Russian Ministry Certificates Enable Potential State MITM on Foreign Domains
Russian organizations under sanctions have begun switching to certificates issued under the Ministry of Digital Development and Communications root after commercial authorities revoked or declined to renew their existing certificates. Users who visit affected sites now encounter browser warnings that the authenticity of the resource cannot be verified.
The article explains that the only practical workarounds are to install the Ministry root certificates system-wide, switch to Yandex Browser which already bundles them, or maintain two separate browsers. Each option carries significant risks: loss of access to services, full system trust in a state-controlled CA, or reduced usability.
Threat Model
The author constructs a detailed threat model focused on a third party operating inside Russian jurisdiction. This actor can legally compel any Russian company to hand over data and can also deploy TLS interception appliances between users and foreign services. Once the Ministry root is trusted, the same infrastructure can silently terminate and re-sign connections to non-Russian domains, capturing session tokens and credentials.
Because the Ministry root currently carries no name constraints, it can issue certificates for any domain. The article therefore recommends re-signing the root with nameConstraints that permit only the national TLDs .ru, .su, and .рф.
Technical Implementation with OpenSSL
All steps are performed using OpenSSL on macOS and Linux. Users first download the Ministry certificate bundle from gosuslugi.ru, extract the non-GOST files, and create a new local root with appropriate basicConstraints, keyUsage, and nameConstraints extensions.
- Generate a fresh 4096-bit local root limited to national domains.
- Create a temporary CSR and extract the public key from the original Ministry root.
- Cross-sign the Ministry root using the local root and a cross_ca_ext configuration that preserves CA capabilities while inheriting the name constraints.
The resulting new_root_ca.crt can then be installed in the system trust store. Verification commands confirm that sites under .ru domains continue to validate while foreign domains such as sberbank.com are rejected when only the constrained root is present.
The author stresses that users must perform these steps themselves; any party holding the private key of a trusted root can still perform interception within the certificate’s permitted scope.
Related articles
Browser Privacy Ranking 2026: Tor Browser Leads at 9.5 While Chrome and Yandex Rank Lowest
SecurityLab.ru has published a detailed 2026 browser privacy ranking that evaluates major browsers across six criteria including initial network behavior, site isolation, fingerprint resistance, funding model, configurability, and code auditability. Tor Browser scores highest at 9.5 for its comprehensive protections including unified fingerprinting and layered JavaScript controls, followed by Mullvad Browser at 9.0 and LibreWolf at 8.5. Brave earns 7.5 for built-in tracker blocking but faces criticism over default telemetry and cryptocurrency features. Firefox scores 6.0 out of the box yet reaches 8.5 after extensive configuration, while Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, Opera, and Yandex Browser occupy the bottom positions due to persistent tracking mechanisms and closed-source components. The report also highlights the Local Mess localhost tracking technique used by Meta and Yandex that bypassed browser isolation entirely.
Bypassing Blocks, Privacy, and Anonymity Remain Separate Challenges for Decentralized Networks
The developers of the decentralized circumvention tool Tunnel Cat have clarified that their service addresses only traffic delivery and does not guarantee privacy or anonymity. Transport-layer TLS encryption protects data in transit between nodes but provides no end-to-end protection for conversation content. The team explicitly recommends using separate E2E-encrypted messengers such as Signal or Matrix rather than relying on Telegram. Operational telemetry is retained to comply with legal obligations in multiple jurisdictions and to monitor blocking patterns inside Russia. Because client devices relay traffic for others, the architecture inherently prevents strong anonymity guarantees comparable to Tor. The project deliberately separates the circumvention function from messaging and anonymity tools to avoid overpromising security properties.
How to Detect and Remove Stolen Photos from Fake Profiles, Listings and Ads
Photos are frequently stolen from social networks, old listings, building chats and review sites, then reused in fake profiles, advertisements and rental scams. Russian law under Article 152.1 of the Civil Code protects the right to one's image, while separate copyright rules protect the photographer. Victims are advised to gather strong evidence including full-page screenshots, PDF copies and original files before contacting platforms. Search tools such as Yandex Images, Google Lens and TinEye help locate copies across multiple services. Complaints can be filed directly with site administrators on VKontakte, Odnoklassniki, Avito and Telegram, or escalated to Roskomnadzor and police when personal data or fraud is involved. Preventive steps include lowering image resolution, adding watermarks and restricting album visibility through privacy settings.
Configuration Drift Silently Breaks Multi-Hop Chains in sing-box Reality Fleet
A post-mortem analysis of a censorship circumvention network using sing-box and Reality revealed that four out of seven nodes were unreachable due to outdated allowlists, even though all monitoring reported green status. The fleet consisted of 14 endpoints across seven machines and four providers, with traffic routed in two hops where entry nodes only knew client identities and exit nodes only knew destinations. White-list rules on entry nodes permitted only five addresses instead of all required relays, causing urltest to silently discard most chains without logging failures. Canary checks, external probes, and the relay-lockdown.sh script all passed because none compared the allowlist against the full signed configuration. Two private paid nodes lacked any route section entirely, exposing them to potential abuse. The issue stemmed from configuration drift over time, with no single person maintaining an overview of the entire system. Automated fixes were implemented with safeguards to prevent fleet-wide lockouts.