Part 3 – A Beacon of Truth in the Murky Waters of Deception? Or Just More Murk? PHDays

“On May 22 at(https://phdays.com/ru/), my colleagues and I decided to explore the topic of Fakes comprehensively. We live in an era of deception and alternative reality…” – thus begins the pathetic announcement of another event by Positive Technologies [Анонс_мастер-класса]. The question immediately arises: is not this “comprehensive exploratory” impulse itself another exhibit in the very museum of fakes that the organizers so zealously intend to deconstruct? After all, when it comes to “the pot calling the kettle black,” it is hard to find a more suitable candidate for the role of the main “pot” than the organizers of this sabbath of the righteous themselves.

Positive Technologies, known for its, to put it mildly, multifaceted reputation, and its flagship conference PHDays, on whose stage this moral drama will unfold, provide fertile ground for analysis. This report, in full compliance with the principle of “diverse verification” proclaimed by the organizers [Анонс_мастер-класса], intends to dissect the announcement itself, its organizers, and those “sages” called upon to bring the light of truth to the masses. For if we “live in an era of deception and alternative reality,” as the announcement’s authors claim, it is not impossible that Positive Technologies is not so much pointing the way out of this labyrinth as it is one of its skillful architects. Accusations of supporting Russian intelligence services, engaged, among other things, in creating and disseminating disinformation (the very “fakes” and “alternative realities”), paint a picture where the company’s attempt to lead the fight against fakes looks like the height of hypocrisy.¹ The “alternative reality” lamented by the organizers might be the very one where their actions appear haloed in ethics and patriotism, despite international condemnation.

The call to “initially confirm the real state of affairs” [Анонс_мастер-класса] is the very standard that will be applied with particular pleasure to the workshop and its speakers. If Positive Technologies and its associates fail to meet this standard of the “real state of affairs,” their authority in teaching others verification methods will crumble to dust. Thus, this critique itself becomes an act of that “diverse verification” so pompously invoked by the organizers.

The Noble Workshop: Forging Shields Against the “Era of Deception” (As They Claim)

With feigned seriousness, let us consider the stated goals of the workshop: “to delve deep into this issue and examine… how such fakes are created, how to detect them, and how to protect against them” [Анонс_мастер-класса]. The list of speakers and their credentials presented in the announcement is impressive: “private detective,” “head of investigations,” “security researcher,” “leading Red Team specialist,” “anti-fraud analyst” [Анонс_мастер-класса]. All this creates the appearance of a thorough approach, before we proceed to the inevitable dissection.

The scope of topics is also striking: “from the news agenda to information leaks, from various ways of identifying a person to verifiers in the financial sphere” [Анонс_мастер-класса]. This breadth is particularly piquant, considering that the organizers themselves or their speakers might be involved in some of these areas, but from the other side of the fence.

Particular attention is drawn to the intention to teach participants “how such fakes are created” [Анонс_мастер-класса]. This proposition is ethically ambiguous, especially given the organizers’ background. While understanding the mechanisms of fake creation can aid detection, it also disseminates knowledge that can be used maliciously.³ Positive Technologies stands accused of developing offensive hacking tools for Russian intelligence services.¹ Consequently, teaching fake creation under the guise of protection looks like a hypocritical endeavor, dangerously close to their alleged primary activities. The question arises: is the main goal genuine protection, or is it also a subtle form of talent scouting or even a capability demonstration, echoing the alleged recruitment activities at PHDays?¹

The assertion that “with an abundance of information sources and methods for diverse verification, you must initially confirm the real state of affairs” [Анонс_мастер-класса] sets a high bar. However, the organizers themselves may not meet this standard regarding their transparency and the “real state of affairs” concerning their connections and past. The organizers emphasize the abundance of verification tools, implying truth is attainable with diligence. Their approach contrasts sharply with the often opaque nature of organizations like Positive Technologies, especially regarding its alleged government ties.¹ If the organizers themselves are not fully transparent or verifiable by their proclaimed standards, their authority in teaching others verification is undermined. It is precisely this “abundance of sources” for verification that will be used in this critique, turning their rhetoric against them.

