India’s growing battle against cyber fraud has now reached some of the world’s biggest messaging platforms, with the government widening its scrutiny beyond WhatsApp and turning its attention to Telegram and Signal over their long-standing username features.
According to sources familiar with the matter, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology has issued notices to both Telegram and Signal, seeking detailed explanations on how the companies prevent fraudsters from exploiting usernames for impersonation, phishing schemes and financial scams.
The move comes barely a day after the government sent a similar notice to WhatsApp and directed the platform to pause the rollout of its proposed username feature until consultations with authorities are completed to the government’s satisfaction.
Officials are particularly concerned that allowing users to communicate through usernames instead of visible phone numbers could make it easier for criminals to disguise their identities and approach potential victims without revealing traceable information. Authorities believe such anonymity could fuel the rise of cybercrimes that have already become a major challenge across India, including digital arrest scams, fake investment schemes, phishing attacks and identity theft.
Sources said the government’s communication to Telegram goes a step further by directly questioning why the platform should continue to retain a username system if adequate safeguards against misuse cannot be demonstrated. Telegram has relied on usernames as a core part of its messaging infrastructure for years, allowing users to interact without exchanging mobile numbers.
Signal, which also offers username functionality as part of its privacy-focused design, has reportedly been asked to explain the protective mechanisms it uses to prevent impersonation and fraudulent activities on the platform.
The latest notices indicate that New Delhi is attempting to establish a uniform regulatory approach rather than targeting a single company or service. Officials appear increasingly concerned that cybercriminals migrate rapidly between platforms whenever restrictions are introduced elsewhere, making platform-specific action less effective.
The government’s concerns are rooted in a sharp increase in online financial fraud reported across the country over the past two years. Investigators have repeatedly linked sophisticated scams to anonymous or fake online identities used to gain trust before extracting money or sensitive information from victims. Law enforcement agencies have also highlighted the growing trend of so-called “digital arrest” scams in which fraudsters impersonate police officers, investigators or government officials to intimidate citizens into transferring funds.
In its notice to WhatsApp, authorities reportedly warned that introducing usernames could “materially increase” such crimes by allowing bad actors to contact users without relying on identifiable mobile numbers. The government also reminded parent company Meta that WhatsApp, as a significant social media intermediary under Indian law, must comply with due diligence obligations laid down under the Information Technology Act and associated rules.
WhatsApp defended the planned feature, arguing that it had built several safeguards designed to reduce abuse and protect users from impersonation attempts. The company maintains that usernames can enhance privacy by reducing the need to share personal phone numbers while still allowing users to connect with others securely.
India represents WhatsApp’s largest global market, with more than 500 million users relying on the service for personal and business communication. Telegram and Signal maintain smaller but influential user bases, particularly among professionals, journalists, activists and privacy-conscious users.
The government’s latest intervention also arrives at a time when Telegram has already been facing heightened regulatory pressure in India. Over recent months, officials raised concerns over the circulation of fraudulent content, impersonation activities and sensitive leaked material through the platform.
The scrutiny intensified during the controversy surrounding alleged leaks and circulation of fake and leaked National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test papers earlier this year. Authorities accused Telegram channels and related services of failing to prevent the spread of misleading information and illegally shared examination material connected to one of India’s most important competitive tests.
Those concerns eventually led to a temporary ban on Telegram and some of its associated web services until June 22. The restrictions lasted for roughly a week before the platform resumed operations after the government allowed the suspension order to expire.
Lionel Messi Equals World Cup Goal Record with Stunning Hat-Trick as Argentina Overpowers Algeria
Read More
Bhagwant Mann Accuses Religious Leaders of Bias, Says Final Verdict Lies With Sikh Congregation
Read More
Indian Air Force Officer Shubham Kumar Crash Tragedy: Fiancée Turned Legal Wife Receives ₹21 Lakh Aid, Family Raises Emotional Questions
Read MoreIndustry observers believe the latest notices could signal the beginning of broader rules governing anonymous communication tools in India. The challenge for regulators will be finding a balance between privacy protections valued by millions of users and safeguards necessary to prevent criminal misuse.
For messaging companies built around privacy and encryption, that balance may define their relationship with one of the world’s largest digital markets in the years ahead.