CX research and other sources that have informed the creation of the CX Guidelines and Standards.
‣
CX research findings
The research findings in this section are references used to support the development of the standards and guidelines. The references in this table should not be interpreted as requirements. All of the Data Standard Body's reports relating to consumer research and community engagement can be found on CX reports.
Ref | Theme | Findings | Source | Version |
1 | Communicate motives for data requests | Participants needed clarity around the value proposition of sharing their data as well as data recipient motivations for wanting access to that data. Participants were suspicious of data recipient motives, and wanted assurance that their purpose for gaining access to that data was not just to advertise their services or sell their data to advertisers. | Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 63 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
2 | Clearly explain the purposes of data requests | Data recipients should clearly explain why data is being requested. They should be relevant to the features/product that consumers are using.
Most participants commented that having this detailed information throughout the consent flow was helpful. Details of how their data was going to be used, and why this was needed in the data cluster components was particularly helpful and reassuring. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 38
Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 36 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
3 | Data minimisation principle; consumer control | Follow the data minimisation principle to only ask for what is required. Research has shown that participants did not want to share personal data (e.g contact details or mailing address) that was perceived to have no relevance to receiving the product/service they are sharing their data for. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 38 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
4 | Consent duration | Having the ability to choose the duration of consent is ideal. However participants were comfortable with the 12 months period, knowing that they can withdraw consent at anytime. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 39 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
5 | Data sharing duration | Participants preferred to share enough data to enable them to find useful insights, but not their full transaction history. This generally aligned with the duration of billing cycles, or duration of seasonal changes in behaviour. | Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 64 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
6 | Provide a clear purpose of accessing the data history | Participants needed to understand the purpose of sharing their data history. Adding this purpose can help clarify the difference between the request for historical data vs consent durations, as this was a point of confusion to participants in Phase 2 research. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 40 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
7 | Consent withdrawal | Add withdrawal information and clearly explain the consequences of what happens to their data when they stop sharing. Many participants in research were not able to confidently articulate the consequences of withdrawal when this information was not present. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 41 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
8 | Accordion menus | Accordion menus reduce cognitive overload while also allowing more information to be revealed if desired. | Phase 1, Research report, page 55 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
9 | Account selection | Account(s) selection is appreciated. Many participants showed strong appreciation for this step as there were certain accounts that they did not want to share data from. | Phase 1, Research report, page 69 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
10 | One Time Password language | Clearly explain the use of verification code as a One Time Password. Some participants during research expected to enter their banking password following the Customer ID. Emphasising the difference can aid in a smoother authentication process. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 53 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
11 | One Time Password security measure | Apply a time limit to the code for additional security measure. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 53 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
12 | One Time Password delivery | The code should also be delivered by other methods such as email as alternative to SMS via mobile number. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 53 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
13 | A CDR logo should be strengthened by linking it to accreditation information | A CDR logo and accreditation should be easily verifiable by linking it to the data recipient’s specific accreditation data on a government website. | Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 4 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
14 | Data recipients should provide information about measures taken in case of security breaches | Data recipients should clearly state, in an accessible and highly visible section of the app, the security measures that are being taken in order to secure any data being shared with them. They should also outline what will occur in the event of a data breach, including any notification protocols for consumers and steps taken to re-secure their data. These consequences should take into account the sensitivity of the data being stored, and the scope and consequences of the breach. | Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 4 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
15 | CDR Help | CDR helpline or contact information should be available in multiple languages. | Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 4 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
16 | Accessibility of CDR information
| CDR information site should have full translation functionality and be fully screen-reader accessible. | Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 4 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
17 | The use of a One Time Password was perceived as secure | Authentication with One Time Password was seen as a smooth and more seamless process. The use of a verification code in this authentication method provided a sense of security for participants as they were used to receiving verification codes from their bank as an extra layer of security measure (i.e. 2-Factor authentication).
“Log in to the bank inside the app and with verification code as well. Feels more secure” - Phase 2, Round 2, Participant 12 | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 52 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
18 | Expectations of data once consent is expired/withdrawn | Phase 1: Most participants expected data to be deleted upon revocation, including 54% of surveyed participants.
