Two outdated software bugs addressed, says WhatsApp
New Delhi, Apr 19: Instant messaging app WhatsApp on Monday said it has addressed two bugs that existed on its outdated software and that it had no reason to believe that "these vulnerabilities were ever abused".
The official statement came in the wake of a recent advisory issued by the CERT-In which cautioned WhatsApp users about certain vulnerabilities in the app (application) that could lead to breach of sensitive information.
"We regularly work with security researchers to improve the numerous ways WhatsApp protects people's messages."
"As is typical of software products, we have addressed two bugs that existed on outdated software, and we have no reason to believe that they were ever abused," a WhatsApp spokesperson told PTI in a statement.
The spokesperson added that WhatsApp "remains safe and secure, and end-to-end encryption continues to work as intended to protect people's messages."
A "high" severity rating advisory issued by the CERT-In, or the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team, on Saturday had said that the vulnerability has been detected in the software that has "WhatsApp and WhatsApp Business for Android prior to v2.21.4.18 and WhatsApp and WhatsApp Business for iOS prior to v2.21.32."
"Multiple vulnerabilities have been reported in WhatsApp applications which could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code or access sensitive information on a targeted system," the advisory had said.
The CERT-In is the federal technology arm to combat cyber attacks and guarding the Indian cyber space.
The advisory had recommended users to update their devices with the latest version of WhatsApp from Google Play store or iOS App Store to counter the vulnerability threat.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
K’taka HC declines stay on menstrual leave order, says issue of public importance
Bengaluru: The State Government has strongly defended its decision to grant one day of paid menstrual leave every month to women employees, telling the Karnataka High Court that the notification was issued in the larger interest of women and is legally sound. The Court, treating the matter as one of significant public importance, refused to stay the implementation of the order and adjourned the hearing to January 20.
The Labour Department’s November 20, 2025 notification was challenged by the Bangalore Hotels Association, Avirat Defence System, Facile Aerospace Technologies Ltd and Samos Technologies Ltd. Justice Jyoti Mulimani heard the petitions on Wednesday.
At the start of the hearing, the bench asked whether the State had filed its objections. Advocate General K. Shashikiran Shetty informed the Court that objections had been submitted and that copies would be provided to the petitioners.
Defending the notification, the Advocate General said the government had introduced a progressive measure aimed at women’s welfare, one that no other state in India had implemented so far. He told the Court that 72 objections were received and considered before finalising the notification. He argued that the government was empowered to frame such policy under Article 42 of the Constitution and noted that the Supreme Court and the Law Commission had earlier made recommendations in this direction.
ALSO READ: MP Brijesh Chowta urges centre to grant point of call status to Mangaluru airport
When the Court asked whether the notification applied to all sectors, the Advocate General replied in the affirmative. The bench observed that the matter required detailed hearing because of its wider public impact and decided to take it up in January. The Court added that petitioners may file their responses to the State’s objections before the next hearing.
Petitioners’ counsel B.K. Prashanth requested that the State be restrained from enforcing the order until the case is decided. The Advocate General responded that the government had already begun implementing the notification across all sectors.
Justice Mulimani noted that nothing would change between now and the next hearing and emphasised that the Court would consider all arguments thoroughly before issuing any direction. The bench then adjourned the matter to January 20 and asked petitioners to file any additional applications with copies to the State’s counsel.
