perf routing—but you’re now running infra that must be hardened, tested, and monitored like any service.

When you’re responsible for a web stack, you don’t just want a checklist of “risks to think about”—you want to understand how often these risks actually manifest, what the real impact tends to be, and how to prioritize mitigation.

Below is a risk-matrix that lays out likelihood × impact for key GTM-related risks

Risk

Relative Likelihood

Relative Impact

Custom HTML tag misuse / malicious code injection

High

High

Data layer leak/exposure of PII / undeclared data sharing

Medium-High

High

Third-party tag compromise (vendor breach, supply-chain issues, malicious external scripts)

Medium

Very High

Excessive permissions / poor access control

Medium

Medium-High

Consent / legal non-compliance

Medium

High

Performance degradation from tag overload or misfired tags

High

Medium

Server-side GTM container misconfiguration/infrastructure risk

Lower-Medium

High

How to Prioritize Mitigations Based on This Matrix?

From a senior developer’s standpoint, here’s how we’d allocate effort, given typical resource constraints:

  1. Lock down custom HTML tag usage. Make reviewing any custom HTML tag mandatory, limit who can publish custom code, and prefer built-in or vetted tag templates.
  2. Audit data layer content. Review what data is pushed (especially on sensitive pages—login, checkout, user profile). Ensure no PII or internal secrets are exposed. Enforce consent state before pushing data.
  3. Monitor GTM containers for unusual changes / external scripts. Use content monitoring, network request tracing, or alerts when new external script domains are introduced in tags.
  4. Strengthen permissions & access controls. Least privilege, role-based access (RBAC), separation of duties, and requiring approvals or peer reviews before publishing tags/containers. To protect your Google account (and by extension, your GTM account) from unauthorized access, enable two-factor authentication.
  5. Embed consent and legal compliance early in testing. Make sure test environments mimic actual user consent behavior. Rejecting consent must block tags that would otherwise run.
  6. Use performance monitoring tools (Lighthouse, RUM) regularly. Even “security” issues can become performance liabilities; tag load order, size, and number of requests are measurable. Keep performance thresholds and monitor with alerts.
  7. Be cautious with server-side containers. While server-side is powerful for privacy and performance, for many sites it introduces new infrastructure risk. Ensure secure hosting, proper key management, minimal attack surface, TLS, etc.

By understanding the potential security risks associated with Google Tag Manager and following these best practices, you can help ensure that your use of this powerful tool does not inadvertently introduce vulnerabilities into your website.

Performance-wise, implementing GTM the right way is as important. Learn how to reduce the impact of third-party Google Tag Manager code and check the GTM performance tricks and hacks we did to have minimal impact on our website's performance.