meta-wearables-on-device-compliance

Audits Meta Wearables DAT features for data-flow, permission, and processing-location compliance.

Updated Sep 6, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/shotcowboystyle/meta-wearables-ops-plugin --skill meta-wearables-on-device-compliance-shotcowboystyle
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: meta-wearables-on-device-compliance
Source: https://github.com/shotcowboystyle/meta-wearables-ops-plugin/tree/main/.agent/skills/meta-wearables-on-device-compliance
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/shotcowboystyle/meta-wearables-ops-plugin --skill meta-wearables-on-device-compliance-shotcowboystyle

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? Teams building Meta smart-glasses features often cannot prove where camera, microphone, sensor, and Display data is actually processed, stored, or transmitted, which blocks privacy review and release sign-off. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Data-flow auditing: Builds a processing ledger classifying each data item as glasses-native, phone-local, remote, mixed, or unknown, with network, storage, retention, and consent fields. - Capability gating: Verifies camera, HFP microphone, A2DP, native Display, Web App, and sensor claims against permissions, thermal/lifecycle state, and platform contracts for iOS DAT 0.9.0, Android DAT 0.9.0, and Display Web Apps. - Evidence grading: Separates source, static, mock, browser-sim, connected, physical, signed, and production evidence so unproven claims never ship. - Use Case: Before releasing a glasses camera feature, run the compliance workflow to produce a data-flow table, permission-gate table, and open-gate report proving no raw frames leave the device without consent. ## Quick Start Review my Meta Wearables camera feature for on-device compliance and produce a data-flow and evidence report.

Frequently Asked Questions about meta-wearables-on-device-compliance

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I verify on-device processing claims for Meta smart glasses?

Build a data-flow ledger naming each data item's source, processing location, network destination, storage, retention, and consent path. Use the 'on-device confirmed' label only when the implementation and target evidence prove the processing stays on the named device.

What is the difference between glasses-native and phone-local processing in Meta DAT?

Glasses-native means processing executes on the glasses themselves, while phone-local means the companion phone performs it. A phone camera, phone microphone, or MockDevice feed must never be described as a glasses-native capability.

Does Meta DAT 0.9.0 support background capture and offline operation?

Background continuation, offline behavior, HFP audio, and thermal safety cannot be promised from source prose alone. Each claim requires connected or physical evidence on the named device, firmware, and companion version before release.

Why is a MockDevice test not enough evidence for a glasses camera feature?

MockDevice and browser-sim results are deterministic fixtures that do not exercise real optics, transport, or firmware. Physical evidence requires the named pair performing the scripted operation with recorded device identity, firmware, build, and timestamp.

What compliance rules apply to Meta Display Web Apps?

Display Web Apps must be delivered over HTTPS with the MRBD marker and a 600x600 additive layout. Localhost or simulator output does not prove on-glasses delivery, and native DAT and Web App claims must stay separate.