Tech World on Edge: India’s Smartphone Source Code Proposal Sparks Security Fears

India's proposal to mandate the sharing of source code with the government for all smartphone manufacturers has raised much concern within the tech industry and digital policy circles. The proposal is part of the larger Indian Telecom Security Assurance Requirements and is intended to protect national security by enhancing security for all users of mobile phones as online fraud and data breaches are growing rapidly in the second largest smartphone market in the world.

Many industry associations and technology companies feel that this requirement will lead to unintended consequences and will likely create more exposure to cyber risks for both users and infrastructure, as well as create disincentives to invest and innovate in the technology space.

What the government is putting forward

Under a draft framework that's still in the works, phone manufacturers would have to hand over their source code to government-approved labs so they can have a look at it and figure out any vulnerabilities. Meanwhile, the companies would have to give the authorities a heads-up before they release any big software updates or security patches. And then there's this: mandatory malware scans, extending the time devices have to store logs, and tweaking software so that apps can't just keep snooping on your camera and mic when you're not using them.

As of right now, January 2026, that's still just a proposal; don't get too excited yet. No law has been passed, and the government is still talking to the industry, listening to what they have to say before making any final decisions. IT Secretary S. Krishnan has said that the government will take the industry's feedback on board and that drawing any conclusions just yet would be premature.

Cybersecurity implications of mandatory source code access

From a technical standpoint, source code disclosure significantly increases the attack surface. While controlled access enables review, it also creates additional points of exposure. Any compromise of government systems, designated labs, or insider access could lead to unauthorized disclosure of vulnerabilities.

Source code provides a complete blueprint of how a system operates. If accessed outside tightly controlled environments, it enables faster identification of weaknesses, including zero-day vulnerabilities, before fixes are deployed. This shortens response windows and raises the risk of large-scale exploitation. There is also no global precedent among major democracies for mandating such comprehensive disclosure. As a result, standardized protocols for secure handling, storage, and audit at this scale do not currently exist.

Supply chain exposure is another factor. Centralized review points may become targets for attackers seeking to extract proprietary information or introduce malicious elements into the software lifecycle.

Privacy and digital rights implications

The proposed policy has spawned a whole heap of concerns about privacy and data protection. Allowing people to take a peek at the source code basically lets them get right down to the nitty-gritty of encryption methods and how devices work, which in turn makes it rather easier for security to be compromised or for the government to keep a closer eye on people. And if you're going to have to store these device logs for at least a year, you're basically asking for trouble. The more you store of people's activity, the more likely it is to get hacked or fall into the wrong hands, especially when you're still working with a data protection framework that's still in its infancy.

Civil societies have warned that if the government doesn't put some real safeguards and transparency in place, these sorts of measures could end up having a stifling effect on people's digital freedoms.

Industry response shows rare alignment

Industry is fighting back with one voice in opposition. The MAIT and ICEA, both big names in the IT world, have come out swinging; they say that secrecy is key and that this thing doesn't set any sort of international precedent. They also say that it's just not practical to get into the source code, because that's basically going to mess with people's intellectual property rights.

Smartphone makers are also saying that if source code has to be reviewed, it's just not going to work because of the way they do business. On top of that, they're worried that the mandatory malware scans will end up eating into the battery life and that the government's going to be holding up any sort of security patches to the point where they become useless.

Apple, Samsung, Google, and Xiaomi are all staying quiet on the whole thing, and Counterpoint Research reckons that between the lot of them, they're sitting on a pretty big chunk of the Indian smartphone market—34% if you count just Samsung and Xiaomi, and a further 5% with Apple.

Global context and trade considerations

China and Russia have seen a big drop in foreign investment and are now facing even more hurdles in the form of compliance costs and international trade friction, all as a result of certain policies they've put into place that basically discourage the government from forcing companies to show them their source code except in really extreme security cases.

This is having a pretty big impact on how businesses think about things all around the world and is playing a big part in the worry about where India's regulations are headed.

A policy choice with long-term consequences

The proposed policy is a tough call for India; it's all about finding a balance between looking out for security on the one hand and not making things worse in terms of how stable the whole system is and how users' personal info is going to be protected. What India does is going to have a big impact on how it fits into the global tech scene. Some of the big players are saying that instead of putting a big thumb on the scale for the government, India could try a more low-key approach to get the same results, like getting outside experts to give a thumbs up or thumbs down on things, setting up a system for reporting security holes, and really cracking down on how companies use people's data.

As talks are still ongoing, everyone is watching with bated breath to see where the policy is headed and how it's going to affect tech companies, investors, and the tech community worldwide.

More For You

WhatsApp Ghost Pairing Scam: CERT-In Warns of Account Hacking Without OTP

KawaiiGPT lowers the bar for cybercrime with free black-hat AI

Fake APKs to Digital Arrests Mark a New Phase of Cyber Fraud in India

Chrome Zero-Day Attack Breaks Cover: Update Now to Stay Safe