Hidden Risks in the Crypto Assets Market: Potential Threats from Dependency on Communication Platforms

This report delves into the potential risks brought about by the cryptocurrency market's high dependence on specific communication platforms, using the Vietnam ban incident as an example to explore the structural vulnerabilities exposed by this dependence.

Main Discovery

• Platform Dependency Risk Emerges: In June 2025, a ban by Vietnam on a certain communication platform led to a 45% drop in user activity within major Crypto Assets communities in just a few days. This incident highlights the structural weakness of the encryption industry’s excessive reliance on a single, irreplaceable communication tool.

• Insufficient Alternatives: Despite the industry attempting various alternative platforms such as Discord, Signal, and local applications, none have been able to fully replicate the original platform's advantages in global coverage, privacy protection, and encryption user experience. No alternative solution has been found that can compete with it on scale.

• Global Regulatory Pressure Intensifies: Governments around the world are increasing scrutiny on the communication platform under the guise of maintaining "digital sovereignty," particularly targeting its stance against data sharing and monitoring. However, the platform has recently begun cooperating with authorities in certain jurisdictions, temporarily alleviating concerns in some key markets.

The communication platform's core position in the Crypto Assets market

This communication platform has become the preferred communication tool for the global encryption community due to its strong privacy protection, scalable group chat, and bot integration features. These characteristics make it the platform of choice for opinion leaders and new projects to build their communities. Market participants widely use this platform as their main interaction channel.

Today, this communication platform plays an indispensable role in the structure of the Crypto Assets market. Its existence is often taken for granted, but if one imagines a major industry event (such as Token2049) without this platform, the depth of its integration becomes apparent—participants would have to resort to exchanging other social media accounts. Such a scenario clearly does not align with the current state of the industry. At this stage, it is hard to imagine a Crypto Assets ecosystem without this communication platform.

Analysis of the Vietnam Ban Incident

On May 21, 2025, the Ministry of Information and Communications of Vietnam issued a comprehensive ban on a certain communication platform at the request of the Ministry of Public Security, requiring all telecommunications operators to block relevant services in the country by June 2.

This decision immediately triggered chaos in the entire crypto assets ecosystem in Vietnam. As one of the countries with the largest user base on the platform globally, Vietnam's crypto assets sector heavily relies on this platform as the main communication channel. The ban has left local crypto projects and users without effective alternatives. Although many have turned to VPNs to maintain access, this workaround is at best a temporary and incomplete solution.

For ordinary users who only have a general interest in Crypto Assets, accessing the platform via VPN has proven to be too troublesome. As a result, many people have completely withdrawn from participation. In just a few days, the average page views of the top ten Crypto communities in Vietnam have dropped by more than 45%.

In response, community organizers began to explore and promote alternative platforms. The activity level in the Vietnamese server on Discord surged, while some communities attempted to use local messaging applications, aiming to cater to users seeking a simpler interface.

However, these alternatives cannot replicate the unique balance of usability, privacy, and native encryption features of the original platform. Despite the ban, most users still rely on the original platform through VPNs—this is a stopgap measure rather than a true alternative.

Looking for feasible alternatives

The regulatory pressure on this communication platform reveals a structural weakness in the crypto industry: its severe dependence on a single communication tool.

As the case in Vietnam shows, the immediate response to the ban has been the widespread use of VPNs. While this provides a short-term workaround, it creates significant inconvenience for ordinary users. Despite the growing level of institutional participation in Crypto Assets, retail investors still account for a large portion of market activity. During this transformative period as the market tries to move beyond its early user base, reliance on the platform has become a barrier to broader adoption.

This has prompted the industry to actively seek alternative platforms. Discord has become the preferred solution for many communities in Vietnam, offering real-time communication and a developer-friendly environment. However, it lacks the mobile-first simplicity that the original platform provides. Another candidate, Signal, promotes having strong security features, but the tools it offers for native encryption use cases are limited—making it an incomplete alternative.

Other messaging applications, such as Zalo or WhatsApp, often have user bases limited to specific regions. This makes them inconsistent with the global nature of the Crypto Assets ecosystem from the outset, which inherently requires cross-border communication.

