Silent Crow

Russia's Supreme Court Bans Silent Crow and Cyberpartisans BY as Extremist Organizations

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has officially recognized the hacker groups Silent Crow and Cyberpartisans BY as extremist organizations and banned their activities in Russia. The closed-door ruling, issued at the request of the General Prosecutor's Office, accuses both groups of conducting joint cyberattacks against Russian and Belarusian critical information infrastructure with the aim of destabilizing the political situation and achieving an unconstitutional change of government. Cyberpartisans BY are described as part of the Belarusian association Supratsiv, which allegedly seeks a violent overthrow of the constitutional order, and are linked to the banned Polk named after Kastus Kalinouski as well as Ukrainian military information-psychological operations units. Silent Crow, previously known as CyberWar and Cyber LegionsUA, is portrayed as a pro-Ukrainian collective of politically motivated hacktivists whose primary objective is to damage Russian state bodies, companies, and critical infrastructure. Both groups are held responsible for attacks on Aeroflot IT systems, Rostelecom databases, Rosreestr servers, and the Belarusian Railway infrastructure. Participation in or support for these organizations now carries legal liability under Russian law.

How CISOs Can Speak to CEOs: Translating Cyber Risks into Business Impact and Financial Consequences

The July 2025 Aeroflot cyber incident, claimed by Silent Crow and Belarusian Cyber-Partisans, demonstrated how technical vulnerabilities quickly translate into canceled flights, regulatory investigations, stock market reactions, and direct executive accountability. The article examines the persistent communication gap between CISOs, who focus on metrics like EDR coverage and mean time to detect, and CEOs, who prioritize costs, operational disruptions, revenue loss, and personal liability. Research from EY and Splunk highlights differing perceptions of threats and success measures, while real-world cases such as Marks & Spencer, Jaguar Land Rover, Clorox, Change Healthcare, SolarWinds, and Uber show how contractor weaknesses, missing MFA, and delayed disclosures lead to hundreds of millions in damages and legal actions. Regulatory developments, including SEC charges against CISOs and Russia's 420-FZ with turnover-based fines, further force cybersecurity discussions into the boardroom. The piece provides a practical translation table showing how technical warnings should be reframed using concrete business scenarios and financial impacts. It concludes that both CISOs and CEOs must initiate conversations around unacceptable events, downtime costs, and risk reduction versus post-incident consequences.