Dependency of the Crypto Assets Industry on Telegram: Discussion of Potential Risks and Alternatives

Main Points

• Platform dependency risks emerge: In June 2025, Vietnam's ban on Telegram led to a 45% drop in user activity in major Crypto Assets communities, highlighting the industry's over-reliance on a single communication platform.

• Lack of Alternatives: Although there are alternatives like Discord and Signal, it is difficult to replicate Telegram's global coverage, privacy features, and native encryption user experience. Currently, no platform can match Telegram's combination of characteristics at scale.

• Increased regulatory pressure: Governments around the world are strengthening their scrutiny of Telegram under the guise of "digital sovereignty," targeting its stance against data sharing and surveillance. Telegram has begun cooperating with authorities in some regions, temporarily alleviating some market concerns.

The Role of Telegram in the Crypto Assets Market

Telegram, with its strong privacy protection, scalable group chats, and bot integration, has become a major communication platform for the global Crypto Assets community. It is the preferred choice for KOLs and new projects to build communities, playing a central role in the interactions among market participants.

Telegram deeply integrates into the structure of the Crypto Assets market. Imagine a significant event ( like Token2049) without Telegram, where participants can only exchange LinkedIn profiles; such a scenario is clearly out of place. At the current stage, an encryption ecosystem without Telegram is almost unimaginable.

Vietnam's Comprehensive Ban on Telegram Incident

On May 21, 2025, the Vietnamese Ministry of Information and Communications issued the order number 2312/CVT-CS, requiring all telecommunications operators to block Telegram services domestically before June 2.

This move has caused chaos in Vietnam's encryption ecosystem. Vietnam is one of the countries with the largest number of Telegram users globally, and its domestic Crypto Assets sector heavily relies on the platform. The ban leaves local projects and users without viable alternatives. Many have turned to using VPNs to maintain access, but this is only a temporary and incomplete solution.

For ordinary users, accessing Telegram via VPN is too inconvenient. Many have completely withdrawn from participation because of this. In just a few days, the average viewership of the top ten crypto asset communities in Vietnam has dropped by more than 45%.

In response, community organizers began exploring alternative platforms. Activity on the Vietnamese server on Discord surged, and some communities attempted to use local messaging applications like Zalo to cater to users seeking a simpler interface.

However, these alternatives cannot replicate the unique balance of usability, privacy, and native encryption features that Telegram offers. Despite the ban, most users still rely on Telegram through VPNs - this is a workaround rather than a substitute.

Feasibility Analysis of Telegram Alternatives

The regulatory pressure on Telegram reveals the structural vulnerabilities of the Crypto Assets industry: a severe reliance on a single communication platform.

The Vietnam case shows that the immediate reaction to the ban is an increase in VPN usage. While it provides a short-term workaround, it poses significant obstacles for ordinary users. Retail investors still account for a large share of market activity, and during the transformation period when the market attempts to surpass its early user base, reliance on Telegram becomes a barrier to broader adoption.

This encourages the industry to actively seek alternative platforms. Discord has become the preferred choice for many Vietnamese communities, providing real-time communication and a developer-friendly environment, but it lacks the mobile simplicity of Telegram. Signal promotes strong security features, but offers limited tools for native encryption use cases.

Other messaging applications like Zalo or WhatsApp often have user groups limited to specific regions, which is inconsistent with the global nature of the Crypto Assets ecosystem.

The crypto industry has yet to find a viable alternative to Telegram. While its technological advantages such as anonymity, privacy, and bot integration continue to drive its dominance, the fundamental issue lies in its structural nature.

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

Telegram occupies a rare position in the communication field. It does not dominate any single national market and is not a primary application for many users. However, in many regions, it is often the second most used communication tool. This unique status as a universal secondary platform grants Telegram a de facto neutrality that transcends borders, making it difficult to replace.

Regulatory Risks Faced by Telegram

Despite the lack of viable alternatives, governments around the world are strengthening censorship of Telegram in the name of "digital sovereignty."

This mainly stems from Telegram's strong privacy policy and its general refusal to share user data, with only a few major jurisdictions as exceptions (. For many governments, the inability to monitor encrypted communications on the platform remains a core concern.

These concerns are increasingly being translated into regulatory actions. Countries that have taken measures against Telegram typically follow three strategies: comprehensive bans and promoting domestic alternatives; implementing temporary blocks for specific events; and selective filtering, which allows access to the app but blocks specific channels or restricts speed.

The precedents set by these cases indicate that there may be more restrictions in the future. Currently, several countries are considering a full or partial ban on Telegram. Although the political reasons vary from country to country, the regulatory models are becoming more consistent. Governments typically cite national security, non-compliance with local laws, or risks to public order as reasons for control.

Telegram's response has become a key variable. Although the triggering points vary by jurisdiction, the fundamental issue remains the same: Telegram is unwilling or unable to meet local compliance requirements. In countries with stricter regulations, the tolerance for non-cooperative platforms is significantly reduced.

However, Telegram's strategy is shifting. After the CEO's arrest, the company began taking steps to improve compliance. A notable example is the release of transparency reports, disclosing the IP addresses and phone numbers of violators, but only in jurisdictions with strong democratic systems.

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

![Hidden Risks in the Crypto Assets Market: What Would Happen if Telegram Goes Down?])https://img-cdn.gateio.im/webp-social/moments-01a34cf54e6fd21aebb44817bd011bc8.webp(

Potential Impact of Telegram's Comprehensive Ban

The likelihood of a global ban on Telegram remains low, but the concerns of governments around the world are real and growing. If it were to happen, users' initial reactions might be similar to those in the Vietnam case, where there was an increase in VPN usage. However, this is only a short-term workaround.

In the event of a comprehensive ban, users will migrate to alternative services. The most viable alternatives are not clones of Telegram or local messaging applications, but platforms that have Telegram's region-neutral characteristics.

The recently rising adoption rate of Signal is a potential candidate. However, a stronger competitor may be X's upcoming communication service XChat. Given X's deep integration with the crypto community, XChat can leverage the existing user base for a strong market entry.

However, the more direct risk lies in the potential impact on the TON Foundation. Although the TON Foundation is separate from the official Telegram, the two are closely related. The native T2E games on Telegram have always been at the core of the growth of the TON ecosystem. The ability to easily use the TON wallet directly within the Telegram interface is also a key advantage.

The expansion of the ban measures turns this integration into a risk point. For example, if access to Telegram is blocked, the user acquisition and trading flow of applications integrated with TON will be immediately affected. Even if the blockchain continues to operate normally, the impact still exists. Since the market views Telegram and TON as a unified platform, projects based on TON face direct reputation and operational risks.

Although the possibility of a global ban on Telegram is low, the industry must face the reality: there are limited viable alternatives. More broadly, the Crypto Assets ecosystem relies not only on Telegram 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 path forward is clear. Reducing excessive dependence and achieving platform diversification is no longer an option but a necessary survival strategy.

![Hidden Risks in the Crypto Assets Market: What Would Happen if Telegram Goes Down?])https://img-cdn.gateio.im/webp-social/moments-dae36b327fc9eab50483787e6a77d15a.webp(