FAS Case Against Apple Will Not Brick iPhones for Russian Users
The Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service has initiated proceedings against Apple over the company’s failure to comply with a prior warning, yet the case will have no impact on the functionality of iPhone and other iOS devices in Russia.
Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Information Policy Andrey Svintsov confirmed that gadgets will continue operating exactly as before. The regulator demanded that Apple pre-install a national messenger application and a Russian app store on devices running iOS. While the company implemented the choice of a domestic search engine, it did not fulfill the remaining requirements according to FAS.
Owners of iPhone devices have been assured that authorities will not block hardware, turn devices into expensive paperweights, or apply any other technical restrictions. Svintsov, quoted by TASS, explained that the efforts of FAS, Roskomnadzor and other agencies are focused solely on documenting violations and subsequently imposing fines.
Any court rulings will stay in effect until Apple chooses to return to the Russian market. Before resuming legal operations, the company must first settle all accumulated penalties. Svintsov described the strategy as appropriate, noting that future payments would go directly into the Russian state budget.
For the time being, the regulatory claims remain exclusively Apple’s problem. No remote technical measures against Russian iPhone users are planned.
Related articles
Fonts, CDNs, and Hosting: The Cross-Border Data Transfers No One Notices
A Russian developer building a contract-processing service discovered that his website was silently sending visitor data to foreign companies despite keeping all contract data on Russian servers. The site used Vercel for hosting, Google Fonts across 33 pages, and Cloudflare's cdnjs for PDF and Word libraries, exposing IP addresses, browsers, and browsing history. Under Russia's 152-FZ, such transfers require a separate notification to Roskomnadzor, and the United States and EU are not on the list of countries with adequate protection. The developer migrated fonts and libraries to his own Russian server, moved hosting domestically, and updated his privacy policy after a single console command revealed the external domains. The case highlights how common web practices like loading Google Fonts or using CDNs can trigger strict data localization and notification rules, with fines reaching millions of rubles for violations.
How to Complete the Roskomnadzor Personal Data Notification Form in 2026: Field-by-Field Analysis
The article provides a detailed walkthrough of the current Roskomnadzor notification form for operators processing personal data under Russian law. It explains that the form is an extract from existing internal documents rather than a questionnaire, requiring operators to reference their data processing policy, inventory results, appointment orders, and protection level acts. Key prerequisites include confirming that notification is mandatory after the 2022 amendments removed most exemptions, preparing five core documents, and understanding that the form pulls data directly from those records. The guide covers every section, from operator identification and processing regions to data categories, protection measures, geography, and post-submission obligations. It also addresses common mistakes, the option to save drafts, auto-population features, and liability for non-compliance or inaccurate information. The piece concludes with a checklist mapping each form field to its source document.
OBEP Raids on Russian IT Firms: How to Safeguard Source Code, Servers and Blockchain Assets During Searches
Russian IT companies, Web3 projects and fintech services now face frequent visits from OBEP operatives conducting pre-investigative checks or searches under criminal cases. The article details the legal distinction between operational-search measures and formal searches, emphasizing article 164.1 of the UPK RF that prohibits seizure of physical servers in economic crime investigations. It explains how companies can demand data mirroring instead of hardware removal and how to invoke article 51 of the RF Constitution when pressured for encryption keys. Commercial secret regimes are presented as a tool to raise criminal liability for leaks and to request closed court proceedings. Practical checklists cover document verification, staff instructions, password retention and immediate calls to specialized criminal counsel. The guidance aims to prevent business paralysis while preserving evidence integrity during raids.
RWB Deploys Enterprise-Wide Database Access Control with Trino and Open Policy Agent
RWB has replaced fragmented manual database access processes with a centralized architecture built on Trino as the single entry point and Open Policy Agent for policy enforcement. The system enforces least-privilege access, mandatory auditing, and automated revocation tied to HR records while eliminating anonymous and password-based logins. Access requests now complete in 3–10 minutes instead of an average of four days, with 92 percent handled automatically. Key components include Keycloak for OIDC authentication, Vault for secrets, Kafka for security event streaming to SOC, and Kubernetes orchestration. Responsibility is split across AI & Data Security, Core DevOps, Access Management, SOC, and Trust & Safety teams. More than 1,250 PostgreSQL clusters and 90 projects are now connected, with real-time dashboards tracking adoption and policy health.