oh, just don't. oh, i mean you won't. yes, to shape out. the same becomes the attitude and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves worlds apart, we choose to look for common ground. oh, well, never be a victory for russia. wait, we shall see what you're still waiting. much really need not unless you look at a meal. crane war is a proxy war. this is a war between russia and the united states. as among americans to not should kick them in common doin. market forces are and you're not in your engage in conflict of russian forties. american forces are harrington, defend nato. allies happens that nato escalates even more indiscretion. military

operations become a war when you, but those have some of the rules and lemme shall. another 1000 is my store. i see it. i see your to us thinking costliest. got earlier with so you sleep, you shenika you stuff with almost them. let's see. we live at home is still foolish or in your sewage nurse eager for girl who's ah, but any old out the gym. we always happy to see you as an expert on our team, miscast clear sky. welcome to the program and thank you for inviting us to your home life. and of course, you know, what we want to discuss with you today is your recent statement that all smartphones in russia might become disabled. some say that you just try to scare people, is the existing technology that can make it possible, and if so, how more?

brighter episode. but as even in the, let's talk about the statement 1st. i never made any such statement interview, said our offense might be disabled to which i replied, do not worry, and joint based smartphones might be disabled as well. as for the technology aspect, there are 2 factors here. almost all smartphones have a built in remote disabling functionality. this was developed so that users could remotely turn off a lost smartphone, for example, to make sure that their private data wasn't stolen was this feature one can either raise all stored information or disable the smartphone altogether. basically turning it into a brick one, this feature is documented and if it is available to the user, obviously the platform can take advantage of it as well through phone manufacturers can also use it. but there is also an undocumented feature. our specialist looked into this matter and they discover that many smartphones have the disabling feature . of course, we haven't examined all phones. that would be

a mess of research. but we did look at a small range of models user. so the situation is not great in that respect. you have to understand that in essence, the real own of your smartphone is it's manufacturer. when the russian, all sorties talk about import substitution. that is one of the reasons we use technology that is controlled by an external manufacturer. unfortunately, information technology is controlled by developers and producers not use it to pay money for their technological product, but gone forshie you learn in that case. can we say that this is a serious cyber threats? not all smartphone producers or even based in the u. s. law was not in them were medical schools. these are mostly american companies, the platforms i found, or android, or developed in the u. s. so this kind of control is a potential capability. it does look like your typical on off switch, of course. anyway, that is the most important factor. but having this technological capability is one thing. another question is, will they decide to use it a war?

yes, that's what i'm talking about. yep. well, a girl. i think it might be possible if there is a series escalation and the war, and it would be some type of hybrid strategy. simply disabling smartphones in some territories, pointless. this measure would likely have to be part of some kind of package. for example, if we become very successful on the front lines and the west realizes that it can't do anything about this. we could certainly expect some hybrid attacks in the, in, for me, in space and simultaneous actions that would significantly damage our infrastructure . would this necessarily affect smartphones, or maybe would they target base stations or other i o t elements? i can't make any predictions. i can only say that there is a hypothetical possibility restored her, i'll be meaningful. there were diverse reactions to your comments. so ma, skeptical a mobile research group expert, for example, said that if disabling smartphones was a realistic cyber threats, we could talk about disabling aircraft equipment, which hasn't happened and seems like this option is not on the table. what do you

say about that? so the gar garcia breakables though as though it's proposing bread with well, 1st we do not know what is on the table. before late february, there had been a lot of things we thought would be impossible. but now we are witnessing the disabling of several infrastructure elements. we are registering a drastic increase in attacks. major retailers are sold for 10 euros in our country . he would have predicted something like that 6 months ago. and i will not dare to predict what will happen as for disabling aircraft technology. when you are waging a hybrid war, you have to have a reason for every action. why would you disable airplanes right now? what would be the goal? they might be exaggerating this potential. if we talk about military charts, this is one thing. but with civilian aircraft, you must have a purpose anymore, but i do not think they would do something like that. just for the sake of disabling that is just wrong. you have to understand that if they demonstrate some potential capability, like disabling smartphones,

