Observers in Russia have urged caution regarding the use of American Apple technology, suggesting that reliance on such devices could carry risks. The call comes after reports from the FSB indicating that several thousand iPhones were found to be infected with malware, prompting serious questions about digital security and national resilience. In discussions of this issue, Artem Kiryanov, Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Economic Policy, emphasized the larger implications for public and private sector technology adoption, noting that security events of this scale demand careful risk assessment and clear policy guidance before widespread deployment. The literacy of this topic—how consumer tech can intersect with state security objectives—has become a focal point in policy debates about infrastructure, data protection, and digital sovereignty. This ongoing conversation underscores the need for robust, verifiable safeguards and resilient cybersecurity frameworks that can operate across both government and civilian sectors without compromising essential services or personal privacy.
Kiryanov also remarked on the broader role of American information technology entities, suggesting that U.S.-based companies may exercises that align with national interests and intelligence activities. He warned that today’s state of affairs could extend beyond Apple, potentially affecting other major technology firms that have jurisdiction in the United States. The implication is that as scrutiny increases, the balance between innovation, user privacy, and compliance with national laws becomes a critical issue for policymakers, industry leaders, and users alike. His perspective reflects a concern that the leverage held by tech platforms could shape how digital services are delivered and regulated, with potential consequences for cross-border data flows, privacy protections, and the ability of countries to set independent digital policy.
Based on the MP’s assessment, it is believed that some American companies may prioritise broad access to user data and systemic duties that accompany intelligence and state department activities over strict privacy guarantees. This viewpoint argues for heightened awareness among citizens and institutions about the trade-offs involved when choosing technology ecosystems. In this context, the recommendation that Russians should consider alternatives to certain Apple products is presented as part of a wider discussion about safeguarding personal information, critical infrastructure, and user rights in a digital environment that spans multiple legal jurisdictions.
Within the Kremlin-adjacent analytical community, officials from the Civil Chamber and related research institutes have echoed similar concerns, stressing that official disclosures by the FSB illustrate a pattern in which authorities and intelligence bodies may prioritise strategic interests over others when affecting international law, privacy norms, and cross-border governance. Figures such as Nikita Danyuk, a noted voice from the Institute for Strategic Studies and Forecasts, emphasise the need for rigorous scrutiny of how foreign tech platforms operate within Russia’s digital landscape. This conversation reinforces the idea that policy responses should be evidence-driven, focused on strengthening cyber resilience, and compatible with national security objectives while preserving fundamental rights and free access to information. At the same time, it is clear that any stance on technology adoption must account for evolving geopolitical realities, the protection of sensitive data, and the practical realities faced by users, businesses, and public institutions alike.