Before taking leadership at Killnet, the interviewee explains their path through digital communities and their motives for joining larger networks. They describe founding a hacker collective known as the Deanon Club, which operates as a darknet forum and a Telegram channel plus chat space. The channel serves as a personal blog where events, notable personalities, and practical tips are shared with other participants, while the forum and chat are used by members to discuss tasks, opportunities, and collaborations.
The Deanon Club is portrayed as having a broad agenda, with a stated primary focus on disrupting drug sales sites. The method hinges on identifying accounts linked to illicit trade across social networks and messaging apps, the darknet, and other online services. The group claims to publish compromising information to damage reputations and to deploy distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks as a strategic tool.
When asked about potential use of physical force, the interviewee references the existence of mercenaries and the wide array of services offered on the darknet that can involve violence for hire.
Killnet Rebirth
The discussion then shifts to the acquisition of Killnet, with the interviewer asking whether the purchase was driven by the owner of Mega and a person named Moriarty. The response clarifies that Moriarty and Mega are not involved in the decision; the purchase is described as a personal initiative aimed at expanding the Deanon Club into a brand and bringing in skilled hackers rather than just passive viewers, though the emphasis is placed on image and positioning.
Regarding cost, the interviewee declines to reveal an exact figure but provides a price range stating the amount was more than ten thousand dollars and less than fifty thousand dollars. The deal is presented as a spontaneous decision born out of a casual business conversation with Killmilk, rather than a premeditated plan. The two parties quickly agreed and shook hands, marking a decisive moment in the business narrative.
On the topic of an anonymizing article about Killmilk published on socialbites.ca, the interviewee asserts that Killmilk has not been effectively anonymized and that the information in the article remains unrefuted at the time of the interview. They emphasize that even if some information were true, it would not be used to weaponize the anonymity against a friend.
The relationship with Killmilk is described as generally positive, evolving from initial suspicion to a cooperative partnership over about eighteen months. Early tensions included public disputes on Telegram, but those were resolved as they discussed grievances and developed joint projects, such as the Infinity forum, which has since ceased to operate.
Reaction from former Killnet leadership to the new arrangement is described as negative; many managers and experts left the collective. In contrast, the Deanon Club now publicly advertises substantial payments for skilled hackers, ranging from one hundred thousand to three hundred thousand dollars for a single operation. The revenue is attributed to business ventures, special orders, and media projects, with this funding reserved for true pentesters who can identify and exploit vulnerabilities in others’ information systems.
Special orders are explained as targeted hacking aimed at eliminating competition outside the drug trade, including online gambling operators. Killnet is framed as continuing to function as a hacktivist group, but with a shift toward a more professional mode of operation, potentially fewer publicly publicized shares but greater strategic importance. Over time, the organization aims to distance itself from politics and focus more on commercial orders, with a caution that attacks may affect Russian marketplaces but will not undermine white-listed companies.
Looking ahead, the interviewee envisions Killnet becoming an established, globally recognized hacker organization known for genuine, high-profile operations. In the months since acquiring Killnet, the person claims to have already overseen a significant intrusion, specifically the disruption of Kyivstar, a major Ukrainian telecom operator.
In describing the Kyivstar incident, the piece notes a large-scale outage affecting mobile and internet services across Ukraine, with Kyivstar’s computer infrastructure partially disabled. Two pro-Russian groups, Killnet and Solntsepek, publicly claimed responsibility for the attack. Some questions arise about the reliability of competing claims, but the interviewee suggests that multiple groups contributed to the incident and reiterates that Killnet played a leading role.
The interviewer probes concerns about personal safety and the risk of identity exposure. The interviewee responds with a stark view on the abundance of internet articles about their persona, suggesting that many are incorrect, and acknowledges that exposure could be fatal. They also challenge the notion that Killmilk was anonymized, stating that Killmilk’s identity was not real and that drug cartel figures are actively seeking the individual, a claim not realized at the time described. The two parties described a generally cooperative relationship, evolving from initial hostility to eventual collaboration.
There is mention of past threats from former Killnet members, described as anger and passive hostility on Telegram channels, dismissed as trivial by the interviewee. A key takeaway offered for preserving anonymity on the darknet is the principle of maintaining a clean page: one’s online persona must remain separate from real-life identity to avoid easy detection through a single misstep.
Overall, the interview presents a portrait of a controversial figure who blends entrepreneurship, hacking expertise, and strategic risk-taking across a spectrum of online and offline activities. The narrative emphasizes image management, rapid decisions, and a belief in the value of anonymity as a protective measure while pursuing ambitious, high-stakes operations.