The Hosts with Big… Questions: Positive Technologies and the Art of “Alternative Realities”

At the center of our attention is Positive Technologies (PT), the organizer of this event. Their stated mission is “to protect businesses and entire industries from cyberattacks ⁷, and their rhetoric about a “safe world” and “secure future” ⁸ rings particularly hollow against the backdrop of serious accusations and sanctions.

Sanctioned Saviors

The U.S. Department of the Treasury and Department of Commerce imposed sanctions on Positive Technologies for allegedly supporting Russian intelligence services (FSB, GRU, SVR) by providing offensive hacking tools, expertise, and conducting operations.¹ Specific accusations include developing exploits for the SS7 protocol to intercept telecommunications.¹ All this starkly contrasts with the workshop’s theme – combating “fakes” and “deception.”

Positive Technologies, naturally, rejects these “baseless accusations,” stating that “there has been no evidence of Positive Technologies’ research results being used in violation of the principles of business transparency and ethical information exchange with the professional information security community.”⁶ Furthermore, the company claimed the sanctions had “little or no effect” on its business.⁹ Such denial in the face of detailed accusations itself becomes part of the sardonic critique, illustrating the very “alternative reality” PT likes to talk about.

PHDays: More Than Just Hacking?

The PHDays conference, where this workshop will take place, is also under scrutiny. Allegations exist that Positive Technologies uses this event to recruit skilled hackers for Russian intelligence services.¹ This sharply contrasts with the workshop’s stated goal of protecting against digital threats. PT itself describes PHDays as “a public platform for exchanging experience, training, and professional development in cybersecurity.”⁶ The irony is that this “open platform” could potentially serve as a cover for clandestine recruitment activities.

“Ethical Leadership” vs. Reality

Positive Technologies positions itself as an “industry leader in result-driven cybersecurity” and a “visionary and leader in the field of ethical security research.”⁷ How does this square with being blacklisted for posing a threat to U.S. national security and “trafficking in cyber exploits”?² Their “responsible disclosure policy” ⁷ sounds noble, but if they are simultaneously developing offensive tools for state structures ¹, it constitutes a glaring contradiction.

PT’s expansion into Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Iran, and its pursuit of markets in BRICS countries ¹¹ can be seen as exporting their particular brand of “technological sovereignty,” which may include tools and methods for information control, inadvertently echoing the workshop’s theme.

The workshop is not merely hypocritical; it is a strategic maneuver by Positive Technologies to normalize its image and activities within the cybersecurity community, despite severe international sanctions and accusations. By holding an event on a universally “good” topic (fighting fakes), they attempt to regain legitimacy and subtly advance their narrative. This is a form of “ethics washing”—using a seemingly ethical initiative to distract from or neutralize the negative perception of their core activities. It implies a sophisticated understanding of information warfare and public relations, which, ironically, is highly relevant to a workshop on fakes.

The very fact that Positive Technologies is teaching how to detect fakes, while allegedly being involved in creating tools for offensive operations (which can include disinformation campaigns), is the height of audacity. It is akin to an arsonist lecturing on fire safety. There is an inherent conflict of interest and expertise: their alleged offensive knowledge might inform their defensive teachings, but it also means they are intimately familiar with the “dark side.” This creates a scenario where they might selectively teach detection methods, perhaps omitting techniques that would expose fakes created by friendly actors, or subtly shaping attendees’ understanding of what constitutes a “dangerous” fake.

The practice of hosting Capture The Flag (CTF) competitions at PHDays, especially those involving hacking critical infrastructure like electrical substations ¹⁰, demonstrates a normalization of offensive capabilities bordering on recklessness, particularly for an organization accused of supporting state offensive operations. This directly contradicts the workshop’s stated goal of preventing “non-tolerable damage.”⁷

Below is a table illustrating some of these stark contrasts:

Positive Technologies: Exploring Contrasts

 

