Why Meta is scrubbing fake accounts — and what users in Cambodia should know.

In 2025 Meta (the company that owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp) intensified a months-long campaign to remove fake, impersonating and “spammy” accounts from its platforms. The push, part product integrity effort, part creator-experience reset, has seen Meta take down millions of profiles worldwide and roll out stricter rules and automated systems to detect unoriginal, misleading or abusive behavior. The policy changes and mass removals have created relief among creators who say their work is being stolen, frustration among ordinary users who suddenly found accounts disabled without clear explanations, and fresh scrutiny in countries where criminal scam networks have relied on social platforms to recruit victims or launder influence. Facebook

What Meta says it did (the big numbers)

Meta has published and repeated two related messages through 2025: one about “spammy” and “unoriginal” content, and another about impersonation and scam-linked accounts. In April and July 2025 the company said it was pursuing a “long-term initiative” to make Facebook Feed more relevant to real people and creators by penalizing accounts that repeatedly repost others’ content, engage in fake engagement, or impersonate creators. As part of that work, Meta reported that in the first half of 2025 it took action on roughly 500,000 accounts engaged in spammy or fake-engagement behavior and removed about 10 million profiles that impersonated large content producers. The company said these measures include demoting copycat posts, blocking monetization for offenders, and removing impersonator profiles. Facebook

Independent technology press picked up and summarized the same company figures and the new enforcement posture: Meta’s crackdown targets unoriginal, recycled and AI-assisted spam, with the stated goal of elevating authentic creators and making the platform less noisy. Reporting emphasized that many of the removals were automated and that Meta intends to continue similar actions over time. TechCrunch

Why Meta is doing this now?

Meta frames the campaign as both a product quality and a business problem. Duplicate and imposter content crowd out original creators, reduce users’ trust in what they see in the Feed, and make it harder for authentic accounts to grow. In addition, the company says impersonation and spam are often tools used by criminal scammers both to build credibility and to send victims toward off-platform scams. By taking down inauthentic or impersonating accounts, Meta says it can reduce the profit and reach of bad actors while restoring attention and monetization opportunities to legitimate creators. Facebook

The timing also coincides with a broader industry trend: platforms are facing pressure from governments, creators and advertisers to curb fraud, deepfakes, and large-scale content farms. New detection tools (including AI) make larger, automated sweeps possible — but they also increase the risk of false positives that can affect innocent users. Forbes

Countries and regions affected — and Cambodia’s place in the story

Meta’s published statistics are global and do not provide a public, country-by-country breakdown of disabled or removed Facebook profiles. That means the precise number of accounts disabled in any one country, including Cambodia is not released in Meta’s high-level posts. What reporting does show, however, is that Southeast Asia (and Cambodia in particular) has been a focal point of international concern because of organized “scam centers” that have embedded social media into their fraud operations.

Investigations and international reporting during 2024–2025 documented large scam networks operating from parts of Cambodia which used social platforms and messaging apps to run romance, investment and impersonation scams. Governments and international news outlets have linked some of the scams to account networks that were removed or disrupted by platforms and law enforcement. In August 2025, AP reported that WhatsApp had deactivated millions of accounts linked to criminal scam centers and explicitly mentioned that some of the schemes were traced to a scam center in Cambodia; that same reporting described how platforms work together to disrupt cross-platform fraud. More recently (October 2025) diplomatic and law-enforcement actions including joint sanctions and emergency diplomatic discussions — have highlighted Cambodia as a critical battleground in the fight against organized online fraud. AP News

In short: Meta’s global removals are measured in the millions, but public reporting does not supply a precise, official count for Cambodia alone. Where Cambodia becomes visible in the narrative is as a country where organized scam operations have relied on social platforms — prompting coordinated platform enforcement and government action. Facebook

How many Facebook accounts were disabled “lately”?

Meta’s public totals for 2025 are the best available benchmark: roughly 10 million impersonator profiles removed and around 500,000 accounts acted on for spammy or fake-engagement behavior during the first half of 2025, according to Meta’s own communications. News outlets and tech press repeated those global figures in July 2025 when Meta announced the expanded rules against unoriginal content. For WhatsApp specifically, Meta reported deactivating 6.8 million WhatsApp accounts linked to criminal scam centers during the first half of 2025. There is no official Meta breakdown showing how many of the disabled Facebook accounts were registered in Cambodia alone. Facebook

What happened in October 2025 (and why Cambodian users reported disabled accounts)

In October 2025 multiple international news stories and government statements focused on criminal networks and law-enforcement action in Cambodia, including arrests, diplomatic pressure from affected countries and financial sanctions on groups tied to mass online fraud. Those investigations and takedowns often coincided with platforms cutting off accounts, pages or messaging flows they identified as part of scam operations. As a result, many people connected to those operations (and, in some cases, ordinary users whose profiles matched the automated signals platforms used) found accounts disabled or blocked. Reporting shows that the October surge in attention to Cambodia’s scam centers led to a spike in combined platform and law-enforcement activity but again, platform statements give global numbers rather than a neat Cambodia count. Reuters