Phase 2: All participants expected that their data will be completely deleted/destroyed once data sharing had stopped. However, when stated that their data would be de-identified, participants feel uncomfortable which led to distrust, as it was perceived that their data would still be accessible. | Phase 1 CX report, page 48
Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 66 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
19 | Presentation of data request information | Having all information available on one page but segmented for readability made participants feel the process of data sharing was more transparent and easier to understand. | Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 49 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
20 | Provide a record of consent | The participants found it helpful to have a record of the consent process they had just completed and several participants noted that the confirmation email sent to them reinforced the trustworthiness of the overall process.
“That’s good to know because I'm guessing... If I had a problem I could ring them and quote that number and then yeah. Okay. So that's reassuring.” - MH
“Cool, there's another consent receipt. I think these are really great, I love these.” - SK | Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 35 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
21 | Concerns about banking login information | Participants were not comfortable with putting sensitive information into the app such as passwords and customer IDs, particularly during redirection. Some stating that it could potentially lead to phishing scams. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 23 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
22 | Clearly explain the redirection steps to the data holder space | Some participants correlated ‘redirected’ to being redirected to a 3rd party as the intermediary service to securely connect the app to the bank. While this wasn’t causing any issues or concerns of drop out, it might be something to watch out for. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 54 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
23 | The CDR logo helps facilitate consumer trust | The majority of participants found the CDR logo to be helpful in identifying the data recipient as trustworthy. For some participants, the CDR logo drew their attention to the data holder’s Consumer Data Right Accreditation details; for others, the simple check mark symbol in itself created a positive association with trust and security. | Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 33
Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 37 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
24 | Key and persistent concerns and anxieties about data sharing | Participants often imagined that the worst would happen to their data. To anticipate and assuage these concerns, data recipients should clearly state what data will not be used for. The following are key and persistent concerns and anxieties about data use.
These include:
- Selling data for marketing purposes
- Unauthorised access by other parties, including government - CDR data being used to discriminate
- Data use is unclear
- Lack of trust in CDR participants to honour terms | Phase 1 and Phase 2 research | 1.4.0 or earlier |
25 | Clearly articulate the sharing data value proposition | Data recipients should clearly explain the value added by sharing data to increase the chances of consumer adoption. Introducing the concept of data sharing without a clear value proposition will not be conducive to adoption.
“Without not knowing much more about it I’ll probably not proceed... I’ll just close it” -Phase 1, 5.3 Participant 20 | Phase 1 Research report, page 52 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
26 | Consent should be a genuine choice and not a precondition of service | This consent flow model should not make consumers feel that access to their data and the security risks therein is the ‘cost’ of receiving services or benefits. Participants felt in general that they have little control over how their personal information is shared currently. This continual disempowerment has led to a state of apathy and indifference about how their personal data is used.
“I probably would like to have a little bit more to feel like you're not being spied on all the time, it would be nice. But, I guess, that's, once again, just gonna happen. You can't stop it.” - Phase 2, Stream 2
Vulnerable users have more concerns about data misuse and were particularly concerned that their data would continue to exist in the system after withdrawing consent. Thus data recipients should be required to explain how consumer data will be handled during sharing and opt-out. | Phase 2, Stream 2 Research report, page 16
Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 4 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
27 | Data recipients should use authenticators that are familiar to consumers | Participants from research noted that receiving verification codes from their bank as an extra layer of security measure is familiar to them. The verification code provides a sense of security and prevents consumers from having to change known behaviour. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, pages 52, 53 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
