Privacy-focused Apple won’t comply with Indian order to preload state-run app

Privacy-focused Apple has no intention of complying with the Indian government’s directive to pre-install a state-developed so-called “cyber safety” app on its iPhones and plans to formally raise its objections with authorities in New Delhi, Reuters reports Tuesday citing three people familiar with the matter. The mandate has triggered widespread concerns over potential surveillance and ignited a major political controversy.
Aditya Kalra and Munsif Vengattil for Reuters:
‎

The Indian government has confidentially ordered companies including Apple, Samsung, and Xiaomi to preload their phones with an app called Sanchar Saathi, or Communication Partner, within 90 days. The app is intended to track stolen phones, block them and prevent them from being misused.
The government also wants manufacturers to ensure that the app is not disabled. And for devices already in the supply chain, manufacturers should push the app to phones via software updates…
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s political opponents and privacy advocates criticized the move, saying it is a way for the government to gain access to India’s 730 million smartphones.
In the wake of the criticism, India’s telecom minister Jyotiraditya M. Scindia on Tuesday said the app was a “voluntary and democratic system,” adding that users can choose to activate it and can “easily delete it from their phone at any time.”
Apple however does not plan to comply with the directive and will tell the government it does not follow such mandates anywhere in the world as they raise a host of privacy and security issues for the company’s iOS ecosystem, said two of the industry sources who are familiar with Apple’s concerns.
The second source said Apple does not plan to go to court or take a public stand, but it will tell the government it cannot follow the order because of security vulnerabilities. Apple “can’t do this. Period,” the person said.

‎
MacDailyNews Take: Only Apple truly protects end-users’ privacy and security.
As we wrote last month:
Many would consider it a strong selling point if every iPhone user had the ability to disable and track their stolen iPhone – as Apple does to iPhones (and other devices) stolen from Apple Retail Stores in smash and grabs, BUT:
Apple already empowers iPhone users with robust tools like Find My, Activation Lock, and Stolen Device Protection to remotely track, lock, erase data, and render a device unusable without the owner’s Apple ID credentials—effectively bricking it for thieves in most cases.
For retail store smash-and-grabs, Apple deploys an even more aggressive, immediate “kill switch” via proximity-based software on demo units, triggering alarms, disabling functionality, and alerting authorities the instant devices leave the store’s Wi-Fi network. Extending this instant, foolproof remote disable to every consumer iPhone sounds empowering, but Apple likely holds back for several pragmatic drawbacks that could outweigh the benefits:
• Abuse and False Claims: Verifying theft would be a nightmare — requiring police reports, proof of purchase, or eyewitness accounts for millions of reports annually. Malicious users could falsely flag devices to spite ex-partners, settle grudges, or sabotage secondhand sales, overwhelming Apple’s support and leading to wrongful bricks.
• Retail cases are straightforward: Apple owns the inventory and has direct telemetry.
Impact on Innocent Buyers and the Used Market: Stolen iPhones often resurface cheaply on secondary markets like Craigslist or eBay. A permanent disable could punish good-faith purchasers who bought unknowingly, stranding them with e-waste and eroding trust in Apple’s ecosystem — especially since sellers vanish with cash. Activation Lock already mitigates this by tying devices to Apple IDs (removable with proof), but a “retail-style” brick might be irreversible without Apple’s manual intervention, complicating legitimate transfers.
• E-Waste and Environmental Backlash: Bricking devices en masse would accelerate electronic waste, as thieves might dismantle for parts anyway, but victims couldn’t recover or repurpose hardware. This clashes with Apple’s sustainability pledges and could invite regulatory scrutiny or consumer boycotts over planned obsolescence perceptions.
• Privacy and Security Risks: A universal kill switch demands constant connectivity and deeper device monitoring, raising red flags for surveillance fears or vulnerabilities to hacks (e.g., nation-states coercing Apple to disable dissidents’ phones). It could also conflict with laws like right-to-repair mandates, locking users out of repairs or third-party services.
• Legal and Liability Hurdles: Broadening this feature might expose Apple to lawsuits from affected parties (e.g., disabled devices in rentals or family-shared plans) or demands from governments for backdoor access. Carriers already blacklist IMEIs for theft, so Apple avoids redundant, litigious territory.
In essence, while retail disables are a controlled, low-risk demonstration of the power of Apple’s infrastructure, scaling it consumer-wide invites chaos Apple has wisely sidestepped by prioritizing user-empowered (but reversible) tools over an iron-fisted kill swtich. If theft spikes, though, expect iterative tweaks like enhanced Stolen Device Protection rather than a full switch.

‎
Please help support MacDailyNews — and enjoy subscriber-only articles, comments, chat, and more — by subscribing to our Substack: macdailynews.substack.com. Thank you!
Support MacDailyNews at no extra cost to you by using this link to shop at Amazon.
The post Privacy-focused Apple won’t comply with Indian order to preload state-run app appeared first on MacDailyNews.