The Union government on Friday issued notices to messaging platforms Telegram and Signal seeking details of the safeguards they have put in place to prevent fraud and impersonation through username-based communication features, the Hindustan Times reported, quoting an unidentified government official.
The notice was two days after the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology had asked WhatsApp to pause the rollout of a similar feature.
“The rules apply to everyone,” the official told the newspaper. “Similar notices will be sent to Telegram and Signal on Friday.”
The ministry has asked Telegram and Signal to explain how they prevent misuse of features that allow users to communicate without revealing their phone numbers, according to The Times of India.
The ministry has raised concerns that such features could facilitate “scams, phishing, digital arrest frauds and identity impersonation”.
In Telegram’s case, the government has also asked why the platform should be allowed to continue offering the username feature.
The companies have been given three days to respond, The Times of India reported, quoting unidentified persons familiar with the matter.
The notices follow the ministry’s direction to Meta-owned WhatsApp on Wednesday to pause the rollout of its proposed username feature until consultations with the government are completed.
In response to the government’s concerns, WhatsApp said that, to protect against misuse, usernames associated with public figures, government entities, celebrities and verified accounts on its parent company Meta’s platforms had been reserved so they could only be claimed by their legitimate owners, The Indian Express reported.
A spokesperson for platform said that the users would still need a phone number to create and use an account, The Indian Express reported. The spokesperson added that persons would need to know a user’s exact username to contact them for the first time, with an optional username key providing an additional layer of control.
On Thursday, digital rights organisation Internet Freedom Foundation criticised the government’s action and called on the ministry to withdraw the notices issued to WhatsApp, Telegram and Signal.
The organisation said the new notices “widen an unconstitutional dragnet over privacy features” and that it had no basis in law.
The organisation argued that any restrictions on such features should be grounded in legislation rather than executive action.
It also called on the ministry to publish the notices and specify the legal provisions under which it was acting.
The foundation had said on Wednesday that the notice to WhatsApp amounted to “an attempt by the executive to decide what a company may build and ship, which no statute permits”.
Concerning development: Digital rights organisation
Describing the notices issued to Telegram and Signal as “concerning”, non-profit organisation Software Freedom Law Centre called on the Union government to explain the legal basis on which the action was taken.
The legal services organisation said that while concerns regarding online fraud, phishing, impersonation and cyber-enabled financial crime are legitimate, regulatory intervention affecting product design “must remain firmly grounded in law”.
It added that the username feature “is designed to enhance privacy by allowing users to communicate without exposing personal information”.
“Such apps are widely used by journalists, human rights defenders, lawyers and others who work in sensitive matters and may face heightened risks if their contact information is publicly disclosed,” the organisation pointed out. “Any regulatory action affecting such privacy-enhancing technologies must therefore be carefully justified and proportionate.”
It also pointed out that the Information Technology Act, 2000, or Information Technology Rules do not require intermediaries to justify or obtain permission before introducing lawful software features.
Concerns regarding phishing or online scams cannot justify the creation of an “unlawful approval mechanism for software features or question technology companies on their products through executive notices in the absence of a legal basis”, stated the Software Freedom Law Centre.
Edited by Neerad Pandharipande.
You’ve read Scroll.
Now help sustain it
Scroll is funded by readers, not corporate owners. If you believe our work matters, support our newsroom. Become a member today!
We’re not driven by clicks or corporate interests – just honest, independent reporting. Keep us going. Support Scroll today!