Russian Data Centers May Face Temporary State Management Under Decree 604 for Protection Shortfalls
Large Russian data centers may fall under the scope of presidential decree No. 604, which permits temporary state management of critical infrastructure facilities with insufficient protection. By default, Rosimushchestvo would assume the role of administrator.
The measure can be applied when an owner fails to fulfill security requirements, poses a threat to stable operations, inadequately protects the facility from drone attacks, or restores operations too slowly after an incident. The decree covers communications, energy, transport, industry, utilities, and other critical sectors.
Industry participants believe that major commercial and departmental data centers serving government bodies, banks, and federal operators clearly qualify. While Tier III and higher facilities usually maintain solid cyber defenses, the primary new expenses will involve physical security measures.
Operators must now protect generators, cooling systems, communication nodes, and other external engineering equipment against aerial threats. The challenge is especially acute in European Russia, where 80–90 percent of commercial data center capacity is concentrated in Moscow and St. Petersburg.
Protection against drones was not previously part of standard data center design. Some companies are already modernizing infrastructure. RTK-DC stated it continuously reviews security measures, while RUVDS confirmed work on safeguarding external equipment.
The market anticipates detailed sector-specific requirements tied to facility category and criticality. Experts highlight the need for redundant communication channels, DDoS protection, vulnerability management, and accelerated recovery processes. Additional protection will require significant capital expenditures that may ultimately be passed on to clients, particularly in government, financial, and telecommunications segments.
First Deputy Prime Minister Denis Manturov assured that no mass campaign or nationalization is planned; decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis at the highest level.
Related articles
Passphrases vs. Leetspeak Passwords: Why Four Random Words Outperform P@ssw0rd!2026
The article explains why a passphrase made of four randomly selected words provides far greater resistance to offline attacks than a complex-looking password constructed with substitutions and appended symbols. It details how password strength is measured in bits of entropy rather than visual complexity, showing that four words drawn from a 50,000-word list yield approximately 62 bits while common leetspeak transformations add almost none. The piece contrasts fast legacy hashing with modern slow algorithms such as Argon2 and emphasizes the protective effect of per-password salting. It criticizes registration forms that reward predictable patterns and highlights NIST guidance favoring length over mandatory character rotation. The author recommends diceware-style generation for master passwords and password managers for everything else, noting that passkeys ultimately eliminate the need for memorizable secrets altogether.
Building the Foundation of Digital Trust: Why Identity Security Remains Undervalued
Identity Security is presented as one of the most underestimated pillars of cybersecurity because granting access involves trusting individuals with sensitive information and systems. The article examines the deep intersection of IT and security functions, the costs of manual access errors, and the need to align business processes with technical controls. It references a 2026 Identity Conf study showing 43.5% of organizations experienced errors in manual rights assignment and 33.5% left access for former employees. Recommendations draw on NIST Human-Centered Cybersecurity concepts, SP 800-53, and Russian FSTEC Order No. 117 to design lifecycle processes covering account provisioning, privilege reviews, and continuous monitoring. Models such as RBAC and ABAC are discussed alongside IGA and IdM solutions to ensure business permissions map correctly to application rights. The piece stresses that successful projects require joint IT and security efforts from the initial survey through pilot and acceptance phases while measuring both risk reduction and operational efficiency.
VK Files Lawsuit in EU Court Seeking to Overturn Sanctions Imposed in July
Russian internet company VK has submitted a formal challenge to the European Union's sanctions regime by filing a case with the Court of Justice of the European Union. The company argues that the restrictions placed on VK and its subsidiary Communication Platform LLC are both unjustified and unlawful. The lawsuit, registered under case number T-664/26 on 7 October, directly contests the July sanctions that targeted the developer of the MAX messenger. Earlier restrictions had already led to the removal of multiple VK ecosystem applications from Apple App Store and Google Play, forcing users toward alternative distribution channels such as RuStore, Huawei AppGallery, Samsung Galaxy Store and Xiaomi GetApps. While installed Android applications continue to function and receive updates, iOS users face disrupted push notifications after the apps were delisted. The legal action itself does not automatically restore app availability in the affected stores.
VPN Rules in Russia 2026: No Fine for Ordinary Users but Strict Penalties for Advertising and Extremist Content Access
As of September 2026, Russia maintains no separate administrative fine for ordinary citizens simply connecting to a VPN service. Responsibility arises only for specific actions such as deliberately searching for known extremist materials, advertising tools to bypass restrictions, or failing to comply with Roskomnadzor demands as a service operator. Corporate VPNs used for remote access to company networks remain fully legal under exceptions in Article 15.8 of Law No. 149-FZ. New provisions in the Code of Administrative Offenses, including Articles 13.53, 13.52 and 14.3 introduced by Laws 281-FZ and 282-FZ, impose fines ranging from 3,000 to 500,000 rubles depending on the violation and the offender category. The rules distinguish clearly between end users, service owners and advertisers. VPN technology itself is not banned, yet public services face ongoing blocking and operators must integrate with state filtering systems. The material reflects the regulatory situation on 24 September 2026.