Encryption Law by Country
Where strong encryption is a right, restricted, or compelled. National law and policy, mirrored per country.
Source: Global Partners Digital, World Map of Encryption, updated 2026-07-02. Full data at www.gp-digital.org/world-map-of-encryption
Encryption Law by Country (196)
General right to encryption
While there is no explicit right to encryption, Article 5 of the Constitution guarantees the secrecy of correspondence and of telegraphic, data and telephonic communications is inviolable, except, in the latter case, by court order, in the situations and manner established by law for purposes of criminal investigation or the fact-finding phase of a criminal prosecution. A copy of the Constitution can be found here . Article 7(III) of the Civil Rights Framework for the Internet (Law No. 12.965) guarantees the inviolability and secrecy of user communications online, with exceptions only permitted by court order. A copy of the law (in Portuguese) can be found here .
Mandatory minimum or maximum encryption strength
No known legislation or policies.
Licensing/registration requirements
No known legislation or policies.
Import/export controls
No known legislation or policies.
Other restrictions
No known legislation or policies.
Obligations on individuals to assist authorities
No known legislation or policies.
Obligations on providers to assist authorities
Article 52 of Anatel Resolution No. 614 of 28 May 2013 provides that telecommunication service providers must ensure the secrecy inherent in telecommunication services and the confidentiality of data, including connection records, and subscriber information, using all necessary means and technologies. Article 52 also requires telecommunication service providers to make available data relating to the suspension of telecommunication secrecy to authorities that, according to the law, have competence to request such information. A copy of the Resolution can be found here . There have been at least two court decisions which suspended the use of an encrypted communications app on the basis that they failed to comply with court orders demanding the contents of encrypted communications. However both cases are under judicial secrecy (segredo de justiça) meaning it is not possible to see the decisions to determine the legal basis for the actions taken.
Assessment Text Area
Brazil’s legal frameworks provide for the inviolability of the secrecy of communications, including online, with exceptions permitted only by court order. So far, there have been at least two court decisions which suspended the use of an encrypted communications app on the basis that they failed to comply with court orders demanding the contents of encrypted communications. It’s not possible to determine the legal basis for the actions taken.
Murphy's Law