Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Dataset . 2025
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Dataset . 2025
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Dataset . 2025
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Bridging the Privacy Gap: Developers' Practices and the Missing Role of Privacy Engineers

Authors: Neto, Manoel; Vilela, Jéssyka; Canedo, Edna Dias;

Bridging the Privacy Gap: Developers' Practices and the Missing Role of Privacy Engineers

Abstract

Context: Privacy has become a first order concern in software engineering, yet organizations still struggle to translate legal mandates into actionable engineering practices and governance routines. Goal: This study investigates how Brazilian software practitioners perceive, adopt, and operationalize privacy standards and practices, identifying challenges and actionable opportunities to strengthen privacy by design in real projects. Method: We conduct a conceptual replication of prior work on privacy engineering, adapting it to the Brazilian context via a survey (31 practitioners). The instrument maps roles and privacy perceptions and practices (RQ1), the use of standards, frameworks, and techniques (RQ2), and challenges and improvement opportunities (RQ3). Results: Practitioners consistently distinguish privacy from security, but formalization is limited. Although 60.7% report considering privacy across the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC), half do not use privacy-focused methods and 46.4% are unaware of them. Practices skew toward classic security controls (e.g., access control, 85.7%) rather than dedicated privacy engineering artifacts. The Brazilian General Data Protection Law (LGPD) is the dominant compliance driver (82.1%), with low uptake of ISO 27701/NIST PF. Key barriers include unclear legal guidance (53.6%), insufficient training (42.9%), and late integration of privacy (39.3%). Automation remains incipient (14.3% fully automated Data Subject Rights (DSAR) workflows; 42.9% manual). Organizational support is uneven (39.3% sufficient; 39.3% partial; 21.4% insufficient). Spearman correlations revealed strong relationships (ρ up to 0.63) between experience, training, and integration practices, indicating that professional maturity and capacity building are key enablers of privacy-by-design adoption. Conclusion: Results indicate a persistent gap between awareness and effective governance. We recommend (i) targeted training and curricular inclusion, (ii) clearer role/accountability assignments, and (iii) investment in tooling/automation to operationalize privacy-by-design. These actions can help shift privacy from reactive compliance to a sustained dimension of software quality in Brazilian 

Keywords

(4-(m-Chlorophenylcarbamoyloxy)-2-butynyl)trimethylammonium Chloride/chemical synthesis, Privacy Engineering, Software Development Practices, GDPR, LGPD, Privacy by Design, Data Protection Standards

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average