Crypto Black Markets Rebound: Telegram’s Purge Fails as Money Laundering Hubs Resurface
In May, Telegram launched what appeared to be a decisive strike against the shadowy Chinese-speaking underworld of cryptocurrency fraud by blocking its largest marketplaces—platforms rife with services for money laundering, the trade of stolen data, and other illicit activities. Yet this purge proved to be little more than a temporary reprieve: the black markets quickly reemerged under new names, resuming operations on the very platform that had previously banned them.
According to a report by Elliptic, the criminal service economy tied to Telegram has already rebounded in full since the high-profile crackdown in mid-May. At the time, the messaging app dismantled accounts and channels linked to the two largest hubs—Haowang Guarantee and Xinbi Guarantee—which together facilitated transactions totaling approximately $35 billion. The majority of these funds were linked to investment scams targeting individuals in Western nations, with much of the fraud carried out by people coerced into working in scam centers across Cambodia, Myanmar, and Laos.
Within mere weeks, smaller players filled the void left behind. As Elliptic experts note, Telegram has done little to hinder this resurgence. In fact, many of the newly prominent entities appear to be run by the same operators whose accounts were disabled in May.
One platform receiving particular scrutiny is Tudou Guarantee, partially owned by the Huione group—the same entity behind Haowang Guarantee. In the past month alone, Tudou Guarantee has more than doubled in size. Its primary Telegram channel now boasts nearly 289,000 subscribers, mirroring the numbers of Haowang at its peak. Elliptic estimates that Tudou Guarantee processes around $15 million in daily transactions—nearly rivaling Haowang’s former volume.
Xinbi Guarantee, the second major hub, also reappeared under new Telegram channels with minimal rebranding. Its audience is again growing rapidly, despite Telegram having previously acknowledged the platform’s blatant violation of its policies.
Elliptic shared current examples of activity on Tudou Guarantee with journalists: offers to launder cryptocurrency, build phishing websites, and sell stolen personal data abound. Even more disturbing were ads for sexual services, some of which hinted at the involvement of minors—promising access to “students,” “queens,” and “lolis,” accompanied by images of young girls.
In the past, Haowang and Xinbi Guarantee promoted similarly disturbing content, including ads for handcuffs and batons—equipment reportedly used by guards at labor camps where victims were forced into scam operations under threat of violence.
Telegram responded swiftly in May when journalists inquired about Xinbi Guarantee’s activities, removing its channels and those of Haowang Guarantee. At the time, the platform stated that all communities identified by journalists and analysts had been dismantled and reaffirmed its zero-tolerance policy toward fraud and money laundering.
Yet, Telegram has shown no urgency in replicating that crackdown. Elliptic has repeatedly shared updated intelligence on new black-market operations—including Tudou Guarantee—in dedicated Telegram groups involving both media and company representatives. Nevertheless, the accounts remain untouched.
For instance, Xinbi Guarantee has resumed its activities under identical branding and continues to gain traction. Telegram has not publicly explained its apparent refusal to take further action, though in a recent statement it implied that the issue was not neglect or resource scarcity.
According to Telegram, many of the channels in question cater to users from China, where strict currency controls are in place. The company suggests that citizens are often compelled to seek alternative means of transferring funds abroad, and it is therefore reluctant to impose sweeping bans, particularly when such actions may be interpreted as complicit in upholding authoritarian restrictions.
Elliptic refutes this rationale. Co-founder Tom Robinson asserts that the issue has nothing to do with financial autonomy for ordinary users, but rather concerns “a vast criminal enterprise rooted in fraud and money laundering.”
Others in the anti-crime community echo this criticism. Erin West, a former prosecutor and current head of nonprofit Operation Shamrock, describes Telegram as “a haven for fraudsters,” hosting what amounts to an open “classifieds board” for criminals.
Harvard analyst Jacob Sims argues that Telegram’s selective enforcement is likely not rooted in principle but in pragmatism—an attempt to avoid scrutiny from U.S. authorities. In early May, the U.S. Treasury officially designated Huione—the parent of Haowang Guarantee—as a key target for surveillance due to its involvement in money laundering. Sims believes this may have triggered Telegram’s initial crackdown. However, newer entities remain outside the scope of such designations, allowing the company to stand idle.
This unfolding situation underscores a hard truth: even when tech platforms cooperate with authorities, their interventions are often fleeting. Criminal networks are agile—they adapt, rebrand, and restore their operations to former scale with astonishing speed. Until lawmakers devise more effective regulatory mechanisms, platforms like Telegram will have little incentive to maintain consistent and forceful enforcement.
