WhatsApp username feature – Artifex.News https://artifex.news Stay Connected. Stay Informed. Thu, 09 Jul 2026 10:58:00 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.2 https://artifex.news/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/cropped-cropped-app-logo-32x32.png WhatsApp username feature – Artifex.News https://artifex.news 32 32 WhatsApp’s reply on notice over ‘username’ feature due July 9: IT Secretary https://artifex.news/article71201937-ecerand29/ Thu, 09 Jul 2026 10:58:00 +0000 https://artifex.news/article71201937-ecerand29/ Read More “WhatsApp’s reply on notice over ‘username’ feature due July 9: IT Secretary” »

]]>

Meta-owned WhatsApp’s response to the government notice on the ‘username’ feature is due on Thursday (July 9, 2026), IT Secretary S. Krishnan said.

Last week, the Centre issued a notice to Meta questioning the proposed username feature on WhatsApp, flagging concerns that it could materially increase online fraud, phishing, digital arrest scams, and impersonation attacks.

The username feature essentially allows people on the messaging platform to communicate without sharing their phone numbers.

The government had also directed the platform not to launch the feature until consultations on the issue are completed “to the satisfaction of the Government”.

Subsequently, WhatsApp had sought some more time to submit its response on the ‘username’ feature and had assured the government that it would not roll it out in India until discussions are complete.

“Today is the day when the reply is due,” Mr. Krishnan said on the sidelines of the CII GCC Business Summit, when asked about WhatsApp’s response to the ‘username’ feature.

On whether two other messaging platforms, Telegram and Signal, reverted on the notices sent to them on the ‘username’ feature, Krishnan said: “There is still a little more time, so the replies have not yet been received…we will examine this issue”.

Last Friday, a team from Meta met officials in the IT Ministry following the notice summoning them.

In the notice, the government asked Meta to explain why action shouldn’t be initiated under the IT Act and rules over WhatsApp’s new feature that may increase cybercrimes.

It also reminded Meta that WhatsApp, as a significant social media intermediary, is bound by due diligence obligations under the IT Act and rules.

A WhatsApp spokesperson, last week, said that the ability to use a username is not yet live and will roll out slowly later this year.

“To protect against impersonation, we’ve held the highest-profile names – think public figures, government entities, celebrities, verified Meta accounts – so they can only ever be claimed by their legitimate owners and lookalike derivatives of known names are held as well,” the spokesperson had said.

Users still require a phone number to use WhatsApp, the company had said and added that it has built multiple layers of defence against scams into usernames.

“Other users need to know the exact username to message you. We will limit how many new people an account can contact, block repeated attempts to guess someone’s username key, and have systems to detect and remove activity showing common impersonation and abuse patterns,” the company had said.

WhatsApp will show whether a first-time sender is a new account, contact, mutual group member or from another country before users respond.

“When the feature becomes available, and someone sends a message for the first time via your username, we will show you if they’re a new account, if they’re your contact, if you have groups in common, and if they’re based in a different country, so you can decide whether to respond,” WhatsApp had said.

After sending a notice to WhatsApp, the IT Ministry had shot off notices to Telegram and Signal too, raising questions on their existing username feature and asking how the platforms are addressing concerns related to fraud and impersonation risks. While WhatsApp has 50 crore users in India, Telegram’s reach is a fraction of that.

Notably, over the last few days, Meta and Telegram have also faced regulatory scrutiny on other issues.

While the government issued a stern notice on Meta on child sexual abuse material in Instagram ads on Saturday, Telegram was served a notice directing it to crack down on the “widespread dissemination” of pirated films, OTT content and other audio-visual material through its platform.

Published – July 09, 2026 04:28 pm IST



Source link

]]>
After WhatsApp, Telegram and Signal receive notices on username feature https://artifex.news/article71175746-ecerand29/ Thu, 02 Jul 2026 18:45:00 +0000 https://artifex.news/article71175746-ecerand29/ Read More “After WhatsApp, Telegram and Signal receive notices on username feature” »

]]>

Spokespersons for Telegram and Signal did not have an immediate comment to share on the notices. File photo for representational purposes only.
| Photo Credit: Dado Ruvic

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) on Thursday (July 2, 2026) sent notices to Telegram and Signal, seeking information on their username feature. The notice comes shortly after a similar missive was sent to WhatsApp on Wednesday (July 1, 2026). The Meta-owned messaging platform is yet to implement the feature anywhere in the world, but is taking reservations for usernames.

Spokespersons for Telegram and Signal did not have an immediate comment to share on the notices (Telegram was contacted outside normal business hours in the United Arab Emirates). The username feature appeared to remain available on both platforms well into Thursday evening.

The Union government’s move against the three messaging platforms comes on the heels of a week-long ban of Telegram, after authorities argued that backdated PDF files could lead to people mistakenly assuming a question paper was leaked. Telegram fought against the ban in the Delhi High Court, calling the move a “mistake”. The court sided with the government, holding the short ban a proportionate response. Telegram was unblocked after the NEET exam was held, following the leak of the first attempt.

The Internet Freedom Foundation, a Delhi-based digital rights advocacy group, called the pressure on the messaging platforms an “unconstitutional dragnet over privacy features” (accounts with a username on all platforms are designed to conceal phone numbers). “The executive is restraining lawful features, and with them the private communication those features protect, without the authority of law,” IFF said in a statement.

“We agree there can be regulatory authority for such features however it requires a clear articulation of policy intent that is rooted in legislation. This simply does not exist at present. No provision of the IT Act permits it as we have explained in our statement yesterday,” the body added, arguing the notices were unconstitutional.

The notice to Signal in particular was worrying, IFF said. “Signal … keeps almost [no data on user accounts and activity], has refused to build the searchable directory an identification order would need, and is the tool journalists, activists and many at risk people and their contacts rely on, so a notice aimed at it strikes straight at protected speech,” IFF said.



Source link

]]>