The Brazilian National Data Protection Authority published Technological Radar No. 4, dedicated to neurotechnologies and their impacts on personal data protection. The document brings the topic into the Brazilian regulatory debate and reinforces the need for special attention to the risks arising from the collection, processing, and use of neural signals.
Neurotechnologies are technologies capable of interacting with the nervous system by collecting or interpreting signals related to brain or neurological activity. When applied in medical, educational, workplace, consumer, or artificial intelligence contexts, these solutions may generate extremely sensitive data about individuals.
So-called neurodata may reveal or enable inferences about emotions, mental states, cognitive abilities, health conditions, behavioral patterns, intentions, and even possible future behaviors. For this reason, the topic expands the traditional challenges of data protection and begins to involve dimensions directly related to mental privacy, individual integrity, non-discrimination, and the preservation of fundamental rights.
Among the risks highlighted in the debate are excessive monitoring of individuals, the use of neural information without adequate transparency, discrimination based on cognitive or neurological characteristics, manipulation of behaviors and decisions, and the misuse of data in employment, consumer, health, and education relationships.
From a legal and corporate perspective, the processing of neurodata must observe the principles set forth in the LGPD, especially purpose limitation, adequacy, necessity, transparency, security, prevention, and non-discrimination. Due to the sensitivity of this information, mere access to the technology is not sufficient to justify its use. It is necessary to demonstrate a legitimate purpose, proportionality, data minimization, and the adoption of appropriate safeguards.
The integration between neurotechnologies and artificial intelligence makes the scenario even more complex. Systems capable of processing neurodata may generate inferences, behavioral profiles, and automated decisions with relevant impacts on data subjects. This requires prior risk assessment, algorithmic governance, documentation of processing decisions, review of legal bases, and human oversight mechanisms.
For companies, research institutions, healthtechs, edtechs, and organizations operating in innovation, the topic requires a preventive approach. The implementation of robust governance mechanisms should include data protection impact assessments, specific internal policies, information security controls, access limitations, transparency with data subjects, and continuous review of processing models.
It is also recommended that organizations assess reputational, ethical, and regulatory risks before adopting technologies capable of collecting or inferring neural information. In sensitive markets, compliance should not be treated only as a legal requirement, but as an element of trust, responsibility, and sustainable innovation.
The advancement of neurotechnologies reinforces a broader trend: the more intimate and sophisticated the data processed, the greater the degree of governance, transparency, and responsibility required from organizations. In this context, data protection takes on a strategic role in defining the ethical and legal boundaries of innovation.
