When Phone Numbers Become "Disposable" Assets: Observations on Xiaohongshu's Account Ban Logic

Many in the industry will vividly recall the wave of account bans that began at the end of 2025. For a time, various communities and forums were filled with discussions about the "end of matrix play." However, beyond the large-scale account bans, a more specific and frustrating problem for operators was repeatedly mentioned: Why can't I register a new Xiaohongshu account with a de-registered phone number anymore?

This seemingly simple question touches upon platform risk control logic, operator habits, and the evolution of the entire gray ecosystem. It's not a new issue, but it re-emerges with sharper intensity whenever platforms tighten their policies.

Not Just Banning Accounts, but Tagging "Resources"

In the early days, most people understood it as "account violation, ban account." At most, it was linked to the device. But the inability to re-register with a de-registered phone number points to a more fundamental logic: The goal of platform risk control is shifting from punishing individual "actors" (accounts) to tagging and restricting "infrastructure" (registration resources).

Phone numbers are one piece of this core infrastructure.

You can think of it this way: When an account registered with a phone number is penalized for serious violations (such as marketing, traffic diversion, batch operations, etc.), that phone number's "identity" is invisibly tagged in the platform's backend. Even if you voluntarily de-register the account, or if you "release" the phone number through an appeal channel after it's banned, this tag may persist. When you try to register again with that phone number, the system recognizes this "carrier of bad records" and directly rejects the registration process.

The logic behind this is clear: The platform believes that the "entity" associated with this phone number (whether an individual or a team) has a tendency for high-risk behavior. Restricting the phone number reduces the cost of repeated violations at the source. This is far more efficient than chasing thousands of new accounts generated by it.

Common Coping Strategies and Their Pitfalls

Facing these restrictions, the industry has seen a proliferation of coping methods, but many have led to dead ends.

1. Purchasing a Large Number of New Accounts ("White Accounts") This is the most straightforward idea. However, the problem is that in 2026, the source and quality of numbers in the new account market are highly complex. Many numbers are already flowing in through virtual operators, overseas number segments, or specific channels, and these number pools may already be under close scrutiny by the platform's risk control system. The "new" accounts you buy might carry a "original sin" from the platform's perspective from the moment they are created. Batch registration patterns are even clearer danger signals.

2. Relying on SMS Verification Platforms This was once a cost-effective solution. However, numbers from SMS verification platforms are recycled. A number might have been used to register platform A last month and is now being used to register Xiaohongshu. The "history" of this number is completely uncontrollable; it may already have bad records on various platforms. Furthermore, the IP addresses and access patterns of SMS verification platforms are highly concentrated and abnormal, making them easily identifiable. The larger the scale, the more using such services resembles marching through a minefield.

3. Frequently Changing Devices and Networks This is a struggle at the "technical trick" level. Many believe that constantly resetting phones and changing IPs can simulate new users. However, modern device fingerprinting and browser fingerprinting technologies can collect hundreds of parameters, from screen resolution and font lists to WebGL renderer hash values. Simple resets are unlikely to completely erase all traces. More importantly, "frequent changes" itself is a fixed, non-real user behavior pattern. A normal user wouldn't register accounts on new devices every day. Risk control systems are looking for precisely these kinds of "regular anomalies."

The core problem with these methods is that they are all engaged in "feature confrontation" with the platform. You discover the platform detects A, so you hide A; the platform adds detection for B, so you fake B. This is an arms race, and the platform always has the home-field advantage in data and rule-making. The accumulation of single-point tricks is fragile in the face of large-scale and long-term operations.

From "Countering Detection" to "Simulating Reality": A Shift in Thinking

A realization that gradually formed is that instead of being exhausted by constantly responding to new detection points added by the platform, it's better to return to the essence: thinking about what platform risk control ultimately aims to protect and what it aims to identify.

The ultimate goal of platform risk control is not to ban all operators who engage in multi-account operations (which is technically impossible and commercially unnecessary), but to filter out "non-real" behaviors that damage the platform's ecosystem, harm user experience, and are clearly industrially produced.

Therefore, a more sustainable approach is not "confrontation," but "simulation." Simulating the device, network, and behavioral trajectory of a real, ordinary user. This requires a more systematic solution, not just a few tricks.