PT’s Claim/Self-Presentation	“Alternative” Reality (Accusations/Sanctions)	Sardonic Comment/Implication
“Leader in the field of ethical security research.”7 “Our global mission is to create products and technologies to enhance cybersecurity worldwide.”6	U.S. sanctions for “assisting Russian intelligence services in conducting offensive cyber operations.”1 Accusations of developing SS7 protocol exploits.1 Listed as a company posing a threat to U.S. national security.2	Apparently, “ethical research” includes creating tools for espionage, and “enhancing cybersecurity” is achieved by arming some actors against others.
PHDays – “a public platform for exchanging experience, training, and professional development in cybersecurity.”6	Accusations of using PHDays to recruit hackers for Russian intelligence services (FSB, GRU).1	An excellent “public platform” for non-public purposes. Exchanging experience apparently includes passing resumes “where they need to go.”
“We adhere to the principles of maximum openness at all levels of our activities.”6	Accusations of secret collaboration with state intelligence structures.1	Maximum openness in what is hidden from the public? A charming oxymoron.
Workshop on combating fakes and the “era of deception” [Анонс_мастер-класса].	Organizer (PT) accused of facilitating operations that may include creating and spreading fakes and disinformation.1	Who better to teach how to fight deception than someone who may have had a hand in creating it? Practical experience is a great thing.

Oracles of Authenticity: A Close Look at the Workshop’s Sages

Now, let us turn our gaze to those chosen experts tasked with enlightening the audience in the fight against fakes. Their professional backgrounds and stated presentation topics deserve no less scrutiny and sarcastic analysis.

1. Ekaterina Tyuring, private detective

• Role at the workshop: Will discuss “current ‘fashionable’ trends in digital crimes, about responsibility for deep (and not so deep) fakes” [Анонс_мастер-класса].
• Hypocritical Aspects/Questions:
  • A private detective discussing responsibility for fakes is interesting in itself. What are the ethical boundaries of private investigation, especially in digital surveillance and information gathering?¹³ Does her practice always align with the high moral principles of combating deception?
  • Tyuring is the author of the YouTube blog “Turing’s Tears.”¹⁵ One of her videos bears the telling title “How do SPECIAL SERVICES find people? FSB method.”¹⁷ Speaking at an event organized by a company (PT) accused of collaborating with Russian special services (FSB, GRU) ¹, while the speaker herself explains “FSB methods,” is blatant irony. Is she teaching how to emulate such methods or defend against them? The ambiguity here is fertile ground for sarcasm.
  • Her blog also covers “methods of fraud.”¹⁶ Doesn’t she risk, even by teaching these methods for awareness, arming potential fraudsters? This echoes the broader ethical dilemma of the entire workshop.
  • She develops and teaches OSINT programs for banks, foreign trade participants, and the Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.¹⁵ OSINT can be used for legitimate investigations, but also for creating sophisticated fakes or intrusive surveillance.²⁰ Where does she draw the line, and how does this dual role fit with a workshop on combating fakes?

1. Igor Bederov, Head of Investigations at “T.Hunter”

• Role at the workshop: Will talk about “how to identify fakes in the media space and data leaks” [Анонс_мастер-класса].
• Hypocritical Aspects/Questions:
  • Hunter’s work includes “preventing and investigating various incidents in cyberspace, which helps identify network offenders and bring them to justice.”²¹ Sounds commendable.
  • However, what are T. Hunter’s investigation methods?²² Are they always ethically impeccable? One source mentions methods available “only to special services, such as traffic interception,” which Bederov himself considers “much more dangerous,” yet discusses.²² Doesn’t T. Hunter, in pursuit of “justice,” use methods that blur ethical lines?
  • Hunter offers OSINT training.²⁴ Again, the issue of OSINT’s dual-use nature is relevant.
  • Bederov’s public statements or T. Hunter’s activities, including his socio-political activism and roles as advisor to a governor and assistant to a senator ²⁵, might reveal connections or views that ironically contrast with the mission of purely identifying “fakes” in the media, especially if these fakes serve specific political interests.

1. Dmitry Boroshchuk, Security Researcher at “Beholderishere consulting”

• Role at the workshop: Will talk about “the creation and detection of audio, video, and text fakes” [Анонс_мастер-класса].
• Hypocritical Aspects/Questions:
  • Openly discusses the creation of fakes. This is the most direct case at the workshop. Although done for detection purposes, the line is very thin.³
  • The name of his consulting company, “Beholderishere consulting,” itself has a somewhat ominous, surveillance-oriented connotation. Boroshchuk is a “criminalist and cybersecurity researcher.”²⁶
  • His Telegram channels “Notes of a Network Survivalist” and “Investigation and Forensic Tools.”²⁷ What kind of “survival” and “investigations” are promoted? Do they sometimes cross into a gray ethical zone?
  • His VK post ²⁸ muses about a “computer failure in everything… This is the intro to any disaster movie.” Such rhetoric could be seen as fear-mongering (FUD), ironic for a workshop on fakes, which often uses fear.
  • He teaches OSINT.²⁷ The same questions about the dual nature of this discipline apply.

