Skip to content
BR LGPD · BR-ECA-DIGITAL-CHILD-MONITORING

BR LGPD Arts. 2(II), 19 and 39 - child-monitoring product safeguards

Protect child-monitoring capture, storage and transmission and inform the child

CRITICALRequirementData processingBinding regulationIn forceApplies from 17 March 2026

Where this comes from

Provision: Arts. 2(II), 19 and 39 - child-monitoring product safeguards

Instrument: ECA Digital (Lei nº 15.211/2025)

Citation: Lei nº 15.211/2025, Arts. 2(II), 19 and 39 - child-monitoring product safeguards; Articles 1-3, 7 and 41; Lei nº 15.352/2026

Text version: Lei nº 15.211, de 17 de setembro de 2025, Articles 16-19 and 39; commencement amended by Lei nº 15.352/2026

Checked against the source: 6 September 2026

Read the official text ↗

Who it applies to

It applies when all of these are true:

  • Brazil ECA Digital assessed fact Q_BR_ECA_CHILD_MONITORING_PROVIDER: YES

…unless:

  • Brazil ECA Digital assessed fact Q_BR_ECA_ART39_SERVICE_CLASS: YES
  • Brazil ECA Digital assessed fact Q_BR_ECA_ART39_CLASSIFICATION: YES
  • Brazil ECA Digital assessed fact Q_BR_ECA_ART39_TRANSPARENCY: YES
  • Brazil ECA Digital assessed fact Q_BR_ECA_ART39_PARENTAL_CONTROLS: YES
  • Brazil ECA Digital assessed fact Q_BR_ECA_ART39_REPORT_CHANNEL: YES

What engineering work it implies

Sample acceptance criteria Landfall generates for this obligation:

  • Assess the actual supplier of a child-monitoring product/service available in Brazil under Articles 2(II) and 19: technology intended for parents/guardians to follow children's/adolescents' digital actions through recording or transmission of images, sounds, location, activity or other data. Generic analytics, a parent-facing purchaser label or the absence of child-created accounts cannot alone decide this role.
  • For Article 19, assess Article 39's service-specific modulation and conditional dispensation only where the actual eligible editorial-control or previously licensed-content class and all classification/alternative age-adequacy and signalling, age-classification transparency, complete accessible parental-mediation controls and accessible reporting channels are established. Controls must cover age-based content, personal data, user interaction and commercial transactions. Preserve replacement and non-listed safeguards; do not infer relief from a generic content or monitoring label.
  • Use current information-and-communication-technology mechanisms and solutions to protect the inviolability of images, sounds and other information captured, stored and transmitted to parents or legal guardians. Assess the actual capture/storage/transmission and authorized guardian access paths; encrypting transport alone does not establish every protection.
  • Provide mechanisms informing children and adolescents in appropriate language that monitoring is taking place. Development and use of monitoring must follow their best interests and full development of their capacities. A guardian dashboard or hidden monitoring control alone does not meet the child-facing notice duty.
  • Use synthetic or sanitized assessment cases and minimized configuration, access, control and review evidence. Exclude real child identities, conversations, images, recordings, precise locations and raw personal-data reports from ordinary task attachments, exports and general logs. Keep any legally necessary sensitive operational material in a separately authorized, purpose-limited process with assessed access and retention. This is an engineering evidence-minimization safeguard, not a prescribed fixed log schema or retention period.

Evidence an auditor expects

  • Assessment documentDocument review

    Protect child-monitoring capture, storage and transmission and inform the child — scoped assessment and minimized evidence

