The Indian government intends to have access to communications between private individuals in their country, and they expect the rules applicable to these new powers to be established these days, he said. The Washington Post.
According to the new design of access to communications, internet platforms would have to make a constant analysis of content considered illegal and content that only seeks to disseminate erroneous information, as well as grant access to the police to any communication they have requested and verify who have managed to track the messages. What happens if the platforms do not comply with this? Would they be responsible? Would you share responsibility for the actions of your users? Although it seems far-fetched, it is said that these consequences could have been in the original proposal of this new regime of access to communications, but we still do not know the content of the final document.
Obviously, the justification of this new regime is to combat the country's criminality, but, at what cost? The digital privacy of Indian citizens would be completely violated, although in reality, not only theirs.
This new regime would destroy the end-to-end encryption of internet platforms that allow messages exchanged by two people, only accessible to them. Companies whose core business is not this feature could probably meet these new conditions, however, companies like WhatsApp, where end-to-end encryption is vital in your product, will have to consider creating separate products for India, or withdraw from this market
Another internet governance authoritarianism? Although they seem to follow in the footsteps of China and Russia, there is a difference, India is a democracy with a large number of internet users (400 million users).