Government staff working in the U.S. House of Representatives have been directed to remove WhatsApp from official devices, as internal cybersecurity teams raise red flags over the app’s data handling and security architecture. The order, issued by the House’s Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), signals a broader shift in how federal bodies evaluate the tools their employees use to communicate.
According to internal guidance sent to congressional staff, WhatsApp must be deleted from all work-related phones and computers. The Office of Cybersecurity has identified the platform as a potential threat, citing unresolved questions around data transparency, how long user information is retained, and the limited visibility into the platform’s internal security systems.
Although WhatsApp markets itself as a secure messaging service, with end-to-end encryption enabled by default, experts have pointed to gaps in how the system functions behind the scenes. Critics argue that while message contents may be protected, other forms of metadata, like communication timestamps or contact networks, could be exposed or misused. The CAO’s decision appears to be driven less by fears of message interception and more by the possibility that external actors could map out communication patterns among House staff.
Meta, which owns WhatsApp, pushed back hard against the directive. Company representatives argued that the app offers stronger security than several alternatives currently approved for official use. They emphasized that encryption remains intact, and reiterated that both House and Senate members have used the service regularly without incident.
Still, recent incidents have intensified scrutiny. Earlier this year, Malaysia’s home minister reportedly had his WhatsApp account compromised through a phishing attempt. Around the same time, state-controlled media in Iran warned citizens to delete the app, claiming, without clear evidence, that it was leaking data to foreign entities. While Meta has denied those claims and pointed to the strength of its encryption, such headlines have added fuel to an already heated conversation about digital trust.
Another sticking point for U.S. cybersecurity officials is the limited access researchers and regulators have to WhatsApp’s backend processes. Although the service is built on the well-known Signal Protocol — open-source and widely respected—the company does not offer full transparency into how it implements or modifies that framework. Critics have argued that a tool used widely in high-security environments should allow deeper independent review.
As tensions between Meta and regulators continue to rise, the timing of the ban may also carry political undertones. The company is already in the middle of a legal battle with the Federal Trade Commission, which is challenging Meta’s past acquisitions (including WhatsApp) as part of an ongoing antitrust lawsuit. At the same time, Meta is working to monetize WhatsApp more aggressively, having just rolled out ads inside the app in some markets.
For now, the House’s security teams recommend staff rely on apps like Signal, iMessage, or Microsoft Teams for official messaging. Whether WhatsApp can regain its footing in the government’s tech stack may depend on how convincingly it can address the privacy concerns at the heart of this ban.
Image: DIW-Aigen
Read next: How to Find Someone Using Just a Photo: 10 Best Reverse Image Search Tools (Ranked and Explained)
According to internal guidance sent to congressional staff, WhatsApp must be deleted from all work-related phones and computers. The Office of Cybersecurity has identified the platform as a potential threat, citing unresolved questions around data transparency, how long user information is retained, and the limited visibility into the platform’s internal security systems.
Although WhatsApp markets itself as a secure messaging service, with end-to-end encryption enabled by default, experts have pointed to gaps in how the system functions behind the scenes. Critics argue that while message contents may be protected, other forms of metadata, like communication timestamps or contact networks, could be exposed or misused. The CAO’s decision appears to be driven less by fears of message interception and more by the possibility that external actors could map out communication patterns among House staff.
Meta, which owns WhatsApp, pushed back hard against the directive. Company representatives argued that the app offers stronger security than several alternatives currently approved for official use. They emphasized that encryption remains intact, and reiterated that both House and Senate members have used the service regularly without incident.
Still, recent incidents have intensified scrutiny. Earlier this year, Malaysia’s home minister reportedly had his WhatsApp account compromised through a phishing attempt. Around the same time, state-controlled media in Iran warned citizens to delete the app, claiming, without clear evidence, that it was leaking data to foreign entities. While Meta has denied those claims and pointed to the strength of its encryption, such headlines have added fuel to an already heated conversation about digital trust.
Another sticking point for U.S. cybersecurity officials is the limited access researchers and regulators have to WhatsApp’s backend processes. Although the service is built on the well-known Signal Protocol — open-source and widely respected—the company does not offer full transparency into how it implements or modifies that framework. Critics have argued that a tool used widely in high-security environments should allow deeper independent review.
As tensions between Meta and regulators continue to rise, the timing of the ban may also carry political undertones. The company is already in the middle of a legal battle with the Federal Trade Commission, which is challenging Meta’s past acquisitions (including WhatsApp) as part of an ongoing antitrust lawsuit. At the same time, Meta is working to monetize WhatsApp more aggressively, having just rolled out ads inside the app in some markets.
For now, the House’s security teams recommend staff rely on apps like Signal, iMessage, or Microsoft Teams for official messaging. Whether WhatsApp can regain its footing in the government’s tech stack may depend on how convincingly it can address the privacy concerns at the heart of this ban.
Image: DIW-Aigen
Read next: How to Find Someone Using Just a Photo: 10 Best Reverse Image Search Tools (Ranked and Explained)
