Meta Platforms has pushed back against concerns raised by the Indian government over WhatsApp’s planned username feature, arguing that the new functionality includes multiple safeguards against fraud and impersonation, even as New Delhi warns it could significantly increase cybercrime across the world’s largest WhatsApp market.
In a statement to CNBC, Meta defended the feature, stressing that usernames are designed to complement, not replace, WhatsApp’s existing identity verification.
“Users still require a phone number to use WhatsApp, and we’ve built multiple layers of defense against scams into usernames,” a Meta spokesperson said.
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 20 (June 8 – Sept 5, 2026).
Register for Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
The company said it plans to implement several safeguards before the feature becomes widely available. These include limiting the number of new users an account can contact, blocking repeated attempts to guess usernames, and deploying automated systems capable of identifying and removing activity that exhibits common patterns associated with impersonation, fraud or abuse.
Meta also emphasized that the feature has not yet been activated globally.
“The username feature is not live and will be rolled out slowly later this year,” it said.
WhatsApp announced the introduction of usernames on Monday, describing them as a major privacy enhancement that would allow people to communicate without having to disclose their phone numbers, similar to messaging platforms such as Telegram, Signal and Discord.
However, Indian authorities have expressed concern that removing visible phone numbers from initial interactions could make it easier for criminals to impersonate trusted individuals or organizations.
According to Indian news agency ANI, the government warned that the feature “may materially increase the incidence of online fraud, phishing, digital arrest scams and impersonation attacks, by enabling bad actors to solicit and message victims.”
The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology has reportedly directed WhatsApp to provide a detailed explanation of the feature within three days or face possible regulatory action under India’s Information Technology Rules. Authorities have also instructed the company to suspend the rollout until the government’s concerns have been adequately addressed.
The dispute comes as India intensifies its efforts to combat cyber-enabled financial crime, which has become one of the country’s fastest-growing digital threats.
According to government figures, reported cybercrime incidents more than doubled from approximately one million cases in 2022 to nearly 2.3 million cases in 2024, driven largely by online investment scams, phishing operations, impersonation schemes and so-called “digital arrest” frauds, where criminals impersonate law enforcement officials to extort victims.
Analysts say those figures have shifted the regulatory balance toward security. Reema Bhattacharya, Head of Asia Research at Verisk Maplecroft, said governments are increasingly placing greater emphasis on public safety than purely on user privacy.
“While user privacy does play a role in policymaking, the sharp rise in cyber-enabled financial crime has undoubtedly shifted the center of gravity towards security.”
India represents a particularly sensitive market for Meta. With more than 500 million WhatsApp users, it is the platform’s largest user base globally, making any product changes subject to heightened regulatory scrutiny.
Neil Shah, Vice President of Research at Counterpoint Research, said WhatsApp’s enormous reach means new communication tools can have unintended consequences if exploited by bad actors. He noted that the username feature could allow scammers to create convincing fake identities using familiar names and profile photos, potentially accelerating fraud campaigns and the spread of misinformation.
Meta says it has anticipated many of those risks.
According to the company, high-profile usernames belonging to public figures, organizations, and widely recognized individuals will be reserved so they can only be claimed by their legitimate owners. The platform also intends to block lookalike variations of well-known names to reduce impersonation attempts. These measures mirror safeguards already employed by other major social media platforms that reserve verified identities and restrict deceptive usernames.
Still, experts say the broader challenge lies in balancing innovation with public protection.
Bhattacharya noted that regulators increasingly expect technology companies to assume greater responsibility for limiting harm on their platforms. At the same time, she cautioned that policymakers must avoid creating rules that discourage technological innovation or unnecessarily weaken user privacy.
“It is difficult to draw the line between legitimate regulation and measures that could discourage innovation or weaken user privacy,” she said.
The latest standoff reflects India’s increasingly assertive approach to regulating major digital platforms. Just weeks ago, authorities temporarily blocked Telegram during a nationwide examination after investigators found channels falsely claiming to possess leaked test papers and demanding payments from students and their families.
Telegram criticized the action, arguing that the restrictions affected millions of legitimate users rather than those responsible for the fraud.
“150 million ordinary users of the app” in India were punished, the company said.
The confrontation with Meta highlights a broader global debate over encrypted messaging services. Technology companies have argued that stronger privacy protections are essential as cyber threats grow, while governments contend that new anonymity features can inadvertently make it easier for criminals to exploit users.