Privacy policy generator
for DPDP, GDPR and CCPA.
Answer a dozen questions and get a privacy policy that names your processors, states a lawful basis per regime, and lists the rights each of those regimes actually gives your users. Free, no signup, and nothing you type leaves your browser.
What a privacy policy has to contain
Every regime asks for roughly the same disclosures in a different order, which is why one document can serve several of them if it is structured carefully. What differs is not the topics but the specificity each law demands, and the consequences of vagueness.
| Disclosure | DPDP Act 2023 | GDPR / UK GDPR | CCPA / CPRA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identity and contact of the controller | Required | Required, Art. 13(1)(a) | Required |
| Purposes of processing | Required, itemised per purpose | Required, Art. 13(1)(c) | Required, by category |
| Lawful basis | Consent, or a Section 7 legitimate use | One of six bases, Art. 6 | Not framed as a basis; disclosure of business purpose |
| Categories of personal data | Required | Required where not collected from the individual | Required, by statutory category |
| Recipients and processors | Required | Required, Art. 13(1)(e) | Required, including any sale or sharing |
| Retention period | Required | Required, or the criteria used, Art. 13(2)(a) | Required, per category |
| Rights available | Access, correction, erasure, nomination, grievance | Access, rectification, erasure, restriction, portability, objection | Know, delete, correct, opt out, limit, non-discrimination |
| How to withdraw consent | Required, and must be as easy as giving it | Required where processing rests on consent | Opt-out of sale or sharing |
| Complaint route | Your grievance officer, then the Data Protection Board | Your supervisory authority | The Attorney General |
| Cross-border transfers | Permitted except to restricted countries | SCCs or an adequacy decision, Art. 46 | Disclosure only |
A single policy can satisfy all three, but only if each regime's specific language is present rather than averaged away.
The notice and the policy are not the same document
This is the distinction that generated policies most often flatten, and under the DPDP Act it is the one that matters most. A privacy policy is a standing reference document: long, complete, linked from your footer, written to be looked up. A notice under Section 5 is short, itemised, and given at or before the moment you collect the data, tied to the specific purposes you are asking consent for.
Linking a privacy policy from a cookie banner and calling that notice does not satisfy Section 5. You need both, they serve different functions, and the notice has to be versioned so you can later show which version a given person actually saw. If you need the second document, the consent notice template is built for exactly that.
Six things that make a policy fail review
These are the findings that recur, in roughly the order a reviewer trips over them. None of them are hard to fix at the drafting stage and all of them are expensive to fix after publication, because a material change to a privacy policy can require fresh consent.
- "Trusted third parties" instead of names. The single most common finding. If you share data with AWS, Stripe and Zendesk, the policy says AWS, Stripe and Zendesk. A reviewer reads an unnamed list as a company that does not know its own data flows
- A retention period with nothing enforcing it. Stating ninety days and having no deletion job is worse than stating nothing: you have documented the standard you are failing
- GDPR wording pasted into a DPDP context. DPDP has no general legitimate-interests basis. A policy claiming one for Indian processing is asserting a basis the Act does not provide
- Rights you cannot actually deliver. Promising erasure within thirty days when the data lives in six systems and a warehouse is a commitment you will breach on the first request
- No effective date, or one that never moves. A reviewer cannot tell whether the document describes the system as built or as imagined two years ago
- Silence about cookies while the site sets them. The cookie scan takes a minute and tells you whether your own policy is accurate
After you publish it
A privacy policy is a claim about how your systems behave. It stays true only as long as nobody adds an analytics tag, a new processor or a new purpose without updating it, which in practice means it starts drifting the week after you publish.
Two habits keep it honest. Re-read it whenever you add a vendor that touches personal data, and re-run a cookie scan quarterly so the tracking section reflects what actually fires. When a change is material (a new purpose, a new category of data, a new recipient) the DPDP Act and the GDPR both treat that as requiring a fresh notice and, where consent is the basis, fresh consent. Versioning the document is what lets you show which policy a given consent was given against.
The things people ask us
Is a generated privacy policy legally valid?
A generated policy is a well-structured starting point, not legal advice. It is valid to the extent that it accurately describes what your systems actually do, which is something only you can confirm. The common failure is not bad drafting, it is a policy that describes intentions rather than the system as built. Have counsel review it before you publish.
Do I need a separate privacy policy and consent notice?
Under the DPDP Act, yes. A privacy policy is a standing reference document. A Section 5 notice is short, itemised and given at or before collection, tied to the specific purposes you are seeking consent for. Linking your privacy policy from a banner does not satisfy the notice obligation.
Can one policy cover DPDP, GDPR and CCPA at once?
Yes, and most companies selling internationally need it to. The structure is common across all three; what differs is specificity. The risk is averaging them into vague language that satisfies none. Each regime's lawful-basis framing and rights list should appear explicitly rather than being merged.
How often should a privacy policy be updated?
Whenever the underlying processing changes (a new processor, a new purpose, a new category of data) and on a scheduled review at least annually. Where a change is material and your basis is consent, both DPDP and GDPR treat that as requiring fresh notice and fresh consent, not a silent edit.
Do I have to name every third party we share data with?
You should. The GDPR permits naming categories of recipients, but naming the actual processors is the stronger position and is what security reviewers and auditors look for. A policy that says "trusted third parties" is the most common finding in a privacy review.
Does this tool send my answers anywhere?
No. The generator runs entirely in your browser. Nothing you type is transmitted to us, stored, or logged, and there is no account to create. You can confirm this by opening your browser's network tab while you use it.
Stop generating documents. Start evidencing controls.
These tools write a document from what you tell them. The platform writes one from what your systems are actually doing, and keeps the proof behind it.