Putin’s censorship infrastructure fails under pressure from Western sanctions
Before Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin was already constructing a digital fortress designed to isolate his citizens from global information flows. This initiative aimed to replicate the surveillance and control mechanisms found in nations like China. When major Western technology firms severed ties with Moscow following the attack on Kyiv, Russian investigative journalist Andrei Soldatov expressed deep concern. Having spent years documenting Russian censorship efforts, he feared that these well-intentioned actions to support Ukraine would inadvertently help Putin further isolate Russians from the free flow of information, thereby aiding the Kremlin’s propaganda war.
Digital throttling reveals systemic weaknesses
Soldatov warned in the first week of the conflict that social media platforms like Facebook were the only remaining spaces where Russians could discuss what was happening inside their own country and abroad. He argued that authorities could not simply cut off access to these vital communication channels without severe consequences. While Facebook did not immediately comply with demands to shut down, the Kremlin quickly adopted a strategy of throttling both Facebook and Twitter until they were effectively unreachable for most Russian users.
Putin has since ordered blocks on Western media and independent news sites within the country. A new law criminalizes spreading information that contradicts the government narrative. Recently, the Kremlin announced restrictions on Instagram, with network monitor NetBlocks reporting by early Monday that the social network was being throttled across multiple Russian internet providers. Despite these aggressive moves, the latest censorship efforts have exposed serious shortcomings in the government’s broader plans to straightjacket the internet. Any Russian citizen with basic technical knowledge can circumvent these government attempts to starve their population of facts.
Tech giants face difficult operational choices
The situation places internet bandwidth providers and associated services in a precarious position. On one side, they face public pressure to punish the Russian state and economic reasons to limit services at a time when bills might go unpaid. On the other, they are wary of helping stifle a free flow of information that can counter Kremlin disinformation. For instance, the state claims its military is heroically liberating Ukraine from fascists, a narrative that relies heavily on controlling digital narratives.
Amazon Web Services continues to operate in Russia, though it states it is not accepting new customers. Both Cloudflare and Akamai also continue to serve their Russian customers, with exceptions including cutting off state-owned companies and firms under sanctions. Microsoft has suspended all new sales of products and services but has not confirmed whether it will halt its cloud services entirely.
U.S.-based Cogent, which provides a major backbone for internet traffic, cut direct connections inside Russia but left open the pipes through subsidiaries of Russian network providers at exchanges physically outside the country. Another major U.S. backbone provider, Lumen, has done the same. We have no desire to cut off Russian individuals and think that an open internet is critical to the world, said Cogent CEO Dave Schaeffer in an interview. Direct connections to servers inside Russia, he noted, could potentially be used for offensive cyber efforts by the Russian government.
Schaeffer stated that the decision did not reflect financial considerations, although he acknowledged the ruble’s sharp drop. This makes imported goods and services more expensive in Russia and could make it difficult to collect customer payments. Meanwhile, Cogent is providing Ukrainian customers free service during the conflict. Schaeffer noted these moves might impair internet video in Russia but will leave plenty of bandwidth for smaller files. Other major backbone providers in Europe and Asia also continue to serve Russia, a net importer of bandwidth, said Doug Madory, director of internet analysis for the network management firm Kentik. He has noted no appreciable drop in connectivity from outside providers.
The sovereign internet law remains a sieve
Cloudflare continues to operate four data centers in Russia even though Russian authorities ordered government websites to drop foreign-owned hosting providers as of Friday. In a March 7 blog post, the company stated that it had determined Russia needs more Internet access, not less. Under a 2019 sovereign internet law, Russia is supposed to be able to operate its internet independent of the rest of the world. In practice, this has brought Russia closer to the kind of intensive internet monitoring and control practiced by China and Iran.
Its telecommunications oversight agency, Rozkomnadzor, successfully tested the system at scale a year ago when it throttled access to Twitter. It uses hundreds of middleboxes router-like devices run and remotely controlled by bureaucrats. These can block individual websites and services, installed by law at all internet providers inside Russia. But the system, which also lets the FSB security service spy on Russian citizens, is a relative sieve compared to China’s Great Firewall. Andrew Sullivan, president of the nonprofit Internet Society, said there is no evidence it can successfully disconnect Russia from the wider internet.
Walling off a country’s internet is complicated, culturally, economically, and technologically. And it becomes far more complicated with a country like Russia, whose internet, unlike China’s, was not originally built out with government control in mind, Sullivan said. ProtonVPN, which has been inventive in finding ways to circumvent Russian blocking, reports clocking ten times as many daily signups than before the war. VPN services tracked by researchers at Top10VPN.com found Facebook and Twitter downloads surging eight times higher than average. Its research found the Kremlin to have blocked more than 270 news and financial sites since the invasion, including BBC News and Voice of America’s Russian-language services.
Russian authorities are also having some success blocking the privacy-protecting Tor browser, which like VPNs lets users visit content at special .onion sites on the so-called dark web. Twitter just created a Tor site; other outlets such as The New York Times also have them. The Kremlin has not blocked the popular Telegram messaging app. It is an important conduit for Ukrainian government ministries and also for Meduza, the Latvia-based independent Russian-language news organization whose website is blocked in Russia. Meduza has one million followers on Telegram. One reason may be that the app remains accessible despite other blocks.
Freedom of information endures despite authoritarian reach
The inability of the Russian state to fully sever its population from global digital networks highlights the resilience of the open internet. While the Kremlin attempts to enforce isolation, technological innovation and international cooperation continue to provide pathways for truth to reach those who need it most. The efforts to build a sovereign internet have instead created vulnerabilities that allow independent voices to thrive even under heavy censorship. As the conflict continues, the world watches closely to see if Moscow can eventually achieve its goal of total digital isolation or if the free flow of information will ultimately prevail against authoritarian overreach.