Real effects: legitimate users caught in automated sweeps

A consistent thread in reporting about the 2025 enforcement wave is that some legitimate users experienced disabled or restricted accounts after automated systems flagged their profiles for impersonation, unusual posting behavior, or connections to suspicious networks. Appeals and review processes exist, but users and commentators have reported slow or opaque outcomes in some cases. Meta acknowledges both the need for automation to scale enforcement and the risk of false positives; it says it is improving review processes and monitoring outcomes. Facebook

How to protect yourself from having your account disabled (practical steps)

Meta and security experts offer several concrete steps to reduce the risk of account takeover, impersonation or being flagged during an automated sweep. These are practical, actionable measures any Facebook user can do today:

1. Enable two-factor authentication (2FA) or passkeys. Add an extra layer beyond your password — an authenticator app, SMS code (less secure), security key (hardware), or passkeys where supported. Meta’s help pages explain how to enable 2FA and note that passkeys and security keys are becoming available as anti-phishing protections.
2. Verify your primary contact info and secure your email. Make sure your account uses an up-to-date, secure email address and phone number so Meta can contact you about suspicious activity and you can recover access quickly. Keep the email account secured with its own 2FA.
3. Avoid repeat reposting of others’ content without context. Meta’s new rules punish accounts that repeatedly share “unoriginal” content without meaningful edits or commentary — this is a signal that can hurt reach and monetization or trigger enforcement. If you repost, add commentary or a clear transformation.
4. Use strong, unique passwords and a password manager. Do not reuse passwords across sites; use a password manager to generate and store complex credentials.
5. Be careful with third-party apps and login permissions. Revoke suspicious app access and avoid logging in through unknown services. Third-party apps are a common vector for account compromise.
6. Monitor for impersonation and report it quickly. If you find a fake account pretending to be you, report it to Meta and ask friends to report it as well — coordinated reporting helps removal. Meta provides reporting flows for impersonation.
7. Keep a copy of important content off-platform. Regularly download and back up photos and messages you value. If an account is disabled permanently you’ll lose access to on-platform content.
8. If your account is disabled, use Meta’s official appeal forms and follow guidance closely. Meta’s Help Center explains how to appeal a disabled account and what documentation may be required. Appeals can take time; providing clear, correct identity documentation (when asked) helps.

Meta’s campaign to purge fake, duplicate and impersonator accounts is a global enforcement effort that accelerated through 2025. The company reports millions of removals at a global scale and says the work will continue. Cambodia has been part of the conversation because organized scam centers in the country were repeatedly named in cross-platform investigations and law-enforcement actions in 2025; those investigations contributed to intensified platform and government responses in October 2025. However, Meta’s public reporting does not publish a country-level tally of disabled Facebook accounts, so there is no official public figure that isolates “how many” were disabled in Cambodia alone. For ordinary users, best practice is to harden account security now (2FA/passkeys, unique strong passwords, verified contact info), avoid behaviors that mimic spammy networks, and be prepared to use Meta’s appeals flows if a legitimate account is mistakenly disabled.

Blockchain Technology Challenges for Cambodia: A Deep Dive into the 2023 Report.

Blockchain technology has garnered global attention for its ability to provide transparency, security, and efficiency across various industries. However, for Cambodia, a country in Southeast Asia that is rapidly developing, adopting blockchain technology presents a unique set of challenges. The “Blockchain Technology Readiness for Cambodia Report 2023” by the Ministry of Industry, Science, Technology & Innovation delves into these obstacles, highlighting the technological, economic, social, security, and privacy issues that must be addressed to make blockchain adoption a reality in Cambodia.

1. Technological Challenges in Cambodia

Infrastructure Deficiencies

One of the primary hurdles for blockchain adoption in Cambodia is its technological infrastructure. Blockchain technology relies heavily on robust internet connectivity to maintain the distributed ledger and validate transactions. Unfortunately, Cambodia’s internet infrastructure, particularly in rural areas, remains underdeveloped. The digital divide between urban and rural areas could significantly hinder the widespread use of blockchain technology. While efforts to expand internet access have been ongoing since 2021, challenges such as limited resources and geographical barriers persist, affecting the country’s blockchain readiness.

Additionally, a reliable power supply is crucial for the uninterrupted operation of blockchain nodes, which validate and record transactions on the network. However, Cambodia’s power grid is prone to outages and fluctuations, as seen in the planned power outages for maintenance in 2023. These interruptions could compromise the stability of blockchain networks, making them less reliable and less attractive for businesses and government use.

Shortage of Skilled Professionals

Another significant challenge is the shortage of skilled professionals in blockchain technology. Designing and implementing blockchain solutions requires specialized knowledge and expertise, which are currently scarce in Cambodia. Although some universities have begun offering courses on blockchain, it will take time to build a workforce with the necessary skills. To bridge this gap, Cambodia may need to seek international collaboration and invest in training programs to upskill its workforce.