• Environment Isolation is Fundamental: Ensure that the browsing environment (primarily browser fingerprint) for each account is independent, stable, and conforms to normal usage. One environment should only handle one account's activities to avoid cross-contamination. In the past, this required a large number of physical devices or complex virtual machine configurations. Now, some tools can manage this isolation more efficiently. For example, in scenarios requiring fine-grained management of multiple account environments, tools like Antidetectbrowser are used. Its core value is not "cracking" but providing a work interface that can be managed in batches and maintain independent and stable fingerprints for each environment. It solves the most basic exposure point of "environmental similarity."

• Resource Lifecycle Management: Treat phone numbers, IPs, and accounts as resources with a lifecycle. A new resource (especially a phone number) needs to be "nurtured" with a reasonable behavioral trajectory consistent with its origin (IP attribution), and should not perform sensitive operations immediately. If a resource is compromised (e.g., associated account is banned), it should be decisively isolated from the resource pool, rather than attempting to "revive" it. Establish processes for resource entry, usage, cooling, and retirement.

• Behavioral Logic Rationalization: This is the most easily overlooked and most labor-intensive part. Real users from different regions, ages, and genders have vastly different browsing paths, dwell times, and interaction habits. If all accounts in a matrix exhibit highly consistent behavior patterns (e.g., synchronized likes, uniform comment templates, regular posting), it's tantamount to self-reporting. Differentiated and randomized behavioral scripts need to be designed for accounts with different positioning.

Specifically on the "De-registered Phone Number" Issue

Returning to the original specific question. When you encounter "de-registered phone number cannot be re-registered," it usually means:

1. The previous account associated with this phone number has triggered a higher-level risk control policy (not necessarily a direct ban, but perhaps a severe warning or traffic throttling).
2. The platform has added this phone number to a "restricted from re-registration" list. This list may be permanent or have a very long cooling-off period (e.g., one year or longer).

At this point, the most rational approach is not to research how to "unban" this phone number (success rate is extremely low), but to:

• Accept the Loss: Mark this number as a "scrapped resource."
• Check Associations: Immediately check other accounts logged in on the same device, same IP, or same browser environment as this number, assess their risk, and if necessary, "silence" or transfer them.
• Review the Cause: Analyze the specific operations that led to the account associated with this number being penalized. Was it content violation, abnormal interaction, or environmental exposure? Avoid the same problem reappearing on the next resource.

Some Things Remain Uncertain

Even with a more systematic approach, this field remains full of uncertainty.

• Platform policies are dynamic and subject to "gray testing." The same operation might be safe today and trigger risk control tomorrow.
• What is the boundary of "simulating reality"? Does overly realistic simulation incur costs that exceed business returns?
• Different business objectives (brand exposure, traffic diversion, data collection) have different requirements for account "health," and one strategy cannot cover all scenarios.

FAQ (Answering a Few Frequently Asked Questions)

Q: Can the platform actually identify the SIM card itself? For example, if I change the card but not the phone. A: For most apps, directly reading the SIM card's International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) requires high permissions and is restricted by the system, so it's usually not used as a primary risk control basis. However, the phone number itself (through SMS verification) is one of the strongest identity identifiers. Risk control relies more on the comprehensive association of "phone number + device fingerprint + behavioral data."

Q: If my account is truly "collaterally punished," is there any hope? A: If it's a minor association (e.g., only traffic throttling), by completely changing the environment (new device, new network, new phone number) and maintaining complete silence for a period (no marketing operations), there's a chance it can "cool down." However, if the core phone number has been marked as "unregistrable," or the account has been permanently banned, it's advisable to give up rescue efforts and shift your focus to building and maintaining new resources.

Q: Ultimately, is there a foolproof method? A: Unfortunately, no. This is a protracted battle of cost and patience. A more reliable direction is to abandon the fantasy of "black technology," turn to a deeper understanding of platform rules, and establish an operational system that is iterative, manageable, and respects "real" logic. This will withstand changes better than any single trick.

Ultimately, when phone numbers transform from a reusable "resource" into a "consumable" that requires careful management, the entire operational logic must change. It requires operators to shift from guerrilla warfare to more refined positional warfare, and this may be an inevitable stage in the industry's move towards a certain degree of standardization.