1. Artemy Abyzov, Leading Red Team Specialist at “T-Bank”

• Role at the workshop: Will talk about “methods of forging identifiers. From access cards to biometrics” [Анонс_мастер-класса].
• Hypocritical Aspects/Questions:
  • A Red Team specialist from T-Bank (formerly Tinkoff Bank). Red Teaming inherently involves simulating attacks and thus understanding and using “fake” credentials or methods to bypass security.³⁰ The ethical aspect lies in authorization, but publicly teaching these methods is different.
  • The founder of Tinkoff Bank, Oleg Tinkov, was involved in a major tax evasion case where he “lied about his net worth in documents to renounce U.S. citizenship” ³² – a significant “fake” for financial gain. While Abyzov is not Tinkov, the association with a bank founded by someone who engaged in high-level deception is ironic for a speaker on forging identifiers.
  • Tinkoff Bank itself has faced security incidents, such as being targeted by a large-scale cyberattack affecting ATMs.³³ Although they were victims, any discrepancy between their public security stance ³⁴ and the reality of breaches could be highlighted.
  • T-Bank’s Bug Bounty program ³⁵ specifies what is not allowed, including “Disclosure of confidential or personal information.” Nevertheless, Abyzov teaches how to forge identifiers, which could lead to such disclosure if misused.

1. Mansur Safin, Anti-Fraud Analyst from “Femida”

• Role at the workshop: Will talk about “methods and detection of deepfakes in financial services” [Анонс_мастер-класса].
• Hypocritical Aspects/Questions:
  • “Femida” – the goddess of justice. A company with such a name fights financial fraud.³⁶
  • What is known about “Femida”? Reviews for “Femida komek” are mostly positive in the legal aid/debt assistance sphere, ³⁸, but this might be a different entity or branch. The announcement implies “Femida” is an anti-fraud company in financial services. The lack of critical information or independent reviews about “Femida” specifically in anti-fraud technology ³⁹ is a gap.
  • If “Femida” uses AI/machine learning for fraud detection (implied by features like Maxmind minFraud® integration ³⁷), how transparent are their methods? AI itself can have biases or be a “black box,” ironic when fighting “fakes” that exploit opacity.

The recurring theme of speakers’ involvement in OSINT and teaching methods related to investigative/offensive techniques suggests a potential ecosystem where the lines blur between intelligence gathering, corporate investigations, state interests, and even the creation of “fakes” (or tools for them). The presence of these speakers, combined with PT’s background, suggests the workshop might subtly promote a specific (possibly Russia-centric) approach to OSINT and information control under the guise of “fighting fakes.” This raises the question of whether the workshop is truly about countering deception or mastering the tools of information manipulation with an implicit understanding of their dual use.

The speakers presented as experts in detecting fakes are often involved in professions requiring understanding or even simulating the creation of fakes (private investigation, Red Teaming, OSINT for persona creation). Their professions create inherent ambiguity regarding the knowledge disseminated. Given PT’s background, there is a concern that knowledge about “creation” might be the more valuable takeaway for certain attendees, aligning with PT’s alleged activities.

Workshop Sages: Oracles or Mirrors of Deception?