Regulatory and Interoperability Challenges

Blockchain’s decentralized nature poses a challenge to traditional regulatory frameworks. Cambodia needs to develop comprehensive regulations that address issues such as data privacy, security, and the legality of smart contracts. Striking a balance between fostering innovation and ensuring compliance is critical. Moreover, interoperability—the ability of different blockchain platforms and applications to communicate effectively—remains a challenge. For blockchain technology to be effective in sectors like healthcare and supply chain management, it must be able to integrate seamlessly across different systems.

Scalability Issues

As blockchain adoption grows, the infrastructure must be able to handle an increasing number of transactions without compromising performance. This scalability challenge is not unique to Cambodia but is fundamental to blockchain technology. With the emerging fintech sector and initiatives like the National Bank of Cambodia’s Bakong blockchain-based payment system, there is a need for scalable solutions to support increased usage.

2. Economic and Social Challenges

High Costs of Implementation

The high cost of implementing blockchain solutions is another barrier, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Cambodia. Developing and maintaining a blockchain system can be expensive, with costs varying based on the complexity of the application and the number of users. High initial costs and ongoing maintenance fees can deter businesses from adopting blockchain technology, especially when the economic benefits are not immediately clear.

Energy Consumption Concerns

Blockchain technologies, particularly those based on Proof-of-Work (PoW) algorithms, are energy-intensive. In a developing country like Cambodia, where energy infrastructure is still evolving, the high energy consumption required for blockchain could be a significant barrier. This not only affects costs but also raises environmental concerns, making it harder to justify the widespread adoption of such technologies.

Digital Literacy and Gender Disparities

Limited digital literacy among Cambodian youth and small businesses further impedes the effective use of blockchain applications. Bridging this knowledge gap is crucial for ensuring equal participation in a blockchain-driven economy. Additionally, gender disparities in access to education and technical training could exacerbate existing socio-economic inequalities, as women might be less likely to engage with new technologies like blockchain.

Financial Inclusion and Regulatory Uncertainty

While blockchain has the potential to enhance financial inclusion by reaching the unbanked and underbanked populations, creating user-friendly and accessible applications is essential. Moreover, the regulatory uncertainty surrounding blockchain in Cambodia poses risks for businesses and investors. The lack of a clear legal framework can hinder innovation and deter investment in the sector.

3. Security and Privacy Concerns

Balancing Security and Privacy

Blockchain technology offers enhanced security features, such as data integrity, transparency, and traceability. However, achieving these benefits in Cambodia involves navigating a complex landscape of privacy and security concerns. For instance, public blockchains prioritize anonymity, which can conflict with regulatory requirements for user identification on private or government-run blockchains. This tension creates challenges for blockchain adoption in sectors that require high levels of privacy and data protection.

Vulnerability to Attacks

Blockchain networks are not immune to security breaches. Risks such as 51% attacks, where a single entity controls the majority of the network’s computing power, could enable manipulation of the blockchain. Other vulnerabilities, like DDoS attacks and smart contract flaws, present additional challenges. Ensuring robust security measures while maintaining the decentralization that blockchain is known for is a delicate balance that Cambodia must achieve.

Legal and Cross-Jurisdictional Challenges

Given blockchain’s cross-jurisdictional nature, legal and regulatory complexities are heightened, especially regarding compliance with data protection and anti-money laundering regulations. Cambodia needs to develop a legal framework that addresses these challenges while promoting innovation.

4. Strategic Recommendations for Overcoming Challenges

To address these challenges, Cambodia must adopt a multi-faceted approach:

• Infrastructure Development: Investment in internet connectivity and power supply infrastructure is critical. This includes expanding access to rural areas and ensuring a stable power supply to support blockchain networks.
• Skill Development: Encouraging the development of blockchain courses in universities and promoting international collaboration for training programs can help build a skilled workforce.
• Regulatory Framework: Developing a clear and comprehensive regulatory framework that balances innovation with security and privacy concerns is crucial. This includes addressing interoperability and scalability issues to promote widespread adoption.
• Public Awareness and Inclusion: Raising awareness about blockchain technology through education and training programs can help bridge the digital literacy gap. Additionally, promoting gender inclusivity in technology training can ensure broader participation in the blockchain economy.
• Security Enhancements: Implementing advanced security measures and developing a governance framework that addresses both the technical and regulatory aspects of blockchain can help mitigate risks and vulnerabilities.

Conclusion

Blockchain technology offers immense potential for Cambodia’s socio-economic development, but its adoption is fraught with challenges. By addressing these technological, economic, social, security, and privacy issues, Cambodia can create a favorable environment for blockchain adoption. Collaborative efforts between the government, private sector, and civil society are essential to build a sustainable blockchain ecosystem that maximizes benefits while minimizing risks. With strategic planning and investment, Cambodia can position itself as a significant player in the global blockchain landscape.

Read full report here: Report: Blockchain technology Readiness for Cambodia