the country will mobilize its resources, figure out a workaround, and it will be much harder to do something like that next time. so if you're going to pull this kind of switch, you have to really think about everything and make sure this will ashley be a serious blow. we can safely assume that it will be a well thought out step, no m, that were continuous covered. so if i understand correctly, this is just a warning it go up a little bit in your brain a little bit. as long as of course, i was asked if there was technically possible. what you called a statement was really just the comment. my answer is yes, technically it is possible. and mobile system experts should understand that smartphones can be disabled. hutchins, my phone system. so she told me that a, is there a chance that other key infrastructure elements could be disabled? and if so, what would they be? horizontal gunners that all depends. earlier, i mentioned base stations automated process control systems also come to mind,

especially if they're connected to the internet. our society has been actively going digital in recent years. this process has been very evident in the so called internet of things sector, for example, implementing internet connected systems that help establish remote control over certain objects. read data, et cetera. remote control means that you can influence things remotely as well, but that's just how it is. there is no other way hold on. so it is important to check for such remote influence capabilities in various systems. that is why one of the 1st presidential orders after the start of the special military operation, excluded foreign software from critical infrastructure elements. it also prescribed additional information security measures. the government understands that this threat exists and that it needed to be neutralized. isn't it too late? what a non think of this before? well, normally going, if this was addressed before, the input substitution concept was adopted in 2015 or rather in 2014. it happened

when some key elements were disabled. the bank of russia was at one point disconnected from the swift system, while visa must cod stopped working for a period of time in 7 territories with we realized that impor substitution was significant. and with a special program was created, the unified register of russian programs for electronic computing machines and databases was a last year then the same was done for hardware junior, but only unfortunately for several reasons. the process of input substitution was not as efficient as we would have liked. everybody had gotten used to doing things a certain way, but there is also a general understanding that the quality of important systems is better when you rick, naturally it is a totally different situation. when you use a system on millions of computers or in a limited number of machines, when you can have the same quality without scaling. foreign companies also have an influential lobby in our country. that's why the whole import substitution process

was, wants that forward. one step sideways stock of and one step back. nevertheless, some steps were taken and we have moved forward even compared to 2014 or something . i think the situation is much better now. but also quote with will come in by, you know, let's just go back to your comments about the possibility of smartphones being disabled. are there any steps we could take right now to avoid this scenario? grandma said shelf, jo was kazama was bookstore. so i would say there are 2 groups of steps that can be taken. what the state can do to prevent this from happening, and what individual smartphone uses can do. but these are 2 separate issues to discuss. let's start with the state. it could develop an application and make it free for smartphone uses. that would switch off this mechanism crucial that something like this can be done. this type of technology is presently available and perhaps the stake and also introduce import substitution measures in this area as well. and we have operating systems of our own and the bits on this. i'm not

competent enough in this domain to judge their performance, but there are the aurora and capacity operating systems, which are perhaps worth regarding as an alternative to the foreign med mobile software. or perhaps we could use chinese software. however, i do not saying this approach would be reasonable and it would effectively mean trading bad for worse. so it's not right, but that's what the state on the take to remedy the situation. as for individual users, 1st of all, i would not recommend getting rid of the old beg button mobile phones. you never know, perhaps they will come in handy at a certain point. okay, dig them out just in case. and also i do not saying smartphone blockage will happen over night. it will likely be a gradual process. besides, some smartphones may be turned off on some devices, mobile data uses off, others are disconnected from the network. and if we finally see that the process is gaining speed, it will be possible to switch to other communication means,

in order to stay connected. i do not st. china will choose to play mean tricks on us. the call number flood thought was what bridge stored on a kid by is using chinese technology, really? that bad an option. as you said, trading bad for worse. i mean, there are countries that's on the same side of the fence with the brochure in this regard before nobody got with them about oh hinge 33rd. i do not st. china will choose to play mean tricks on us, for at least they won't block anything intentionally, for sure, going for them. this is a wonderful business opportunity 1st to walk, to step of their mobile device sales. but the problem is that the chinese are in a very dependent position themselves as far as the cell phone market is concerned, and most chinese catches are powered by android. while we had switched off google mobile services and developed an android platform of its own wm and its own app market, a system for content distribution we, but it's still android and we do not know whether it is safe to use. we haven't

