The original of this material
© “Our Version”09/14/2022, Photo: rkplaw.ruFrame from video: via “Our Version”
It is logical to assume that, as a result of the data leak that occurred, a considerable amount of “intimate details” from the internal kitchen and judicial practice of all the above characters, companies and structures got into free access. As well as data on those particularly sensitive principals who generally tried not to advertise their cooperation with Rustam Kurmaev for one reason or another. In total, according to the hackers from Anonymous, the leak contains detailed (including confidential) information about 250 clients of the law firm.
Who is to blame and what to do?
As you can see, Rustam Kurmaev’s company is far from ordinary, its client base is not very simple, and the qualifications of employees responsible for information security seem to be above average. It turns out that “overlooked, not saved”? And how did it happen that the same lawyer Yaroslav Shitsle, who willingly and regularly comments on other people’s “leaks” for the media and professionally promotes the topic of “hacks” in courts, is still (and more than three months have passed since the leak from RKP Law) has not demonstrated his professional competence in protecting the interests of his own employer?
It is generally accepted that hacks and leaks are the result of the work of some high-level technicians using sophisticated and high-tech methods. In reality, up to 90% of successful hacking attempts are implemented due to the human factor, using the so-called “social engineering”. This may well be unwitting assistance to intruders when the victim of the attack follows dubious links, downloads and launches suspicious files. But when it comes to large “leaks”, then in a noticeable number of cases (remember the recent leaks of the databases of SDEK, Yandex.Food and other aggregators, or, more globally, the notorious “Edward Snowden case”), they are organized or supported directly ” from within” of the victim, its current or former employees. Someone is guided by considerations of revenge and resentment, someone tritely wants to make money, and someone (like the same Edward Snowden, who “leaked” the database of secret CIA operations) is driven by considerations of a higher order – political, ideological or moral principles.
Let’s make a reservation right away: no one knows what, how and why exactly happened in the situation with Kurmaev and Partners. “Anonymous” in their report on the hacking only casually mentioned active correspondence with some employees of RKP Law – but it is not clear whether it was an element of the attack, its prerequisite, or already a consequence. Rustam Kurmaev’s company itself did not comment on the leak of its data. There is no information from law enforcement agencies either. Moreover, it is not known whether they are aware of the crime at all; whether they received a corresponding statement from any of the victims.
Over the elapsed time, at least, it would be possible to go public with the version of the “intervention of the enemy special services” (which would look logical, given the obvious readiness of Rustam Kurmaev to trump his father’s “special status” already demonstrated in the “Terminal Service” case). But then it would be necessary to involve very serious structures in the real (and not PR) investigation of the incident. Which (this option is not excluded) could, during the investigation, come to rather unexpected and not very pleasant conclusions for RKP Law.
Why Rustam Kurmaev is silent, if desired, can be understood, given the likely devastating consequences of the very fact of the leak for the professional reputation of the law firm. But after this publication, any of the organization’s 250 clients, who also became an unwitting victim of a leak, can apply to law enforcement agencies. And with such a development of events, “Rustam Kurmaev and partners” may well move from the category of “victims” to the category of suspects and co-defendants, and then in any case it will be necessary to form some kind of “official position”.
Based on media materials
* Alexey Navalny is included in the list of individuals in respect of whom there is information about their involvement in extremist activities or terrorism.