In an era where internet connectivity is as essential as electricity and drinking water, the use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) has surged, particularly in countries like China and Vietnam, where digital censorship is prevalent. VPNs serve as a crucial tool for individuals seeking to protect their privacy and freedom online by encrypting data, hiding IP addresses, and bypassing stringent censorship regulations.
According to a report from VNTB, the use of VPNs is a significant form of resistance against digital censorship in both China and Vietnam, albeit with different characteristics and scales. In China, the VPN usage rate stands at approximately 31%, despite the country's rigorous blocking measures. In contrast, Vietnam boasts a higher usage rate of around 45%, benefiting from less strict censorship policies.
In China, VPNs are primarily used to access international news and information, stay connected with friends and family abroad, fulfill international work requirements, conduct academic research, and enjoy gaming and entertainment. Meanwhile, in Vietnam, VPNs are utilized to access political and human rights content, view critical party-related material, circumvent censorship regarding corruption, and protect personal privacy from government surveillance.
The increasing popularity of VPN usage in both nations reflects a broader struggle against censorship. Despite the sophisticated systems of internet censorship in place, the demand for VPN services continues to rise as users seek ways to bypass restrictions on websites, news outlets, and blogs.
China's internet censorship system, often referred to as the "Great Firewall," is one of the most comprehensive and sophisticated in the world. The Chinese government has blocked thousands of websites—over 8,000—deemed detrimental to the party's authority. Major Western social networks, search engines, and international news agencies are among the targets of this extensive censorship.
Censorship in China is enforced using various technical methods, including IP blocking, URL filtering, DNS poisoning, and packet filtering, alongside human surveillance. Despite these stringent restrictions, VPN usage remains prevalent, with approximately 31% of internet users relying on VPNs to access blocked content.
Conversely, Vietnam's internet censorship, sometimes referred to as the "Bamboo Firewall," exerts significant control over online content, though it is not as expansive as China's Great Firewall. Data collected in early 2022 revealed that 1,108 websites were blocked across ten different internet service providers in Vietnam, with the censorship primarily targeting political and human rights content.
As of early 2025, Vietnam's internet user base reached 79%, translating to roughly 80 million people, with VPN usage at a notably high rate of 45%. This suggests a strong demand for access to restricted content and a greater ease of access to VPN services compared to China.
Legally, the Chinese government prohibits unauthorized VPN services, requiring approved VPNs to grant the government access to user data, which compromises privacy. VPN websites are blocked approximately 73% of the time in China, the highest rate globally, compared to an average of 8% worldwide. In Vietnam, Decree 72, enacted in 2013, tightened censorship by prohibiting the sharing of news and political information on platforms like Facebook and Twitter.
Technically, China employs methods such as DNS poisoning, HTTP/HTTPS filtering, and deep packet inspection to detect and block VPNs, regularly updating measures to counter new VPN technologies. In Vietnam, while VPN blocking measures are less publicized, they include DNS blocking and HTTP blocking, with three major service providers—VNPT, Viettel, and FPT—conducting most of the censorship.
VPNs function by creating encrypted tunnels between users and VPN servers, employing modern encryption protocols to safeguard data and maintain anonymity. This process typically involves five steps: initiating the connection, authenticating and encrypting data, creating the tunnel and transmitting data, hiding the user's IP address, and processing incoming data.
VPNs counter three primary threats: surveillance by internet service providers (ISPs), risks associated with public Wi-Fi, and state censorship. However, VPNs have limitations; they do not prevent viruses or malware and can experience DNS or IP leaks if improperly configured.
VPN providers maintain services in China and Vietnam through a combination of advanced traffic obfuscation technology, flexible global server networks, and legal avoidance strategies. This ongoing battle between censorship technologies and bypass tools like VPNs highlights the tension between state control and the public's desire for digital freedom.
Users are advised to select reputable VPNs, regularly update applications, and understand the potential legal risks associated with their use. VPN providers often employ three technical strategies: traffic obfuscation, protocol diversification, and flexible server infrastructure.
For legal and organizational strategy, many VPN services avoid physical presence in censoring countries, with reputable VPNs headquartered in nations with strong privacy laws. Some VPN providers comply partially with censorship to remain operational, while others, such as Innovative Connecting in China, operate under a "half-legal" status by registering through subsidiaries in Hong Kong.
To counter dynamic censorship, VPN providers frequently rotate IPs and domain names. When a VPN server is blocked, these providers quickly change IP addresses and domain names to maintain service continuity. Regular application updates are also crucial, with providers often updating software weekly to alter encryption signatures and evade detection by deep packet inspection systems.
In summary, the use of VPNs in China and Vietnam represents a critical response to the ongoing challenges of digital censorship. As users increasingly seek to protect their privacy and access unfiltered information, VPNs continue to serve as vital tools in the fight for digital freedom.
