I Built RegCompiler to Translate Regulations Into Engineering Requirements
Regulations are usually written for legal, policy, and compliance teams.
But when those requirements reach an engineering team, the questions become very different:
- What does this requirement actually mean for our software?
- Which systems could be affected?
- What security controls might be required?
- What should developers and security engineers actually implement?
- How can we connect a regulatory requirement to technical work?
That gap is what led me to build RegCompiler.
What is RegCompiler?
RegCompiler is a desktop-first regulatory intelligence and technical analysis tool exploring how complex regulatory requirements can be translated into structured, actionable information for engineering and cybersecurity teams.
The workflow I'm exploring is:
📜 Regulation → 🧠 Interpretation → ⚙️ Technical Requirements → 🔐 Compliance
The idea is to move beyond simply asking:
"What does the regulation say?"
and explore:
"What could this requirement mean for the technology we build and operate?"
Who is it for?
I'm building RegCompiler with people such as:
- Software developers
- Cybersecurity engineers
- DevSecOps teams
- GRC professionals
- Compliance teams
- Security engineers
- Technical founders
- Engineering leaders
Why did I build it?
There is often a gap between regulatory language and engineering language.
A regulation might describe an obligation at a high level, while an engineering team needs to make concrete decisions around things like:
- Authentication
- Authorization
- Encryption
- Data protection
- Logging
- Monitoring
- Access control
- Incident response
- Vulnerability management
- Infrastructure
- Security testing
I wanted to explore whether a technical analysis layer could make that transition easier.
But this is very early
This is not a finished enterprise compliance platform.
I'm currently releasing RegCompiler as an early testing version specifically to find out whether the workflow is actually useful.
At this stage, I'm more interested in finding problems than pretending everything is solved.
I'm looking for feedback on:
- Is the workflow useful?
- Are the technical insights actually actionable?
- What's confusing?
- What's missing?
- What would you expect the product to do?
- Which regulations or frameworks should be supported?
- Could this fit into an existing engineering or security workflow?
I'd love your feedback
If you're a developer, security engineer, DevSecOps engineer, GRC professional, or someone who regularly works with regulatory requirements, I'd really appreciate it if you tried it.
Even if you only spend a few minutes with it, tell me what you think.
If something is wrong, confusing, unnecessary, or just doesn't make sense — please say so.
That's exactly the kind of feedback I'm looking for during this testing phase. 🚀
Top comments (0)