 

Speaker & Organization	Stated Contribution at Workshop (from Announcement)	Potentially Hypocritical Aspect/Connection	Sardonic Question/Observation
Ekaterina Tyuring, private detective	“about current ‘fashionable’ trends in digital crimes, about responsibility for deep (and not so deep) fakes”	Author of YouTube blog “Turing’s Tears” with video “How do SPECIAL SERVICES find people? FSB method.”17 OSINT instructors for law enforcement.15	Discussing fakes at PT, accused of FSB ties, while popularizing “FSB methods” – bold. Isn’t this a masterclass in double standards?
Igor Bederov, Head of Investigations “T.Hunter”	“about how to identify fakes in the media space and data leaks”	T.Hunter offers OSINT training.24 Bederov holds posts as governor’s advisor and senator’s assistant.25	How do political affiliations and teaching potentially “gray” OSINT methods align with objectively identifying media “fakes”? Whose fakes will be identified with particular zeal?
Dmitry Boroshchuk, Researcher “Beholderishere consulting”	“about the creation and detection of audio, video, and text fakes”	Direct mention of “creation” of fakes. Rhetoric about “disaster movies” due to computer failures.28 OSINT instructor.27	Is teaching fake creation under PT’s auspices training defenders or replenishing the ranks of “alternative reality creators”? And isn’t fear-mongering about “disasters” classic FUD?
Artemy Abyzov, Leading Red Team Specialist “T-Bank”	“about methods of forging identifiers. From access cards to biometrics”	T-Bank (Tinkoff) founder caught in major financial deception (data forgery).32 Red Teaming involves simulating attacks, including forgery.	A specialist from a bank whose history is tainted by the founder’s financial “fakes” teaches identifier forgery. What irony! Is this for defense or inspiration?
Mansur Safin, Anti-Fraud Analyst “Femida”	“about methods and detection of deepfakes in financial services”	Name “Femida” (goddess of justice). Lack of independent information about “Femida” in anti-fraud tech.39	Will “justice” from “Femida” be as transparent as the methods they use to fight deepfakes? Or is it another “black box”?

Paid Access to Truth and Teaching Dark Arts: The Business and Ethics of Fighting Fakes

The workshop is accessible “only by purchasing a ticket to the closed part of the festival and registering in advance” [Анонс_мастер-класса], raising ethical questions about charging for information on how to combat such societal evils as fakes and disinformation.⁴⁰ One source notes that “people who cannot pay for quality journalism… are particularly vulnerable to both disinformation and misinformation.”⁴¹ This principle can be extended to this workshop. Is vital, socially significant information restricted to those who can pay? The irony intensifies, considering the organization charging for this “truth” (PT) is itself accused of contributing to the problem of “alternative realities.”¹

Let us revisit the ethical line of teaching the creation of fakes (audio, video, text, identifiers).³ While the stated goal is detection and protection, the knowledge is inherently dual-use. One source warns that “disinformation has become so pervasive that it has begun to erode the underpinnings of trust.”⁴² Doesn’t teaching fake creation, even to “experts,” risk further eroding this trust or inadvertently arming new creators of disinformation? The UN’s position on “responsible technology” ⁴⁴ emphasizes aligning technology with well-being and harm reduction. How does teaching fake creation align with this, especially when conducted by a sanctioned organization?

The rhetoric of “alternative reality” and “era of deception” used in the announcement [Анонс_мастер-класса] also warrants attention. Is this genuine concern or a form of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) designed to sell PT’s services and worldview?⁴⁵ PT’s research and marketing often emphasize threats.⁴⁸ Isn’t this workshop a continuation of a FUD-based marketing strategy? One source warns against “FUD fatigue” and notes that “FUD is a simple but effective strategy that supplies the audience with negative, fake, or false information to influence their behavior and decisions.”⁴⁷

Paid access to the workshop, combined with PT’s alleged background, suggests a possible strategy of cultivating a select, “vetted” audience for receiving more sensitive knowledge about fake creation and detection, potentially for purposes beyond the public good. Limited access allows for a more controlled environment and, potentially, a more select audience than a free, open event, interpreted not just as monetization by PT, but also as ensuring that powerful knowledge about fakes (both creation and advanced detection) is disseminated among individuals or groups they deem “suitable,” which might align with their alleged state agenda.

The workshop’s narrative of an “era of deception” conveniently positions PT and its chosen experts as indispensable guides, potentially overshadowing or discrediting other, more independent sources of knowledge on combating disinformation, a form of information control. By presenting themselves and their speakers as these crucial experts, despite their ambiguous backgrounds, they might subtly devalue or marginalize other efforts to fight fakes, especially those critical of state-sponsored disinformation (in which PT is accused of complicity), a tactic aimed at becoming the “go-to” source for understanding fakes within their sphere of influence, thereby controlling the narrative about which fakes matter and how they should be addressed.