Ultimately, the encryption industry has yet to find a viable alternative to the original platform. Although its technological advantages, such as anonymity, privacy, and bot integration, have propelled it to maintain its dominance, the fundamental issue lies in its structure.

Currently, there is no widely adopted communication platform that can operate seamlessly across borders. Due to varying communication preferences in different countries, finding a single alternative that meets the global needs of the encryption ecosystem remains a significant challenge.

The original platform occupies a unique position in the field of communications. It does not dominate any single national market, and for many users, it is not their primary application. However, in many different regions, it is often the second most used communication tool. This unique status as a universal secondary platform endows it with a de facto neutrality that transcends borders. It is precisely this region-independent status that makes it so difficult to replace.

Increasing regulatory risks

Despite the lack of viable alternatives, governments around the world, including Vietnam, are strengthening their scrutiny of this communication platform in the name of "digital sovereignty."

This is largely due to the platform's strong privacy policy and its general refusal to share user data (with a few major jurisdictions as exceptions). For many governments, the inability to monitor encryption communications on the platform remains a core concern.

These concerns are increasingly being translated into regulatory actions. Countries that have taken measures typically follow one of three strategies. The first is a comprehensive ban, usually accompanied by initiatives to promote domestic alternatives. The second involves implementing temporary blocks in response to specific incidents, such as legal non-compliance or election-related tensions. The third is selective filtering, where the government allows access to the application but blocks specific channels or limits its speed.

The precedents set by these cases suggest that there may be more restrictions in the future. Currently, several countries are considering implementing comprehensive or partial bans on the platform. Although the political reasons vary from country to country, the regulatory patterns are becoming more consistent. Governments typically use national security, non-compliance with local laws, or risks to public order as reasons for control.

In this context, how the communication platform responds is becoming a key variable. Although the triggers vary by jurisdiction, the fundamental issue remains the same: the platform is unwilling or unable to meet local compliance requirements. In countries with stricter regulatory environments, tolerance for non-cooperative platforms has significantly decreased.

However, there are signs that the platform's strategy is changing. Following the CEO's arrest, the company has begun to take steps to enhance compliance. A notable example is its release of a transparency report that discloses the IP addresses and phone numbers of violators, but this is limited to jurisdictions with strong democratic systems.

Although the scope is limited, the platform now shows more willingness to comply with government requirements than in the past. This shift is expected to reduce the risk of facing immediate sanctions in major markets.

Potential Impact of a Comprehensive Ban

The likelihood of a global ban on this communication platform remains low, but the concerns of governments around the world are real and growing. If such a situation occurs, users' initial response may be similar to that of the Vietnam case, namely an increase in VPN usage. However, this approach is merely a short-term workaround.

If a comprehensive ban occurs, users will begin to migrate to alternative services. As discussed earlier, the most viable alternatives are not clones of the original platform or local communication applications. Platforms that possess region-neutral characteristics in the original platform are more likely to gain attention.

The recently adopted Signal is a potential candidate. However, a stronger competitor may be the messaging service that a certain social media platform is about to launch. Given the deep integration of the social platform with the Crypto Assets community, its new service could leverage the existing user base for a strong market entry.

However, the more direct risk lies in the potential impact on a certain blockchain project. Although the project is officially separate from the communication platform, the two are closely related. The native incentive game of the communication platform has always been at the core of the growth of the blockchain ecosystem. The ability to easily use related wallets directly within the communication platform interface is also a key advantage.

The expansion of the ban measures has turned this integration into a risk point. If access to the communication platform is blocked, the user acquisition and transaction flow of applications integrated with the blockchain will be immediately affected. Even if the blockchain continues to operate normally, the impact still exists. Since the market views the communication platform and the blockchain as a unified platform, projects based on the blockchain face direct reputational and operational risks.

Although the global ban on this communication platform is unlikely, the industry must face a reality: viable alternatives are limited. More broadly, the encryption ecosystem relies not only on this communication platform but also on multiple single service points within its infrastructure. If these structural vulnerabilities are not addressed, the industry will continue to be exposed to sudden external shocks.

The direction for future development has become clear. Reducing over-reliance and achieving platform diversification is no longer optional, but a necessary survival strategy.