    Assess the actual supplier of a child-monitoring product/service available in Brazil under Articles 2(II) and 19: technology intended for parents/guardians to follow children's/adolescents' digital actions through recording or transmission of images, sounds, location, activity or other data. Generic analytics, a parent-facing purchaser label or the absence of child-created accounts cannot alone decide this role. For Article 19, assess Article 39's service-specific modulation and conditional dispensation only where the actual eligible editorial-control or previously licensed-content class and all classification/alternative age-adequacy and signalling, age-classification transparency, complete accessible parental-mediation controls and accessible reporting channels are established. Controls must cover age-based content, personal data, user interaction and commercial transactions. Preserve replacement and non-listed safeguards; do not infer relief from a generic content or monitoring label. Use current information-and-communication-technology mechanisms and solutions to protect the inviolability of images, sounds and other information captured, stored and transmitted to parents or legal guardians. Assess the actual capture/storage/transmission and authorized guardian access paths; encrypting transport alone does not establish every protection. Provide mechanisms informing children and adolescents in appropriate language that monitoring is taking place. Development and use of monitoring must follow their best interests and full development of their capacities. A guardian dashboard or hidden monitoring control alone does not meet the child-facing notice duty. Use synthetic or sanitized assessment cases and minimized configuration, access, control and review evidence. Exclude real child identities, conversations, images, recordings, precise locations and raw personal-data reports from ordinary task attachments, exports and general logs. Keep any legally necessary sensitive operational material in a separately authorized, purpose-limited process with assessed access and retention. This is an engineering evidence-minimization safeguard, not a prescribed fixed log schema or retention period. Verify current ANPD implementing requirements and qualified Portuguese source review. Lei 15.211/2025 commenced on 17 March 2026 following Lei 15.352/2026; do not infer all historical legal outcomes or full ECA Digital compliance from this record.

Questions people ask

Does BR LGPD Arts. 2(II), 19 and 39 - child-monitoring product safeguards apply to my service?
It applies when Brazil ECA Digital assessed fact Q_BR_ECA_CHILD_MONITORING_PROVIDER: YES. It does not apply where Brazil ECA Digital assessed fact Q_BR_ECA_ART39_SERVICE_CLASS: YES.
From when does this apply?
BR LGPD Arts. 2(II), 19 and 39 - child-monitoring product safeguards applies from 17 March 2026. Its current status is: in force.
What evidence does an auditor expect?
Protect child-monitoring capture, storage and transmission and inform the child — scoped assessment and minimized evidence.

Find out whether this one lands on you

Landfall's pre-scan answers the applicability question above for your product in minutes, then turns every obligation that applies into traceable engineering tickets with a citation chain your auditors can follow.

Not legal advice. Landfall maps regulatory obligations to engineering work for planning purposes. Its verdicts are not legal advice and create no attorney-client relationship — verify with qualified counsel before relying on them.

What Landfall Is NOT

Critical Boundaries

Understanding these boundaries is essential before using this product. Misuse of this tool for purposes outside its scope may create legal, regulatory, or commercial risk for your organization.

NOT Legal Advice

This product does not provide legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Interpretations are informational analysis, not legal counsel. Always consult qualified legal professionals for compliance decisions.

NOT a Risk Score

We do not quantify, calculate, or certify your compliance risk level.

No numerical risk rating, compliance percentage, or safety score. Risk assessment requires human judgment about your specific context.

NOT Runtime Enforcement

This is a planning and mapping tool, not a runtime enforcement system.

Does not integrate with your production systems. Does not block, filter, or enforce compliance in real-time. Implementation is your responsibility.

NOT Regulatory Approval

Using this tool does not mean you are compliant with any regulation.

No certification, seal of approval, or compliance guarantee. Regulators will evaluate your actual implementation, not your use of this tool.

NOT Authoritative Interpretation

Our interpretations are not binding and may differ from regulatory guidance.

Only regulators and courts provide authoritative interpretation. Our analysis reflects our reading of requirements, which may be incomplete or incorrect.

NOT a Safe Harbor

This tool does not shield you from enforcement actions or liability.

Documentation of your process is valuable, but does not constitute a legal defense. Compliance is ultimately your organization's responsibility.

NOT an AI Compliance Agent

AI features assist analysis but do not make compliance decisions for you.

AI-generated interpretations require human review and approval. Automated suggestions are starting points, not final answers.

NOT Complete Coverage

We do not cover all regulations, all obligations, or all jurisdictions.

Regulatory landscape is vast and evolving. Gaps in our coverage do not mean those requirements don't apply to you.

What This Tool IS:

  • A structured workflow for mapping regulatory requirements to implementation tasks
  • A documentation system for compliance decisions (audit trail)
  • A collaboration platform for compliance, legal, and engineering teams
  • An informational resource for understanding regulatory obligations