28 | Product value proposition | Propensity to willingly share (consent) data is largely the result of expected value. Without a clear, compelling and timely value proposition, there is no reason to consent. | Phase 2, Stream 2 Research report, page 9 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
29 | Withdrawal language | Participants were not always clear what ‘revoke’ meant. Plain language phrase such as 'stop sharing' is recommended to replace this. | Phase 2, Stream 3 Research report, page 30 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
30 | Critical information should be up-front and on-screen | Critical information such as consequences of not consenting and ability to withdraw consent should be highlighted on-screen and should not require additional clicks to access. Where including additional information is not feasible, it should be clearly hyperlinked and easy to find. | Phase 2, Stream 1 Research report, page 70 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
31 | Importance of value proposition | Participants’ willingness to actively share information was tied directly to the value they expected to receive in return. | Phase 2, Stream 2 Research report, page 36 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
32 | Comprehension of the consequences of consent withdrawal | It is imperative that consumers understand the consequence of sharing prior to withdrawal of consent. Research has shown that consumers tend to take a rushed approach to stop sharing which resulted in participants backtracking to better understand consequence. This is known as 'inattentional blindness.' | Phase 2, Stream 2 Research report, page 19 | 1.4.0 or earlier |
33 | Retaining data for legal reasons | When retaining redundant data for legal purposes, participants had questions around what constituted as ‘legal/audit’ purposes’, with participants keen to understand what may trigger such a situation. | CX Research Phase 3, Round 3 report, page 43 | 1.11.0 |
34 | Amending consent: benefits | As has been noted with past rounds of research, the perceived benefit of a use case plays an important role in a participant’s willingness to provide consent. When deciding whether or not to provide their consent to extend or amend an existing consent, participants expressed the critical importance of understanding what benefits the service has provided first. | CX Research Phase 3, Round 4-5 report, 33 | 1.11.0 |
35 | Amending consent: consent expiry | Participants had a broad understanding of the renewal process based on the presented prototypes. This included the exptectation that not acting on a renewal notification would result in the expiry of their data sharing arrangement. | CX Research Phase 3, Round 4-5 report, page 31 | 1.11.0 |
36 | Amending consent: reminders | Participants expressed both a high expectation and appetite for receiving reminders to warn them that their consent was about to expire. | CX Research Phase 3, Round 4-5 report, page 35 | 1.11.0 |
37 | Amending consent: ability to withdraw consent | Some participants expected a clearer ‘withdraw consent’ option when reviewing the existing arrangement. | CX Research Phase 3, Round 4-5 report, page 31 | 1.11.0 |
38 | Amending consent: consequences of expiry | Consequences of expiry was seen as equally as important as benefits for continued sharing. To make an informed decision, it was important for participants to understand what would happen if they did not provide consent, including how it would impact their existing service. | CX Research Phase 3, Round 4-5 report, page 34 | 1.11.0 |
All sources
The consultations, research reports and guidance articles in this section are references used to support the development of the standards and guidelines.
‣
Consultations
Title | Author | Date published | URL |
|---|---|---|---|
Change Request 703: CX Guidelines | Pre-consent | Data Standards Body (DSB) | June 19, 2025 | github.com |
Change Request 702: CX Guidelines | Required and voluntary data - Authorisation | Data Standards Body (DSB) | June 19, 2025 | github.com |
Change Request 701: CX Guidelines | Data Language Standards changes stemming from CD367 | Data Standards Body (DSB) | June 6, 2025 | github.com |
Change Request 700: CX Guidelines | Redirect to App (R2A) CX Guidelines Changes | Data Standards Body (DSB) | June 5, 2025 | github.com |
Change Request 691: CX Guidelines | Expanding Amending BCDC CX Guidelines | Data Standards Body (DSB) | April 15, 2025 | github.com |
Change Request 693: Historical date ranges for Authorisations | Data Standards Body (DSB) | April 15, 2025 | github.com |
Consultation Draft 369: Redirect to App - Draft Standards | Data Standards Body (DSB) | April 4, 2025 | github.com |
Consultation Draft 367: March 2025 Rules - Draft Standards | Data Standards Body (DSB) | March 14, 2025 | github.com |
Change Request 684: CX Guidelines | ADI or NBL to hold CDR data as a DH | Data Standards Body (DSB) | February 5, 2025 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 361: Energy LCCD Phase 2 | Data Standards Body (DSB) | December 18, 2024 | github.com |
Change Request 674: CX Guidelines | Updates stemming from 2024 Consent Review changes | Data Standards Body (DSB) | October 2, 2024 | github.com |
Change Request 659: Enhancing CDR Adoption: Streamlining Account Selection and Improving Data Transparency | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 12, 2024 | github.com |
