India Issues Notices to Telegram and Signal Over Username Features Amid Impersonation Concerns

Key Takeaways

• Indian authorities have sought detailed safety assessments from Telegram and Signal regarding username-based identity features.
• Concerns center on whether usernames could increase impersonation risks and enable fraudulent activity across messaging apps.
• Regulatory review continues alongside WhatsApp directives, leaving final rollout decisions dependent on ongoing consultations.

Regulatory Scrutiny Expands Over Username Features on Messaging Platforms

The Indian government has reportedly issued notices to Telegram and Signal under the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, seeking detailed assessments of username-based features and associated safety safeguards.

Authorities said the review focuses on intermediary due diligence obligations, with concerns that anonymous usernames and the ability to communicate without sharing phone numbers could be exploited for scams and may hinder enforcement actions.

The action extends earlier scrutiny that began with WhatsApp, as regulators assess how major messaging platforms use username-based identity systems. WhatsApp said it has implemented safeguards, including controls over high-profile username allocation and limits on unsolicited contact. A spokesperson also cited systems designed to detect impersonation and abusive behavior.

Separately, Zoho co-founder Sridhar Vembu said Arattai, Zoho’s messaging app, will disable username-based account features to comply with regulatory changes.

The statement reflects how platform operators are responding to evolving regulatory scrutiny. Telegram already uses usernames, while Signal offers the feature in an optional form.

Regulatory Review of Username Features Remains Ongoing Amid Privacy and Safety Concerns

The consultation process between the government and messaging platforms remains ongoing. Officials are reviewing responses and examining the security implications of the proposed username features. No final decision has been announced on whether or when the features will be allowed to roll out.

The outcome of the review could determine how anonymity features are implemented across major messaging platforms. Authorities are particularly focused on balancing user privacy with risks of impersonation and fraud reported in the notices. Further clarity is expected only after platforms submit additional documentation and consultations conclude between stakeholders.

The issue remains unresolved as platforms and regulators continue to assess competing concerns around privacy and safety. The lack of a final ruling leaves uncertainty for companies planning the rollout of username systems in messaging apps. Resolution will depend on whether safeguards are deemed sufficient to prevent impersonation and fraud while preserving intended privacy benefits.