Yes if it meets the GDPR Art. 4(11) and Art. 7 requirements: freely given, specific, informed, unambiguous, with a clear affirmative action. A chatbot conversation that explains the purpose, asks for explicit agreement, and logs the decision satisfies all four. What it must avoid is dark patterns, pre-ticked options, and consent bundled with other terms. The system prompt should enforce per-purpose granularity and explicit affirmative wording from the user.

Timestamp (UTC), the user identifier (email, account ID, anonymous session token), the exact wording presented (so you can prove what they were asked), the user's response (granted/refused/withdrawn), IP and user agent (for cross-checking), and any additional context (which page, which feature). Store all of this in a dedicated table or custom post type and never modify rows after the fact, only append new rows.

You store them. Write a structured document for each processing purpose: what data is processed, lawful basis (consent, contract, legitimate interest, etc.), retention period, recipients. SleekAI reads those into the conversation. The bot is not allowed to invent a lawful basis. If the user asks about a purpose not in the policy, the bot says so and routes the question to your DPO.

Similar pattern with different terminology. CCPA uses 'right to know, right to delete, right to opt out of sale or sharing'. The bot can explain each right, route opt-out and delete requests to the appropriate workflow, and capture the verifiable consumer request with timestamp. The system prompt is configured per applicable regime, and a multibot setup can run distinct EU and California flows from one site.

Yes, and it should. GDPR Art. 7(3) requires withdrawal to be as easy as giving consent. The bot offers a 'withdraw consent' option, logs the withdrawal with its own timestamp, and triggers any downstream actions (remove from email list, stop processing for the withdrawn purpose). The original grant row stays in the log so the audit trail covers both events.

No. A cookie banner is the right tool for the broad allow/deny up front. The chatbot is the right tool for purpose-specific consent (marketing email, data sharing for a feature, subject access requests). Use them together: banner for cookies, bot for granular per-purpose consent decisions that the banner is too crude to capture. Both write to a unified consent log so your DPO has one source of truth.

On your WordPress database, typically in a custom table like wp_sleek_ai_consent_log or a custom post type with structured postmeta. Some teams mirror it to a dedicated compliance system (OneTrust, Cookiebot) via webhook, but the source of truth stays on your site. Backups follow your normal database backup schedule. Retention should match the longer of the underlying processing purpose retention or 3 years after withdrawal.

No. The bot handles routine consent capture and basic privacy-notice questions. Anything that involves rights enforcement (Art. 15 subject access, Art. 17 erasure, Art. 21 objection to processing, complaints) is escalated to your DPO contact, with the conversation summary attached. The system prompt explicitly defers to a human for any rights-exercise request beyond a simple opt-in or opt-out toggle.