Malaysia's decision to stop civil servants from using Waze raises a basic question: are we making the country safer through evidence-based policy, or letting geopolitical feelings crowd out practical reality?
According to a Reuters report published on Oct 21, 2026, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said Waze's Israeli origins raised security concerns, especially about protecting people's data and identities. The government recommended TuJu, a homegrown navigation app developed by the Malaysian Highway Authority, as the alternative.
https://share.google/BQgnYETpBV8mfiPO6. The Star
Protecting sensitive government information is clearly a legitimate duty. Malaysia has every right to ask whether the apps its civil servants use expose sensitive location data, operational movements or details about critical infrastructure.
But where a product comes from doesn't, on its own, prove it's a security threat. The government must explain what risks it has found, what evidence backs the restriction, and how the replacement actually addresses those risks.
National security deserves more than an assumption; it needs evidence.
Security must be measured, not presumed
Waze, bought by Google in 2013, uses satellite positioning and driver-contributed information to give traffic updates, flag road incidents and suggest alternative routes. How useful it is depends partly on how good and how fresh its data are.
The real question is whether its data collection, processing, storage or legal obligations create unacceptable risks for Malaysian government users. That should be settled by an independent cybersecurity audit, not inferred from its Israeli origins alone.
If credible evidence shows Waze exposes sensitive government operations, restricting it on official devices may be justified. Sensitive agencies could also need stricter controls than ordinary departments.
Even so, the government should separate official use on government devices from personal use outside work hours. A proportionate policy would tackle the actual risk without piling on unnecessary restrictions.
What will the ban cost Malaysia?
A navigation app may look trivial next to big national security concerns but swapping out a widely used digital service can have operational and financial fallout.
Civil servants travel constantly for inspections, enforcement, public works, welfare visits and meetings. If the replacement gives less accurate traffic information or forces users to learn unfamiliar functions, delays could hurt punctuality, service delivery and productivity.
Other costs may include staff training, technical support, system integration and cybersecurity testing. If the alternative routes are less efficient, extra fuel and vehicle running costs could follow.
These are possible consequences, not proven losses. How likely they are depends on how TuJu actually performs and how well the rollout is handled.
Picture a district officer travelling to inspect a flood-hit settlement. Accurate road closures, congestion reports and alternative routes can make a real difference. The officer needs the most reliable and secure tool, not just an app that satisfies a political preference.
The same goes for emergency coordination, public infrastructure maintenance and other essential services.
Is TuJu ready to replace Waze?
Encouraging a Malaysian-made app is a sensible ambition. Building domestic tech skills can create room for innovation, skilled jobs and more control over national digital infrastructure.
Local ownership doesn't automatically guarantee data sovereignty or better cybersecurity.
The government should disclose, as far as security allows, where TuJu's data are processed, who can access them, what foreign infrastructure it relies on, and how independently its security has been checked.
It should also test mapping accuracy, traffic prediction, rural coverage, reliability and compatibility with existing government systems.
If the alternative depends on foreign mapping infrastructure, policymakers must explain how that dependency affects the original security rationale. The goal should be real technological independence, not just swapping the app on a phone.
Malaysia's international reputation matters
Malaysia firmly supports Palestinian rights and has no diplomatic relations with Israel. That stance is a matter of foreign policy and national conviction.
But opposing a state's policies shouldn't automatically become a blanket judgment on every technology, company or person linked to it.
An unexplained restriction could make investors wonder whether Malaysia's tech policies follow consistent security standards or shifting geopolitical winds.
The government should apply the same rigorous assessment to apps and digital services from every country. Consistency builds public confidence; selective treatment without clear justification risks eroding it.
Backing Malaysian technology should mean making it competitive through investment, research, performance and public trust not shielding it from comparison.
A better way forward
The government should publish its security rationale, commission independent assessments and set transparent standards for all navigation apps used by public agencies.
Where credible threats exist, restrictions should match the sensitivity of the data and the severity of the risks. TuJu should go through practical trials before being treated as a full replacement, with its performance and security reviewed regularly.
Malaysia also needs a broader national data-security policy covering cloud services, messaging platforms, artificial intelligence and other technologies that handle sensitive information.
In the end, the question isn't whether Waze is Israeli or TuJu is Malaysian. It's whether the government can show its decision makes Malaysia safer without needlessly sacrificing productivity, public resources and confidence in policymaking.
National sovereignty gets stronger when Malaysia builds secure domestic technology, demands accountability from every provider and makes decisions on verifiable evidence. A ban may be justified by demonstrated risks but nationality alone should never stand in for proof.
K.T.Maran Social Environmental Animal Activist
K.T. Maran (maran.kt@gmail.com) is a content creator under the Newswav Creator programme, where you get to express yourself, be a citizen journalist, and at the same time monetize your content & reach millions of users on Newswav. Log in to creator.newswav.com and become a Newswav Creator now!
The User Content (as defined on Newswav Terms of Use) above including the views expressed and media (pictures, videos, citations etc) were submitted & posted by the author. Newswav is solely an aggregation platform that hosts the User Content. If you have any questions about the content, copyright or other issues of the work, please contact creator@newswav.com.