looked into this yet, a separate study is needed to establish if there are any risks there. but i do not saying that using these google powered mobile devices, no matter who manufactured them, would be in any way more secure. the dealer hoarded for where is the decision making sense located the generates cyber security threats, like disabling smartphones in the u. s. council. and what do you think yourself? well yes, i think it's her whom area to live that i'm working with in las vegas. you may be right, it is where our enemies are, you know, but you know, i'm not so much worried about the hostile activities, but rather about the fact that the threat landscape in russia has changed so drastically. the number of cyber attacks where getting has searched and many foreign made cyber security systems have stopped working. as you know, many foreign software producers have withdrawn from the russian market and therefore sees to provide maintenance for their systems is tied up for. but at the same time, nobody seems to care. every one is at ease. we are still operating the same

programs we had before. the special military operation was launched by nasha. and we see today's kia can amik indicators telling us we need to boost digitalization by such and such percent, et cetera. i do not get it, frankly. is it negligence or sloppiness or stupidity? it is clear that the programs need to be replaced or adjusted for digitalization to go on in this situation, but no one is doing anything by now. who are these people enemies or are they simply incapable of grasping the level of threat we are facing? the situation has changed drastically. when you were greg a dark blue. oh, is your so vehement in criticizing the programs which no one is willing to adjust to the changing situation? let me ask you something. what are the 3 main changes that needs to be introduced? we name them for them. oh, glen la jolla, festa war winnie to analyze. war is lacking in russia. what we critically need to

cover all the gaps to keep the entire infrastructure running smoothly and avoid the risk of mobile device blockage across russia. in cybersecurity, this called achieving the level of non realization of the west threat formula. and in order to do this, we need to identify what it is that we're lack of thousands of dollars. and then we need to think of ways to bridge the existing gaps and fill up these deficient when you to identify what needs to be done. some expert teams engage professionals or perhaps commission 10 or say 5 companies to develop solutions on a competitive basis. and then choose the best product, or we could come up with a new mechanism or filling these gaps in. and when each set of rigid deadline would say, 12 or 18 months, or 2 years, or even 3, depending on the systems complexity. and we also need to identify what kind of stuff is required to complete this task. so we had a heated discussion in early summer, but how many staff were going to need given the fact that many i t professionals

have fled from russia. it was said that no one is left now, and this will kill us officials and then it turned out there are still plenty of competent people left even too many. but they aren't doing the work that needs to be done for the week. and what is exactly that they should be doing them. mm hm. they definitely should be dealing with the most important things at the expense of what's trendy. and many of these professionals continue focusing on the industry trends. let me give you an example. so here, there are $26.00 messenger raps in russia, which i love. messengers don't get me wrong. i do not have a problem with them, but do we really need all the 26 of them when this country? also, there are over 60 hostile management software systems registered in russia. 60 different medical database systems, meaning there is a separate system for almost every regional russia. and it's obvious that the quality of the software solutions leaves much to be desired as they were a couple together in hurry, which are what do we really need this lecture when you go, besides,

it's taking up human resources worker, but we will never have enough available i t professionals if we continue producing 60 similar software systems for hospital use and when, if we draft a plan and think through the mechanism of allocating government funds for this, i'm sure we will be able to fill all over again over a very short period of time which definitely reduce exposure. cyber threats as well . that will go at it. if you said this side, the warfare is ongoing, with no serious steps have apparently been taken against russia. what did you mean and why is that? which if you had to assess the state of events on a $1.00 to $10.00 scale, where would we be standing right now? why not know it is obvious that all out cyber war has not been started against russia yet. can you see it is technically impossible to disable russia's infrastructure? the risk of smartphones being disabled is just one of the examples. there are many more, but we see that this is not happening. so we're inclined to thing that no serious