Conclusion: The Pot’s Masterclass on Blackness

In summary, we see a picture of blatant hypocrisy: a sanctioned organization, accused of aiding state-sponsored cyber offense and disinformation, hosts a paid workshop on how to detect (and create!) fakes, featuring speakers whose backgrounds and affiliations raise additional ethical questions.

The irony of PT’s statements about the “era of deception” reaches its zenith when the company itself may, in essence, be an active participant in creating this very “era.” The true motives remain questionable: is this a sincere, albeit flawed, attempt at enlightenment? Or is it a sophisticated exercise in image laundering, narrative control, fear-mongering, and possibly even talent scouting for far-from-noble purposes?

In an era demanding that we “confirm the real state of affairs,” one might ask: is this workshop a genuine effort to combat deception, or is it merely Positive Technologies holding up a carefully crafted, deepfaked mirror to the very “alternative reality” they so eagerly seek to explore… and perhaps expand? This entire workshop can be viewed as a microcosm of a broader trend where actors with questionable ethics or state ties attempt to co-opt and control the discourse around cybersecurity threats (like fakes and disinformation) for their strategic advantage. It is a form of soft power or influence operation within the cybersecurity domain, where the “truth” about fakes becomes a commodity controlled and disseminated by those who may have a vested interest in certain kinds of “alternative realities.” Thus, the “pot calling the kettle black” critique is not just about individual hypocrisy but about exposing a potentially systemic manipulation of the cybersecurity discourse.

