India’s Surveillance Shadow: The Battle Over Always-On iPhone Tracking

In the bustling tech hubs of Bangalore and beyond, a quiet storm is brewing between India’s government and global smartphone giants. At the heart of the controversy is a proposal that could mandate always-active satellite location tracking on devices like the iPhone, raising alarms about privacy erosion in one of the world’s largest smartphone markets. This move, ostensibly aimed at enhancing national security and law enforcement capabilities, pits the demands of state surveillance against the core principles of user data protection championed by companies such as Apple.

The saga began to unfold publicly in early December 2025, when reports emerged that India’s Department of Telecommunications (DoT) was reviewing a telecom industry suggestion to enforce persistent satellite-based location services. This would allow authorities to pinpoint device locations with unprecedented accuracy, even in areas without cellular coverage, leveraging technologies like assisted GPS (A-GPS) and satellite systems. Sources familiar with the discussions indicate that the proposal stems from a desire to bolster surveillance tools, particularly for tracking criminal activities or emergency responses in remote regions.

Apple, known for its staunch defense of user privacy, has been vocal in its opposition. According to documents and emails reviewed by Reuters, the Cupertino-based company, alongside Google and Samsung, has protested the plan, arguing it could set a dangerous precedent for government overreach. The tech firms contend that forcing always-on tracking undermines user consent and exposes individuals to potential misuse of data, from unwarranted monitoring to data breaches.

Tech Giants Push Back on Privacy Grounds

This isn’t the first time India has tangled with smartphone manufacturers over data access. Just days before the tracking proposal gained traction, the government had directed makers to preload a state-owned cybersecurity app called Sanchar Saathi on all new devices. That order, detailed in a government directive obtained by Reuters, aimed to combat fraud and track stolen phones but drew swift backlash for its undeletable nature. Apple, in particular, resisted, citing conflicts with its ecosystem’s security model.

The pivot to satellite tracking appears to be an escalation. As reported by AppleInsider, while the app mandate was eventually withdrawn amid outcry, whispers suggest the government had contemplated even more invasive measures, including always-on satellite location data for iPhones. This would integrate with India’s homegrown NavIC satellite system, which has been increasingly promoted for integration into consumer devices.

Industry insiders note that NavIC, developed by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) in response to past denials of GPS access during conflicts like the 1999 Kargil War, represents national pride in technological self-reliance. Posts on X (formerly Twitter) have highlighted this historical context, with users praising Apple’s inclusion of NavIC in models like the iPhone 15 Pro as a win for Indian innovation. However, the current debate shifts the narrative from collaboration to coercion, as mandatory tracking could force companies to redesign software and hardware to comply.

Global Precedents and Industry Ripples

The implications extend far beyond India’s borders. Tech executives worry that acquiescing here could embolden other governments to demand similar concessions. For instance, in the European Union, regulations like the Digital Markets Act have already compelled Apple to open up its ecosystem, but those focus on competition rather than surveillance. In contrast, India’s approach echoes concerns seen in China, where state access to user data is routine, though Apple has navigated that market by storing data locally under strict controls.

Samsung and Google, as Android ecosystem leaders, face their own challenges. Their devices already support a range of location services, but making satellite tracking non-disableable would require fundamental changes to operating systems, potentially violating global privacy standards like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). A report from India Today underscores how these companies have lobbied against the proposal, emphasizing risks to user trust and international trade relations.

Moreover, the proposal intersects with India’s broader digital ambitions. The country, home to over a billion mobile users, is pushing for greater control over technology infrastructure. This includes bans on certain devices like satellite phones for civilians, as warned in a 2025 travel alert from the U.S. Embassy & Consulates in India, which highlighted risks of detention for possessing such tech. The always-on tracking idea could extend this scrutiny to everyday smartphones, blurring lines between security and surveillance.

User Rights in the Crosshairs

Privacy advocates are sounding the alarm, arguing that constant location data collection infringes on fundamental rights. In a nation where digital payments and services are ubiquitous, from UPI transactions to Aadhaar-linked identities, adding another layer of tracking could create a panopticon-like environment. Experts point out that satellite-aided systems, while useful for emergencies—such as Apple’s Emergency SOS via satellite feature—become problematic when mandated without opt-outs.

Posts circulating on X reflect public sentiment, with some users expressing outrage over potential government spying, while others defend it as necessary for safety in a populous country prone to natural disasters and security threats. These online discussions, often inconclusive, highlight a divide: tech-savvy urbanites decry privacy invasions, whereas supporters cite benefits like faster recovery of lost devices or aid in anti-terror operations.

From a technical standpoint, implementing always-on satellite tracking poses engineering hurdles. iPhones, for example, rely on a mix of GPS, Wi-Fi, and cellular data for location services, with satellite capabilities reserved for specific scenarios. Forcing perpetual activation could drain batteries, increase data usage, and complicate software updates. Apple has historically resisted such demands, as seen in past battles with the FBI over device encryption, positioning itself as a guardian of user privacy.

Economic Stakes and Market Dynamics

India’s smartphone market, projected to reach 1.5 billion units by 2030, is a prize for manufacturers. Apple has ramped up production there, assembling models like the iPhone 16 to reduce reliance on China. However, regulatory pressures could deter investment. A Tech Outlook analysis notes that while the government views this as a step toward digital sovereignty, companies fear it could stifle innovation and lead to market exits.

Samsung, with its strong foothold in India, and Google, through its Pixel line and Android partnerships, have joined Apple in protests. Their collective stance, as detailed in Reuters coverage, includes warnings about setting global precedents that might encourage authoritarian regimes to demand backdoors. This unity among rivals underscores the perceived threat to the industry’s foundational values.

Furthermore, the debate ties into ongoing tensions over data localization. India’s Personal Data Protection Bill, still evolving, seeks to keep citizen data within borders, but mandatory tracking adds a real-time surveillance element. Analysts suggest this could influence trade negotiations, particularly with the U.S., where privacy laws like California’s CCPA set high bars.

Navigating the Path Forward

As deliberations continue, the DoT has yet to finalize its position, but sources indicate internal reviews are weighing privacy concerns against security needs. AppleInsider reports accusations that the government previously eyed even more draconian measures, fueling speculation about backroom dealings.

For consumers, the stakes are personal. In rural India, where cellular blackouts are common, satellite tracking might aid in emergencies, but at what cost? Urban users, already wary after incidents like Pegasus spyware targeting opposition figures—as noted in past X discussions—fear normalized surveillance.

Industry observers predict that if pushed through, this could lead to legal challenges, possibly reaching India’s Supreme Court, which has previously affirmed privacy as a fundamental right in the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment. Tech firms might explore workarounds, like region-specific features, but at the risk of fragmenting their global offerings.

Balancing Security and Freedom

The controversy also highlights India’s push for indigenous tech. NavIC’s integration into iPhones was celebrated on X as a milestone, born from the Kargil denial of GPS access. Yet, mandating its use for surveillance twists this narrative, potentially alienating partners like Apple.

Globally, this could reshape how tech companies engage with emerging markets. Google and Samsung, with their diverse portfolios, might adapt more readily, but Apple’s privacy-first ethos makes compromise unlikely. Reuters sources suggest ongoing dialogues, with ministries debating the proposal’s feasibility.

In the end, this tussle encapsulates the broader conflict between state power and individual rights in the digital age. As India asserts its tech sovereignty, the world watches whether privacy will prevail or if surveillance shadows will lengthen over its vast user base. With protests mounting and no resolution in sight, the outcome could redefine boundaries for smartphone data worldwide.