cyber warfare is being waged against russia for now when you were. but at the same time, the level of cyber threats has gone up within. we have not come close to the upper limit yet. it still can't be much worse unfortunately, because roches dependence and foreign software is still very high for more than how can russia defend itself should an all out cyber was you put it actually break out for the dimensions. what did o'quinn us broader switching and fast? as far as i know, we have been conducting cyber warfare. drills them over the past few years. the ministry of digital development has helped several simulation exercises in case russia gets cut off from the internet and major i t infrastructures. also, they have been working on fortifying essential infrastructure, what they call critical information infrastructure, or c. i a good that should have helped bolster our defenses. i think that the oversee, they are in any statistics i can share. i do not have access to this type of classified information,

but there has been some work done along these lines. but whether there's adequate or effective is not for me to judge that's good, but i do think a lot more. could it be done in terms of input substitution? as i see it, no cybersecurity tools can guarantee any lasting protection. if you continue to rely on foreign made infrastructure, there are no ways to ensure that your security tools, however good, would give good enough protection if you operate foreign hardware to ruin. therefore, the priorities to replace foreign information systems with our own. the 1000 was, bu, suppose the authorities here what you have to say and implements all the solutions you propose. how long would it take for us to reach a point where in your view i, mrs. jersey is at its highest, honestly what of them says they want granite, there will be different timelines for different systems. some can be fixed pretty quickly. for example, by using open source technology. but even there, we have seen cases of code poisoning where all sorts of backdoors or malicious

messages were inserted into the open source code through the community. even though these communities claim to be politically neutral. now some systems are more difficult to improve maker, for example, our association of software developing companies conducted its own analysis and came to the conclusion that we have major problems with industrial software in russia does not have enough specialized industrial software. i will not name specific categories of software is because the manufacturers might get upset with me because we've got a handful of companies that work in this domain. but they are much smaller and less experience compared to western vendors. so they have no other option but to try and catch up. so at least we've got a foundation here because when it comes to software development and programming tools, or we use our foreign ones to go to. so this includes programming languages, development environments, systems and d planning frameworks. with this, we do not have anything of our own. all this isn't something you can quickly fix.

it requires a systemic approach. so how long will it take to build our warning tools? well, as they say, a journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step. we need to make plans and start doing something. then we will course correct. look at china, beijing has set a goal to completely replace all i see systems in the country with domestic products by 2025 chinese steadily. moving towards this goal here, where i do not remember exactly what year the program was adopted. but i believe that by 2025, they will reach their goal. as long as you have a specific target, this is a salva polishing booklet. the system can down with 5 m if we sets all of these goals for ourselves. could it be any downsides in some way? we're cutting ourselves off from the process of globalization on we rhythm can go, but is that set up with it? we know what comply zation is actually all about. we know what it stands for. i

suppose if it worked like some kind of collective consciousness doing everything purely for the benefit of mankind, that would be a good thing. but with globalization comes competition, a single company or some country starts hugging the covers, so to speak, which leads to confrontation on finished project code poisoning threads. in the end, if we have to make a choice for our country, the options we have right now are far from up to marketing. but for now, i do not see russia choosing the part of globalization anytime soon as much as i and the delaware alone bonus crispy of sky in the english language does the term nuclear auction. we've talked a lot about smartphones being forcefully shut down boats from what i understand that is not the nuclear option. there are scenarios, it will be much worse for russia. what is the worst case scenario young in the world? i don't think there will be one single blow against our countries i t infrastructure