Consumer Data Right Rules: consent and operational enhancement amendments consultation | The Treasury | August 9, 2024 | treasury.gov.au |
Change Request 646: Clarify selection of Trusted Adviser in the CX Guidelines | Data Standards Body (DSB) | June 19, 2024 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 350: August 2024 Rules - Standards Impacts | Data Standards Body (DSB) | June 6, 2024 | github.com |
Noting Paper 348: Use Case Enablement Experiment: Account Origination | Data Standards Body (DSB) | April 22, 2024 | github.com |
Draft CX Guidelines (DH Dashboards - Amending Authorisations) | Data Standards Body (DSB) | April 18, 2024 | mailchi.mp |
Change Request 633: Collection Consents - Authorisation Amendment | Data Standards Body (DSB) | February 12, 2024 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 333: Business Consumer Provisions | Data Standards Body (DSB) | October 21, 2023 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 334: Data Holder Dashboards | Data Standards Body (DSB) | October 21, 2023 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 327: Authentication Uplift Phase 1 | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 29, 2023 | github.com |
Noting Paper 326: Authentication Uplift Context | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 29, 2023 | github.com |
Consumer Data Right rules – Consent Review and operational enhancements design papers | The Treasury | August 25, 2023 | treasury.gov.au |
Design Paper 321: Consumer Data Right Consent Review | Data Standards Body (DSB) | July 26, 2023 | github.com |
Noting Paper 296: Offline Customer Authentication | Data Standards Body (DSB) | March 17, 2023 | github.com |
Change Request 574: Additional functionality to support account selection | Data Standards Body (DSB) | January 24, 2023 | github.com |
Noting Paper 280: The CX of Authentication Uplift | Data Standards Body (DSB) | December 7, 2022 | github.com |
Noting Paper 279: Accessibility Improvement Plan | Data Standards Body (DSB) | December 6, 2022 | github.com |
Change Request 557: Withdrawal of a SUI by an Account Holder leaving an "Empty" Authorisation | Data Standards Body (DSB) | November 26, 2022 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 276: July 2023 Rules | Standards Impacts | Data Standards Body (DSB) | November 3, 2022 | github.com |
Noting Paper 273: Consent Review | Data Standards Body (DSB) | October 20, 2022 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 222: CX Standards | Insights and Trusted Adviser Disclosure Consents | Data Standards Body (DSB) | November 4, 2021 | github.com |
Noting Paper 207: Draft v3 Rules Analysis | Anticipated Data Standards | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 4, 2021 | github.com |
Draft v3 Rules consultation | The Treasury | July 1, 2021 | treasury.gov.au |
Decision Proposal 187: CX Standards | Disclosure Consents | Data Standards Body (DSB) | May 21, 2021 | github.com |
Design Paper 176: an ‘opt-out’ data sharing model for joint accounts in the banking and energy sectors | Data Standards Body (DSB) | April 26, 2021 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 168: Separate Consents | Authorisation Withdrawal | Data Standards Body (DSB) | February 26, 2021 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 162: CX Standards | Joint Accounts (see concept Authorisation flow) | Data Standards Body (DSB) | February 15, 2021 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 162: CX Standards | Joint Accounts (see concept Notification Settings) | Data Standards Body (DSB) | February 15, 2021 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 162: CX Standards | Joint Accounts (see concept Ceasing joint account data sharing) | Data Standards Body (DSB) | February 15, 2021 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 160: CX Standards | Non-individuals | Partnerships | Secondary users (see concepts 1.1 Accounts not shown | Generic message, 1.2 Sharing rights request, 1.3 Accounts shown | Generic message - overlay) | Data Standards Body (DSB) | February 9, 2021 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 160: CX Standards | Non-individuals | Partnerships | Secondary users (see concept 2 Removing secondary user instruction) | Data Standards Body (DSB) | February 9, 2021 | github.com |
Noting Paper 157: CX Standards Arising from v2 Rules | Data Standards Body (DSB) | January 29, 2021 | github.com |
Decision Proposal 144: Amending Consent | Authorisation Flow | Data Standards Body (DSB) | December 4, 2020 | github.com |
Draft v2 Rules consultation (see concept 4.2 Disclosure) | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | November 18, 2020 | accc.gov.au |
Draft v2 Rules consultation (see concept 7.2 Amending consents) | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | November 18, 2020 | accc.gov.au |
Draft v2 Rules consultation (see concept 7.5 Data Holder Dashboard) | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | November 18, 2020 | accc.gov.au |
Draft v2 Rules consultation (see concept 5.1 TA disclosure) | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | November 18, 2020 | accc.gov.au |
Draft v2 Rules consultation (see concept 5.2 Insight disclosure) | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | November 18, 2020 | accc.gov.au |
