Traffic from the Far East often doesn’t travel in a straight line to Moscow. It can detour first to the United States, then across Europe, before arriving in Russia. Internet experts explain to socialbites.ca that this detour makes residents’ data easier to intercept as it passes through countries considered non-hostile to the region. The topic touches on the use of RU and .РФ domains in the process.
Experts note that data may even appear to move via the United States by way of submarine cables connecting oceans and continents, highlighting a global network path that crosses multiple jurisdictions. The Chief Engineer of CorpSoft24 explains that the choice of routing is influenced by several factors.
First, technical reasons such as limited bandwidth or the absence of direct routes between the Far East and Moscow can push traffic onto longer, international paths. The second factor is financial—the cost savings of using foreign routes can outweigh the expense of laying new lines within Russia. Yet experts warn that evaluating these transfers solely on price is incomplete.
Bypassing routes may serve to boost reliability and resilience. If one pathway becomes blocked or congested, alternative corridors keep connections alive and the network functional, the engineers say.
Soros aid and telegrams from Moscow
The unusual Internet infrastructure in the Far East is linked to how network development unfolded in the region. In the 1990s, American companies and nonprofits helped build the early Internet there. One notable NGO was Open Society, funded by George Soros, with an official presence in Russia. In 1992, Sprint, supported by Far East operations, established a regional data transmission network called Rosprint / Global One, and in 1993 Soros helped finance the first satellite Internet in Russia, all coordinated through Sprint. Regional authorities supported new initiatives as well.
For many Russians, access remained limited through the mid-1990s, with the Internet present mainly in institutions such as the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. In 1994, the Council for International Research and Exchanges (IREX) set up the Electronic Mail Center at the Far East State Technical University, marking the first free Internet access point in the area. The American organization Project Harmony Inc. also supported access, leading to nine Internet centers across six cities in the Far East.
By 1996, Soros’ Open Society signed an agreement with Russia’s State Committee for Higher Education to create large Internet centers in 33 universities nationwide. These computer rooms, each seating about a hundred people, were established in places including Vladivostok at the Far Eastern State Technical University. The project for laying direct Internet cables in the Russian Far East only materialized in the late 2000s. Before then, many Russians in the Far East depended on existing cables from abroad, which often ran via the United States and Europe.
During the 1990s, routes that used international segments were common due to a lack of direct domestic channels. The situation shifted in the 2000s with the emergence of TransTeleCom and its extensive optical fiber laid along railway routes, alongside leadership changes and strategic decisions by Rostelecom and its backbone networks. These developments helped bring a larger share of data traffic onto Russian soil, though today the Internet in the region remains relatively centralized and inter-operator connections are not exclusively concentrated in Moscow, according to network specialists. Some sessions traverse long distances because of the way peering and infrastructure have evolved, analysts note.
As a result, the flow of traffic through Russia’s Far East can still involve transiting through other countries, a factor that some experts say can slow things down or create unnecessary detours, depending on path selection and peering agreements. The overall architecture continues to be shaped by the balance between optimization, cost, and network resilience, with direct Russian routes increasingly prioritized as the domestic backbone strengthens.
Data danger
Officials warn that routing traffic through third countries to save money carries potential risks for user data. While international backbone operators offer wide bandwidth and attractive tariffs, longer routes may introduce vulnerabilities and more exposure to hostile jurisdictions, according to industry analysts. Some Russian operators still lack robust peer-to-peer agreements that allow traffic to pass directly within Russian borders, which can compound concerns about security and control.
Experts emphasize that the risk of interference or information leaks exists when traffic passes through foreign networks. Some countries are viewed as more prone to espionage or cyber attacks, prompting discussions about enhanced protective measures. To mitigate these threats, providers rely on data encryption, privacy protections, and technologies such as virtual private networks, while continually improving routing practices to keep user data safer. Nonetheless, the push to keep internal traffic inside Russia grows stronger as internet use becomes more central to daily life, and political contexts evolve. The consensus among researchers is that internal Russian routing is increasingly preferable for information security reasons, even as practical challenges keep a portion of traffic on international paths.