Indian government says the rules are essential to ensure security and resilience, especially amid growing anxiety over Chinese surveillance technology, manufacturers warn of disruptions to supply chains, project delays, and significant financial losses
India’s tightening grip on the surveillance technology market has sparked an escalating standoff with global manufacturers, as new security rules mandate rigorous testing of CCTV devices—including software and source code—before they can be sold in the country. The move, rooted in national security concerns, has drawn sharp resistance from foreign firms and reignited fears of protectionism under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration.
At the heart of the dispute is a sweeping mandate introduced in April requiring all internet-connected CCTV cameras—whether imported or domestically made—to undergo assessment in government-accredited labs. The policy applies to firms ranging from China’s Hikvision and Dahua to South Korea’s Hanwha and the U.S.-based Motorola Solutions, with no exemptions for legacy products or existing market leaders.
While the Indian government says the rules are essential to ensure security and resilience, especially amid growing anxiety over Chinese surveillance technology, manufacturers warn of disruptions to supply chains, project delays, and significant financial losses.
New Line Of Defence Or Barrier?
“There’s always an espionage risk,” says Gulshan Rai, former national cybersecurity coordinator. “Anyone can operate and control internet-connected CCTV cameras sitting in an adverse location. They need to be robust and secure.”
The government’s alarm is not unfounded. In 2021, a former junior IT minister revealed that over a million cameras deployed across Indian government institutions were of Chinese origin, some of which had reportedly been transferring sensitive data to offshore servers.
But now, the scope of scrutiny has expanded. Since April 9, manufacturers must submit each model for cybersecurity testing—including audits of firmware, communications protocols, and, where relevant, the source code itself. For companies employing proprietary protocols rather than standard ones like Wi-Fi, the rules allow the government to demand deeper access, including the possibility of international factory inspections.
This has set off alarms in boardrooms across Asia and beyond.
“Millions of dollars will be lost from the industry, sending tremors through the market,” warned Ajay Dubey, Hanwha’s director for South Asia, in an email to India’s IT ministry dated April 9.
Policy Meets Pushback
The rules were formalised just months after India’s Standardization Testing and Quality Certification (STQC) body began mandatory testing of cameras used by government agencies in June 2024. The expansion of the rules to include private-sector and consumer devices significantly raises the stakes, given that 73 per cent of India’s CCTV market lies outside the public sector.
On April 3, officials met with representatives from 17 companies—including Bosch, Honeywell, Xiaomi, and Motorola—who urged a delay. Their appeal was firmly rejected. According to meeting minutes reviewed by Reuters, the government argued that the policy “addresses a genuine security issue” and must proceed as scheduled.
By late May, only 35 of more than 340 pending applications had received certification. Of these, just one belonged to a foreign company. Some manufacturers claimed the slow pace of lab approvals and the complexity of testing procedures had brought their India operations to a near-standstill.
“All ongoing projects will go on halt,” warned Vivotek’s India director Sanjeev Gulati in correspondence with the ministry.
Retailers, too, are feeling the pinch. “It is not possible right now to cater to big orders,” said Sagar Sharma, who runs a CCTV shop in New Delhi’s Nehru Place electronics market. “We have to survive with the stock we have.” Sharma said sales had fallen by around 50 per cent in May compared with April.
China, Unspoken Factor
Though the new guidelines do not name any country, internal communications suggest a focus on Chinese-origin products. In one email dated April 24, Xiaomi noted that Indian officials had declined to process their application due to “internal guidelines” requiring additional disclosures from two Chinese-based contract manufacturers.
The message pointed to unwritten instructions linked to companies from countries sharing land borders with India—primarily, China.
A senior Indian official involved in the policy told Reuters that “China is part of the concern,” adding, “We have to ensure there are checks on what is used in these devices, what chips are going in.”
India’s moves follow a wider global pattern. The U.S. banned sales of Hikvision and Dahua equipment in 2022, citing national security risks, while the UK and Australia have also placed curbs on Chinese-made surveillance systems. Meanwhile, China’s sweeping national security laws—which require domestic firms to cooperate with intelligence services—have only deepened international scepticism.
China’s foreign ministry has condemned the Indian measures, accusing New Delhi of smearing Chinese companies and urging the country to provide a “non-discriminatory environment.”
Compliance or Chaos?
For now, Indian authorities say the policy is about building resilience, not picking winners. The IT ministry has indicated that it may accredit additional testing labs to speed up approvals. As of May 28, India had 15 authorised labs capable of processing 28 applications concurrently—each of which can cover up to 10 camera models.
The government also argues that the policy will ultimately enhance trust in a market that’s projected to grow from USD 3.5 billion in 2024 to USD 7 billion by 2030, according to estimates by Counterpoint Research.
Still, many in the industry remain unconvinced. India’s CP Plus, which controls nearly half the domestic market, said its flagship models had cleared testing, but others were still awaiting approval. Bosch, meanwhile, urged regulators to “allow business continuity” during the evaluation period.
Until then, foreign players remain in limbo, navigating a regulatory thicket that many see as opaque and unevenly applied. As geopolitical tensions continue to influence technology policy, India’s attempt to harden its digital infrastructure might come at the cost of slowing its surveillance ambitions.
Whether the current deadlock leads to enhanced security or market fragmentation may well depend on how swiftly and transparently India can implement its own rules.