Draft v2 Rules consultation (see concept 7.1 Joint accounts) | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | November 18, 2020 | accc.gov.au |
CX Workshop: Error handling | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | August 1, 2020 | miro.com |
Decision Proposal 127: CX Guidelines for Enhanced Error Handling | Data Standards Body (DSB) | May 21, 2020 | github.com |
CX Workshop: Manage and withdraw | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 1, 2019 | web.archive.org |
CX Workshop: Joint Accounts | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 1, 2019 | miro.com |
‣
Research
Title | Author | Date published | URL |
|---|---|---|---|
Patterns in the dark – Deceptive practices in online interactions | University of South Australia | August 8, 2024 | dsb.gov.au |
Consent Review Research Report | Data Standards Body (DSB) | July 26, 2023 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Authentication Uplift - Comparison Report | Data Standards Body (DSB) | June 21, 2023 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Decoupled Research Report | Data Standards Body (DSB) | May 28, 2023 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
App/Browser-to-App Research Report | Data Standards Body (DSB) | December 15, 2022 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
One Time Password Research Report | Data Standards Body (DSB) | December 15, 2022 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Accessibility improvement plan for the Data Standards Chair | PwC's Indigenous Consulting and the Centre for Inclusive Design (PIC) | October 31, 2022 | dsb.gov.au |
Accessibility obligations and conventions framework for the Data Standards Chair | PwC's Indigenous Consulting and the Centre for Inclusive Design (PIC) | July 30, 2022 | dsb.gov.au |
Disclosure Consent Research Report | Data Standards Body (DSB) | April 4, 2022 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Report 4: My Data, my choices - Consumer consent and the CDR | Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC) | April 1, 2022 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Report 3: Vulnerability, Capability, Opportunity | Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC) | May 1, 2021 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Report 2: Joint Accounts and the Consumer Data Right | Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC) | December 1, 2020 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Report 1: Stepping Towards Trust | Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC) | September 1, 2020 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Phase 3, Round 1 and 2 Research Report | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 31, 2020 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Phase 3, Round 3 Research Report | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 31, 2020 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Phase 3, Round 4 and 5 Research Report | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 31, 2020 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Phase 3, Round 6 Research Report | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 31, 2020 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Phase 3, Round 8 Research Summary [PDF] | Data Standards Body (DSB) | August 31, 2020 | github.com |
Phase 2, Stream 1 Research Report | GippsTech | July 31, 2019 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Phase 2, Stream 2 Research Report | Greater than X | July 31, 2019 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Phase 2, Stream 3 Research Report | Tobias | July 31, 2019 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Phase 2, Data Cluster Language Survey | Data Standards Body (DSB) | July 31, 2019 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
Phase 1, Research Report | Tobias | February 28, 2019 | cx.dsb.gov.au |
‣
Guidance
Title | Author | Date published | URL |
|---|---|---|---|
CDR Support Portal: Guidance on Energy Last Consumer Change Date (LCCD) | Data Standards Body (DSB) | April 15, 2025 | cdr-support.zendesk.com |
Joint account implementation guidance | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | February 4, 2025 | www.cdr.gov.au |
CDR outsourcing arrangements - Fact sheet | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | December 20, 2024 | www.cdr.gov.au |
CDR representatives - Fact sheet | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | December 20, 2024 | www.cdr.gov.au |
CDR business consumers - Fact sheet | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | July 9, 2024 | www.cdr.gov.au |
CDR Support Portal: Historical transaction data: Earliest Holding Day | Data Standards Body (DSB) | June 28, 2024 | cdr-support.zendesk.com |
Guide to developing a CDR policy | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | June 25, 2024 | oaic.gov.au |
Trusted advisers in the Consumer Data Right system | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | January 15, 2024 | oaic.gov.au |
OAIC Consumer Data Right insights | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | January 15, 2024 | www.oaic.gov.au |
CDR logo - Fact sheet | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | December 18, 2023 | www.cdr.gov.au |
Privacy Safeguard 1 | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | November 20, 2023 | oaic.gov.au |