. rather they will either hybrid approach and carry out simultaneous attacks on multiple france using information warfare and shutting down various systems in order to destabilize the political situation. we're going if they could attempt to initiate regime change and impose outside control for us. it was expecting just one angle of attack would be nave in my eyes. there are many directions for a potential strike, but i certainly hope our government is well aware of this. and is building up multiple layers of defense, obamacare company, meet him with who's close to study nuclear or let's just go back to the nuclear option. we all understand that there can be no victors in a nuclear war or conflict like that would impact the entire world. of course. does this logic extend to cyber warfare yet key, or what all can been going on? right as, as cyber warfare. well, in that respect, russia can show the world a sing, or 2 even in the last. they say that she has some of the most brilliant hackers in the world. and personally, my believe them when you the so we can retaliate and was wasn't kind of system

naturally, we're all operating the same systems. the modern world is transparent and the technologies that we use they use as well. if they can head us, we can head back perhaps not as efficiently as the owners or producers of their operating systems since they have direct control over them. but we can certainly do some damage. seamless you were born m historian, lama. history tells us that whenever humanity came to the verge of nuclear war, and recall the cuban missile crisis, for example, the parties involved eventually realize the needs negotiates 1st solution calmly. are there any parallels we can draw here real quick? mm hm. so i just read the thought big, oh, no, no. yes. back then common sense prevailed when it comes to cyberspace, there have been multiple attempts to create something analogous to international law. a universal code of conduct. the old countries would sign so far,

this has not been done in early 2, thousands, many were actually trying to address this problem. but as we get closer to our present time, fewer and fewer attempts were being made that the key in recent years rush, her alone has been calling for the well to abstain from using saw the weapons from engaging in cyber warfare et cetera. other nations meanwhile, have adopted a fast strike approach, and there are national cyber strategies. for example, the u. s. i, mr at the g says they can strike 1st if they have reasons to believe that countries pursuing some policy that's unfavourable for washington. they grant themselves this, right? so our, unless it's conducted a study to analyze, decide mistrusted she's of different states. and it turned out that only 3 countries in the world support offensive cyber warfare perspective, the united states, obviously the united kingdom and for some reason ukraine yet on all other countries, including russia, have defensive cyber strategies. that's very telling that one was but he well thank

you so much for talking to us. it was very informative. thank you. ah, ah, i look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such order that conflict with the 1st law show your identification. we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. at that point, obviously is too late truck rather than a barrier shop with artificial intelligence. real, somebody with

a robot most protective phone existence with who i stayed before the morning. i went to rita on a lawyer or so i'm watching it by at the moment today and i don't. yeah. so, but there isn't any, it wasn't just on the horse and don't get me in a play as electron on my list. i'm wondering is do it, but i'm about to leave my desk that i'm really kind of e s a. unless you machine on my i will come on you to be aware it, but i just roll the roof. so john wooten is on the show. i get it, i just

a bottle suggest a deal on that because i was like, i will put it out there to me. okay. yes. special c merchant, the news you need to national team that were like one mission jamal. up on your mind that i'm, that was my dog. it was modeling. would that have machine this at a more than a complex for mac mall, but just put a shield your son on my list of well go to die, get it with the she just as a service doesn't. if there's on this about each other, when you get as well and good as well as a safe return, amok us telling me about that. we did lose this in the machine that but on the new road a new if not, i'm just a new pastor though. i must be in the to school. it was a boy. i mean, we have with a chest this journal. i mean, can you go annual up at the most dental washington,

that edition. okay. okay. will i bring it in? and what of those are the virginia before the city of seattle video, i'm going to look over here with william on going is by way, motion either way. we're interested, right? but accumulate a brown my local book towards procedure where we're sitting in the motion. i wish there was a bus now to stay below ryan is actually one of those really principal belonging that i should be able to show. i mean, you can probably see whether it was a street. mia? no action was a shuttle or stuff, just this one for sure. for see where mm. ebersole or a bill that i saw was theresa. i showed a man that owners could put in as up little girl said she had to say about them. a national board custodians of mm mm

a to what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy even foundation, let it be an arms race is on offensive, very dramatic development. only personally and getting to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful. i think it was time time to sit down and talk. no nation. no nation has ever done anything like it. and all history with

a crew comes under the latest ukrainian shelling of don. yes, kidding. a local hotel on the unit a is ready to partially accepts calls those terms for entry documents. president alexander version to announce the move as told to ease tensions on site. to continue with the pentagon caves into criticism over its deadly drug strikes on civilian defense hedges to simply reduce the number of deaths are mixed bombings of other kinds. a class pakistan declared as a state of emergency i was being called the was.