Kaspersky Introduces a Four-Level UAV Threat Classification in Russia
Russia has welcomed a new system for classifying unmanned aerial vehicles based on danger levels, developed by Kaspersky Lab in collaboration with industry partners. The effort aims to bring clarity to the way drones are understood and managed, particularly as incidents involving unmanned aircraft increasingly affect critical infrastructure and large facilities. The report from RIA News highlights this advancement and its potential impact on safety practices and regulation.
Vladimir Kleshnin, the business development manager for Kaspersky Antidrone, notes that drone-related incidents have become a persistent challenge for hubs such as airports and industrial sites. The central goal of the new rating system, he explains, is to fill the gap in knowledge about what capabilities or features actually help customers protect their environments from drone threats. In short, the classification is meant to translate technical drone capabilities into actionable risk considerations for operators and regulators alike.
The system identifies four threat levels: medium, moderate, high, and critical. Each level is described in terms of typical drone characteristics and the corresponding difficulty of detection, interception, or neutralization in real-world settings. This structured approach provides a common framework for assessing risk and prioritizing protective measures across different sectors.
Medium threats are associated with standard consumer drones available in electronics stores. These machines typically run with factory firmware and use conventional radio control channels. While offering basic functionality, they present a baseline risk that facilities can address with standard security protocols and routine monitoring.
Also falling into the medium category are consumer drones that, while sold publicly, come with enhanced noise immunity. This feature complicates countermeasures, as the drone can maintain control signals under conditions that might otherwise disrupt transmission. The result is a slightly elevated risk profile that requires more vigilant detection methods and layered defense strategies.
Hardware-enhanced drones, which boast more robust transmitters and radio subsystems, are classified as high hazard. Experts point out that such devices resist common interference tactics more effectively. Nevertheless, their high radiation levels often aid in geolocation tracking, helping security teams locate the drone more quickly once detected.
The most severe category is the critical threat level, reserved for aircraft type drones that operate on pre-programmed flight paths without relying on a traditional radio control channel. These machines can execute complex maneuvers and deliver payloads with little to no human input, presenting the most significant challenge for conventional detection and interception systems.
Vladimir Kleshnin expresses confidence that this classification will foster a productive dialogue among regulators, customers, and drone manufacturers. By creating a common language to describe drone capabilities and corresponding protective measures, the framework aims to promote safer use of UAS technology while encouraging industry collaboration on safety standards and compliance. As the drone landscape evolves, such a dialogue is increasingly crucial for balancing innovation with public and infrastructure safety.
Alongside this development, Russia has previously introduced a new drone suppression system designed to enhance defenses against unauthorized unmanned aircraft. The combination of classification and suppression technologies reflects a broader shift toward more proactive and integrated approaches to drone risk management across critical sectors.
In the broader context, the introduction of a standardized UAV threat taxonomy aligns with global trends toward clearer risk assessment and standardized responses. Organizations and agencies responsible for infrastructure protection can leverage this framework to calibrate sensor deployments, automation rules, and response protocols. The ultimate aim is to reduce vulnerability while maintaining the operational benefits that drones offer in areas such as surveying, delivery, and emergency response. (Source: RIA News)