Privacy Safeguard 5 | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | November 20, 2023 | oaic.gov.au |
Privacy Safeguard 10 | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | November 20, 2023 | oaic.gov.au |
Privacy Safeguard 12 | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | November 20, 2023 | oaic.gov.au |
Consumer Data Right insights | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | November 10, 2023 | oaic.gov.au |
Consent (Data minimisation principle) | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | November 10, 2023 | oaic.gov.au |
CDR Support Portal: Authorisation States for Joint Account and Secondary User Sharing | Data Standards Body (DSB) | March 16, 2023 | cdr-support.zendesk.com |
CDR Support Portal: Offline Customer Guidance | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | April 6, 2022 | cdr-support.zendesk.com |
Security Profile: Authentication Flows | Data Standards Body (DSB) | January 1, 2022 | consumerdatastandardsaustralia.github.io |
CDR Support Portal: Guidance on screen-scraping | Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) | March 23, 2021 | cdr-support.zendesk.com |
Privacy obligations | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | January 1, 2021 | oaic.gov.au |
CDR Support Portal: Convention CDS-DC-0015 | Data Standards Body (DSB) | December 22, 2020 | cdr-support.zendesk.com |
CDR Support Portal: Convention CDS-DC-0016 | Data Standards Body (DSB) | December 22, 2020 | cdr-support.zendesk.com |
Technical Standards: Request Object | Data Standards Body (DSB) | January 1, 2019 | consumerdatastandardsaustralia.github.io |
‣
Other
Title | Author | Date published | URL |
|---|---|---|---|
Australian Community Attitudes to Privacy Survey 2023 | Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) | August 1, 2023 | oaic.gov.au |
Regional population by age and sex, Data cubes, Population estimates by age and sex, by SA2, 2020 | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | August 27, 2021 | abs.gov.au |
National, state and territory population, States and territories | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | July 7, 2021 | abs.gov.au |
Potential workers | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | July 7, 2021 | abs.gov.au |
General Social Survey: Summary Results, Australia | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | June 29, 2021 | abs.gov.au |
General Social Survey: Summary Results, Australia methodology | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | June 29, 2021 | abs.gov.au |
Migration, Australia, Key findings | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | April 23, 2021 | abs.gov.au |
Standard for Sex, Gender, Variations of Sex Characteristics and Sexual Orientation Variables | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | January 14, 2021 | abs.gov.au |
WCAG Success Criterion 3.1.5 Reading Level (Level AAA) | W3C Web Accessibility Initiative | January 1, 2021 | www.w3.org |
Literacy and access | Australian Government Style Manual | January 1, 2021 | stylemanual.gov.au |
Vulnerable persons or people | Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission | January 1, 2021 | www.acnc.gov.au |
Measuring Australia's Digital Divide 2020 | Australian Digital Inclusion Index | January 1, 2020 | digitalinclusionindex.org.au |
Disability, Ageing and Carers, Australia: Summary of Findings | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | October 24, 2019 | abs.gov.au |
Estimates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | August 31, 2018 | abs.gov.au |
Language Standards | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | August 3, 2016 | abs.gov.au |
ABS.Stat Beta, ERP by SA2 and above (ASGS 2016), 2001 onwards | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | January 1, 2016 | stat.data.abs.gov.au |
Family characteristics and transitions, Family characteristics, Families | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | February 26, 2015 | abs.gov.au |
Age Standard, Underlying concepts | Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) | March 11, 2014 | abs.gov.au |
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2 | W3C Web Accessibility Initiative | July 1, 2005 | w3.org |
10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design (Flexibility and efficiency of use) | Nielsen Norman Group (NNG) | April 24, 1994 | nngroup.com |
10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design (Visibility of system status) | Nielsen Norman Group (NNG) | April 24, 1994 | nngroup.com |
10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design (Error prevention) | Nielsen Norman Group (NNG) | April 24, 1994 | nngroup.com |
10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design (Match Between the System and the Real World) | Nielsen Norman Group (NNG) | April 24, 1994 | nngroup.com |
Last updated
This page was updated @September 26, 2024
Quick links to CX Guidelines:
Overview
Consent
Authenticate
Authorise
Consent Management
Notifications
Accessibility statement
→ cx@dsb.gov.au → cx.dsb.gov.au | cds.gov.au
The Consumer Data Standards Program is part of Treasury. Copyright © Commonwealth of Australia 2023.
The information provided on this website is licensed for re-distribution and re-use in accordance with Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0) Licence.