Centre asks WhatsApp to delay username feature over fraud concerns
text_fields
New Delhi: The Union government has directed WhatsApp to temporarily halt the rollout of its proposed username feature, citing concerns that it could be misused for impersonation, identity theft, phishing and other forms of online fraud, according to Hindustan Times.
The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) issued a notice after WhatsApp announced earlier this week that users would soon be able to reserve unique usernames, allowing them to connect without sharing their phone numbers. The feature is expected to be introduced later this year, Scroll.in reported.
According to the notice, the ministry asked the company not to launch the feature until consultations with the government were completed to its satisfaction. It also sought a detailed response from WhatsApp within three days explaining how it planned to address the concerns.
The government said the feature could make it easier for fraudsters to contact potential victims, increasing the risk of impersonation scams, phishing attempts and so-called digital arrest frauds. It also warned that usernames resembling those of government departments, financial institutions or public authorities could facilitate identity spoofing.
Responding to the concerns, WhatsApp said it had introduced safeguards to reduce the possibility of misuse. According to The Indian Express, the company said usernames linked to public figures, government bodies, celebrities and verified accounts across Meta's platforms had been reserved so that only their legitimate owners could claim them.
A WhatsApp spokesperson also clarified that users would still need a phone number to create and operate an account. The company added that someone would need to know a user's exact username to initiate contact for the first time, while an optional username key would provide an additional layer of privacy and control.
Meanwhile, digital rights organisation Internet Freedom Foundation criticised the government's directive, arguing that it lacked a clear legal basis. The organisation contended that neither the Information Technology Act nor the Information Technology Rules give the Centre the authority to approve or prevent the launch of product features before they are introduced. It also argued that such intervention amounted to the executive deciding what technology companies could build or release without statutory backing.