Server-side tracking

Server-side tracking sends analytics and conversion events to ad platforms from a server you control, instead of (or alongside) scripts running in the visitor's browser. The event itself doesn't change (a purchase is still a purchase), but the transport does: server-to-server requests survive ad blockers, Safari's ITP cookie caps, and script failures that silently eat browser-sent events.

#A more durable transport, not invisible tracking

Server-side tracking changes how events travel, not what you're allowed to collect. Consent requirements apply identically: a denied user is denied on every transport. What server-side actually buys is signal durability: the browser is a hostile delivery environment (blockers, seven-day cookie lifetimes, consent-script ordering bugs), while your server is not. Meta's Conversions API and Google's server-side endpoints exist precisely so the same conversion can take the durable route. It's a decision with a price (infrastructure to run, plumbing to maintain), not a default every stack needs.

In practice: Buron ships a first-party pixel backed by a production server-side pipeline, so the events feeding its warehouse don't depend on what a browser felt like delivering that day.

Whether server-side is worth it for your stack (benefits, costs, and the cases where client-side-only is still fine) is the full decision page: Server-side tracking: what it fixes, what it costs, and whether you need it. The implementation route via Google's tag infrastructure is Server-side tagging with sGTM: setup, costs, and when it's not worth it, and the whole conversion-signal territory routes from Conversion tracking & signal quality.