Last month, the messaging app Telegram undertook a significant action, banning several prominent Chinese-language black markets that facilitated tens of billions of dollars in crypto-scam-related services. This move, targeting two of the most popular marketplaces for illicit wares, appeared to be a decisive strike against criminal enterprises. However, despite this initial purge, the black marketeers have swiftly rebranded, rebuilt, and resumed their operations on the very same platform. This rapid resurgence highlights the persistent challenges in combating sophisticated online criminal networks.
Telegram’s Initial Purge
One month ago, Telegram made headlines by virtually banning all accounts associated with the top two Chinese-language crypto scam marketplaces: Haowang Guarantee and Xinbi Guarantee. These platforms were notorious for offering services like money laundering, stolen data, and other illicit activities to vast criminal enterprises. This decisive action was initially seen as a strong deterrent against the multi-billion dollar crypto scam industry.
The Swift Rebound of Black Markets
Despite Telegram’s efforts, crypto tracing firm Elliptic recently published a report detailing how these Telegram-based black markets quickly bounced back. Other smaller markets have expanded to fill the void left by the banned platforms, effectively resuming business as usual. This rapid adaptation by criminal groups underscores the difficulty in eradicating online illicit activities when platforms do not maintain continuous enforcement.
Tudou Guarantee: A Major Successor
One market, Tudou Guarantee, which is partially owned by the same parent company as the now-defunct Haowang Guarantee, has more than doubled in size. Elliptic reports that its main channel now boasts 289,000 users, nearly matching Haowang Guarantee’s previous count. Tudou is currently facilitating approximately $15 million in daily crypto payments, indicating its significant role in the rebuilt scam ecosystem.
Xinbi Guarantee’s Persistence
Xinbi Guarantee, despite being banned, has also successfully relaunched on new channels and managed to regain hundreds of thousands of users. Elliptic’s findings show that this market continues its operations, with Telegram seemingly taking no further action against its new accounts. This demonstrates a clear challenge in sustaining bans against determined and adaptable criminal organizations.
The Scope of Illicit Services
Elliptic shared examples of posts from Tudou Guarantee, which openly offer money laundering services, scam website development, and the sale of stolen personal data for targeting victims. Disturbingly, some posts explicitly offer prostitution services, including references to possible minors. These offerings illustrate the deeply illicit and harmful nature of the activities facilitated by these platforms.
Escrow Services and Scam Facilitation
Like the previously banned markets, Tudou Guarantee operates by offering escrow and deposit features, which serve to prevent vendors from defrauding their criminal customers. While these marketplaces do not directly sell the services, their provision of escrow significantly facilitates the transactions for money laundering and other illicit activities. This mechanism adds a layer of “trust” within the criminal underworld.
Telegram’s Stated Policies vs. Enforcement
In May, Telegram stated that “criminal activities like scamming or money laundering are forbidden by Telegram’s terms of service and are always removed whenever discovered.” However, Elliptic’s continued sharing of findings about apparent money laundering activities on ten other markets, including Tudou Guarantee, has not resulted in further bans. This apparent inconsistency raises questions about Telegram’s enforcement practices.
Calls for Proactive Enforcement
Elliptic’s co-founder, Tom Robinson, emphasizes the urgent need for active pursuit of these marketplaces to prevent them from flourishing and continuing to inflict misery on victims worldwide. Experts like former prosecutor Erin West argue that Telegram has the power to shut down these scam economies and human trafficking, but appears unwilling to do so proactively. This situation highlights the ongoing debate about platform responsibility in combating online crime.
