Why the Centre is putting a brake on WhatsApp’s new identity feature

Government authorities have directed Meta to hold off on the rollout of a proposed username feature, citing risks of impersonation and cybercrime.

For years, we’ve known WhatsApp primarily through our phone numbers—a digital tether that links our offline identity to our online chats. That fundamental privacy architecture is now the subject of a high-stakes standoff between the Centre and Meta. The government has officially intervened, directing the tech giant to pause the rollout of a new username feature that promises to change how we connect, fearing it could inadvertently turn the platform into a playground for digital fraud.

The government’s security warning

IT Secretary S. Krishnan laid out the government’s stance on the sidelines of a recent industry conference, marking a clear escalation in oversight. The core concern is impersonation. By moving away from phone-number-only identification, officials worry that bad actors could easily masquerade as government agencies, financial institutions, or even public figures. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has now issued a formal notice to Meta, demanding a detailed justification for the feature and warning that it could facilitate phishing and "digital arrest" scams.

The directive is firm: Meta must pause the implementation until the government is satisfied with the proposed safeguards. This isn't just about one app, either. Reports indicate that the government has widened its probe, sending similar inquiries to Telegram and Signal. The message from New Delhi is consistent—these encrypted platforms must prove that their design choices won't compromise national digital safety.

What Meta says

Meta maintains that the feature, which has not yet gone live for Indian users, is being developed with multiple safety nets. In its defense, the company points out that usernames would be optional rather than mandatory. Furthermore, the platform intends to restrict discoverability, ensuring that usernames cannot be searched by strangers. To add another layer of security, the company has proposed a "username key" system, where a contact request would only be initiated if both parties have exchanged specific credentials.

Why it matters

This friction highlights a growing tension between user convenience and state security. While tech companies argue that usernames provide better privacy—allowing users to chat without sharing their personal phone numbers—the government sees a potential loophole for bad actors to evade detection. When identity becomes fluid, the barrier to committing cybercrime drops.

The bigger picture is that the "walled garden" of private messaging is becoming a primary battleground for digital regulation. As these apps shift from being simple messaging tools to expansive social ecosystems, the government is signaling that it will no longer adopt a hands-off approach. Whether these platforms can convince authorities that their "safeguards" are enough to prevent a surge in impersonation scams remains to be seen, but for now, the update is firmly on hold.