After Iran, U.S. House Bans WhatsApp, Is It Truly Unsafe?
WhatsApp, the world’s most widely used messaging application, has found itself on yet another government blacklist, this time in the United States. In a decisive move on Monday, the U.S. House of Representatives officially banned WhatsApp on all government-issued devices, citing serious cybersecurity risks and lack of data protection transparency. The ban aligns with a growing global trend of rising skepticism towards Meta’s data handling practices.
According to a memo circulated by the Chief Administrative Officer of the House, the Office of Cybersecurity deemed WhatsApp a security risk.
WhatsApp is a “high-risk” application due to its lack of transparency in how it protects user data, absence of stored data encryption, and potential security risks involved with its use.
The memo recommended alternative platforms such as Microsoft Teams, Amazon’s Wickr, Apple’s iMessage and FaceTime, and the Signal app. Each of these apps is seen as more secure or more transparent in data handling, at least by government standards.
A Broader Pattern: From Tehran to D.C.
While this development may sound like a simple bureaucratic decision, it reflects deeper concerns in major capitals around the world. Just a few days ago, Iran asked its citizens to remove WhatsApp from their devices, accusing it of facilitating foreign surveillance. Though met with skepticism at the time, the U.S. action now lends unexpected weight to Iran’s stance.
Unlike Iran’s move framed politically, the U.S. ban rests on technical and security grounds. Yet, both signal a growing discomfort among governments with the opaque inner workings of Meta’s messaging infrastructure.
This isn’t the first time Meta has come under fire over WhatsApp. Regulators in the EU and India have previously penalized the company for failing to disclose how data is shared between WhatsApp and other Meta-owned services. In 2021, WhatsApp’s controversial privacy policy update led to user backlash, forcing the company to delay its rollout.
Meta’s Silence Speaks Volumes
Meta, which owns WhatsApp, has yet to issue a formal response to the ban. Silence, in this case, may be strategic. The company has already been under fire from multiple regulatory fronts, including antitrust suits, political ad policy battles, and increasing global scrutiny over misinformation.
The timing is also critical. Meta is in the midst of trying to position WhatsApp as an enterprise-grade communications tool, launching payment integrations and AI assistant features, and even partnering with governments in some regions for public service updates.
A ban from the U.S. House—echoing a similar move from Iran—could hurt those ambitions. It raises the question: Can WhatsApp truly be trusted as a secure communication platform at the highest levels of government?
WhatsApp US Ban: The Bigger Picture
Government distrust toward commercial tech platforms is not new, but it’s intensifying. What used to be fringe concerns around surveillance, backdoors, or algorithmic manipulation are now mainstream political issues.
From the U.S. and EU to India and the Middle East, regulators are pushing for tighter controls on data sovereignty. In this context, WhatsApp’s ban is more than just a procedural action; it’s a litmus test for how democratic governments intend to approach big tech’s influence in critical infrastructure.
Cybersecurity experts argue that unless Meta makes its architecture more auditable and its data practices more transparent, more bans are likely to follow.
