Cyberwan with Russia: Ukraine will win, but not because of the state

Who were looking for and hired by qualified specialists, purchased equipment, conducted regular tests, exchanged data on incidents. Not always at will - because if you do not fulfill the requirements of Visa, Mastercard or even the NBU - you just fly out of business. But one way or another, this work was done, for many years and for a lot of money. Internet providers and communications operators were "stored".

And above all because for more than 30 years they successfully reflected the attempts of the state to regulate their activities. They "stood" those companies that invested in the creation of their own teams of specialists, in the appropriate tools, processes, solutions, followed the threats and trends that were simply interested in cybersecurity issues. That is, those who were really preparing, and not only spoke about it.

On the other hand, a large piece was "stored" by those patriotic hackers who conducted, for example, a two -year #FRD volunteer action, storming irresponsible officials due to the lack of cyber defense of critical infrastructure. And who conducted the "next Cyberoperatives" long before it became the mainstream. And which quickly self -organized in cyberparticles after 24. 02. 2022.

Even a few activists who have publicly and mercilessly pointed to the shortcomings of the so -called "national cybersecurity system" can claim "stood". But it is unlikely that state cyberwatches have the right to monopolize this "stand". All in recent years, they have only tried to steal as much money as possible under the fashionable slogans "raising cybersecurity" as much money as possible by simulating violent activities.

They arranged "round tables", went on foreign business trips, demanded funding, milked Western donors, searched activists, persecuted critics. But they built Ukrainian 9 "major cybersecurity entities" (plus mls, only cardboard fortresses on the sand of their dreams about the "leading role of the state in the cybergsphere".

And now that almost all the risks they were warned (but which were ignored) were realized - they made the armor and let's wave the flag "We have stood!" Hinting that "we" are them. The whole world sympathizes with Ukraine and Ukrainians and seeks to help, including in cyberdomen. But only officials are issued abroad at the conference. Where they, in Dublin and Las Vegas, pathetically tell the angry foreigners as Ukraine stood in cyberwar, modestly hinting at its main merit.

And what is characteristic - they are believed. Even a few activists who have publicly and mercilessly pointed to the shortcomings of the so -called "national cybersecurity system" can claim "stood". But it is unlikely that state cyberwatches have the right to monopolize this "stand". And in general did they "stand"? This is still a big question. If you put Russian publications and telegram channels, you can reach some other conclusions (even given the percentage of lies and propaganda).

For example, someone knows about the fresh case when you have been bending a YouTube account recently in one Ukrainian special service and placed the videos of anti-Ukrainian orientation there? Apparently, few have heard. Because now in our society it is not customary to talk about cyber-blackers and cyber Mariupol. "Not on time" as they say. But I would greatly advise civil servants to stop abusing this situation. Cyberwar is still in full swing, with some pauses, take -offs and falls of activity.