Telegram eliminated the Chinese cryptocurrency scam markets – then they looked at themselves

Before they were removed from Telegram, the Xinbi guarantee and Haowang’s guarantee showed similar places that offer explicitly illegal services in all those categories and more. Like the recently ascending Tudou guarantee, those other “guaranteed” markets do not sell services directly, but instead offer deposit and deposit characteristics that prevent sellers from frauding customers.

When Wired asked Telegram in May of an Elliptic report focused on Xinbi Guarant’s criminal offers, Telegram responded with a large purge: he prohibited not only Xinbi’s accounts, but also those of Haowang Guaranty, the much wider market that he had persisted for three years, has delivered a much wider market that used the market that continued to improve the work for the improvement and its composition fraud.

In a declaration sent to Wired at the time, the spokesman for the telegram Remi Vaughn wrote that “the communities previously reported by wiring or included in the reports published by Elliptic have all been eliminated” and added that “criminal activities such as scam or money laundering are prohibited by Telegram’s service terms and are always removed when they discover.”

Since then, however, Elliptic has continued to share its results on the apparent money recycling activities on ten other markets, including the Tudou guarantee, in a group of telegrams that included a wired journalist and a spokesman for the telegram. Yet Telegram has not eliminated any of the accounts relating to the black markets highlighted elliptical. The Xinbi warranty has, in fact, reconstructed on new accounts without even rejected. He has not yet dealt with new accounts prohibitions, despite the telegram itself stated that the contents of the market have violated its terms of service.

In a statement to Wired, a spokesman for the telegram defended the apparent decision of the company not to ban the rebound black markets. “The channels in question mainly involve users from China, in which rigid capital checks often leave citizens with little choice if not to look for alternatives to move funds internationally”, reads the note. “We evaluate the relationships of the case by case and categorically refuse general prohibitions, in particular when users are trying to evade the oppressive restrictions imposed by authoritarian regimes. We remain unshakable in our commitment to safeguard the privacy of users and defend the fundamental freedoms, including the right to financial autonomy.”

Robinson by Ellittic refuses this topic. “We have studied these markets for almost two years and it’s not about helping people achieve financial autonomy,” says Robinson. “These are markets that mainly facilitate money laundering for the proceeds of the fraud and other illegal activities”.

Erin West, a former prosecutor who now guides the non -profit operation Shamrock, an organization focused on the interruption of cryptocurrency scam operations, says his accusation against the telegram in a simpler way. “These are bad, who allow bad boy’s business on their bad boy platform,” says West. “They have the ability to close a scam economy and human trafficking. Instead, they are hosting Craigslist for cryptocurrency scammers.”

Telegram’s apparently inconsistent approach to prohibit the black markets of crypt scams could have less to do with its principles of “financial autonomy” which with the attempt not to defeat the government of the United States, says Jacob Sims, a companion visiting the Harvard University Asian center. At the beginning of May, the network of application of the financial crimes of the United States Treasury officially tagged the Huione group to “concern about the recycling of primary money. “Sims argues that the designation, which referred directly to Haowang’s guarantee but not to the Tudou guarantee, may have stimulated the telegram to act and that another move similar to the government could be necessary to push Telegram to act again.

“In the end, the repression of last month shows how disruptive the telegram can be when he collaborates, but also shows how quickly the scammers will adapt,” says Sims. “There is no real legal guilt that technological companies have for what happens on their platform unless there is a specific case brought to their attention by the police. And so, until it changes, I don’t know what incentive they must be proactive.”