Works cited

1. Sanctioned Firm Accused of Helping Russian Intelligence Was Part …, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.zetter-zeroday.com/sanctioned-firm-accused-of-helping/
2. Commerce Department blacklists controversial spyware company NSO Group – CyberScoop, accessed May 12, 2025, https://cyberscoop.com/commerce-department-blacklists-controversial-spyware-company-nso-group/
3. What Is Cybersecurity Ethics? A Comprehensive Guide – Clarusway, accessed May 12, 2025, https://clarusway.com/cybersecurity-ethics/
4. Дипфейк: этика, законность, креатив., accessed May 12, 2025, https://sabatovsky.com/blog/tpost/ckl85bb6c1-dipfeik-etika-zakonnost-kreativ
5. Russia’s Cybersecurity Companies Shrug Off Sanctions – CEPA, accessed May 12, 2025, https://cepa.org/article/russias-cybersecurity-companies-shrug-off-sanctions/
6. Positive Technologies’ official statement following U.S. sanctions, accessed May 12, 2025, https://global.ptsecurity.com/about/news/positive-technologies-official-statement-following-u-s-sanctions
7. Positive Technologies, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.ptsecurity.com/upload/iblock/5d1/7goteifo1t4qelj3bklizutluke3rxaa/about_the_company_06_2023.pdf
8. Positive Technologies, accessed May 12, 2025, https://global.ptsecurity.com/
9. Positive Technologies says U.S. sanctions had little or no effect on its business, accessed May 12, 2025, https://therecord.media/positive-technologies-says-us-sanctions-had-little-or-no-effect-on-its-business
10. Positive Hack Days – Wikipedia, accessed May 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Hack_Days
11. Russia’s Information Security Industry Expands International Footprint – Jamestown, accessed May 12, 2025, https://jamestown.org/program/russias-information-security-industry-expands-international-footprint/
12. SCADA Strangelove – Wikipedia, accessed May 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCADA_Strangelove
13. Ethical and legal principles of professional activity of a private detective on the internet, accessed May 12, 2025, https://lbku.krok.edu.ua/krok-university-law-journal/article/download/266/221
14. Tips From A Private Investigator – Detective To Avoid Scams – ΚATΕΡΙΝΑ ΜΠΙΤΖΙΟΥ, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.detective-bitziou.gr/en/tips-from-a-private-investigator-detective-to-avoid-scams/
15. 4-месячный онлайн-курс OSINT: технология боевой разведки, accessed May 12, 2025, https://osint-offensive.codeby.school/
16. Интернет-Розыск (@irozysk): «Катерина Никерина, она же Катя …, accessed May 12, 2025, https://tlgrm.ru/channels/@irozysk/10325
17. Что такое «оффлайн-дизайн» и как с этим работать | Анна …, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_e_6FigWYFI
18. Слежка за семьёй в «Траектории». Что чиновники скрывают от родителей? – YouTube, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3IudwqtKr4
19. “Компенсации для жильцов. Комментарий от “ЭВОЛЮЦИЯ” – Екатерина Трибунских ПОЛНОЕ ВИДЕО НА КАНАЛЕ – YouTube, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xavj_EOxl38
20. OSINT и ПОИСК ИНФОРМАЦИИ в Интернете. Екатерина Тьюринг расскажет, как НЕ НАРУШИТЬ ЗАКОН – YouTube, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWpZ1Figj6Y
21. Игорь Бедеров – возглавит расследование киберпреступлений в T.Hunter, accessed May 12, 2025, https://tomhunter.ru/press-center/news/igor-bederov-ekspert-po-rassledovaniyu-prestuplenij-v-kiberprostranstve-vozglavit-dannoe-napravlenie-v-kompanii-t-hunter.html
22. How to protect a smartphone from attacks? | NEWS.am TECH – Innovations and science, accessed May 12, 2025, https://tech.news.am/eng/news/4034/how-to-protect-a-smartphone-from-attacks.html
23. 其他服務業Business News – Taiwan Services Trade Information, accessed May 12, 2025, https://industry.meettaiwan.com/taiwanservices/internet/en/procurementInfoDetail.aspx?item=34119&cat=10
24. Киберэксперт рассказал, как распознать мошенничество – Tom Hunter, accessed May 12, 2025, https://tomhunter.ru/press-center/press-releases/kiberekspert-rasskazal-kak-raspoznat-moshennichestvo.html
25. Игорь Бедеров – спикер делового форума | InterForum, accessed May 12, 2025, https://interforums.ru/speakers/igor-bedrov
26. Дмитрий Борощук | Global Digital Space, accessed May 12, 2025, https://gdspace.ru/experts/dmitriy-boroschuk
27. Дмитрий Борощук | Безопасность 360, accessed May 12, 2025, https://360sec.ru/educators/8
28. Дмитрий Борощук – ВКонтакте, accessed May 12, 2025, https://vk.com/beholderishere
29. Корпоративная безопасность 2022. Тенденции, проблемы и решения, accessed May 12, 2025, https://secconf.ru/conference-november-2022
30. What Is a Red Team in Cybersecurity? Definition | Proofpoint U.S., accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.proofpoint.com/us/threat-reference/red-team
31. Red Teaming in Generative AI: Exploring Vulnerabilities, Safeguards, and Ethical Challenges – Riskinfo.ai, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.riskinfo.ai/post/red-teaming-in-generative-ai-exploring-vulnerabilities-safeguards-and-ethical-challenges
32. IRS Criminal Investigation’s top 10 cases – 6 to 10 | Internal …, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.irs.gov/compliance/criminal-investigation/irs-criminal-investigations-top-10-cases-6-to-10
33. Cyberattack on Russian Banks Cause Widespread Disruption, accessed May 12, 2025, https://thecyberexpress.com/cyberattack-on-russian-banks-cause-disruption/
34. How T Bank (Tinkoff) Elevates Customer Experience (CX) with Digital Innovation and Customer-Centric Solutions – Renascence, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.renascence.io/journal/how-t-bank-tinkoff-elevates-customer-experience-cx-with-digital-innovation-and-customer-centric-solutions
35. T-Bank – Standoff 365 Bug Bounty, accessed May 12, 2025, https://bugbounty.standoff365.com/en-US/programs/tbank/
36. Fraud Analytics Certificate Program – ACFE, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.acfe.com/training-events-and-products/all-products/product-detail-page?s=fraud-analytics-certificate-program
37. Anti-Fraud for WooCommerce, accessed May 12, 2025, https://woocommerce.com/products/woocommerce-anti-fraud/
38. Отзывы о Фемида-Комек, юридическая компания, улица Жумалиева, 81, Алматы – 2ГИС, accessed May 12, 2025, https://2gis.kz/almaty/firm/70000001049965262/tab/reviews
39. accessed December 31, 1969, https://www.anti-malware.ru/analytics/Threats_Analysis/russia-financial-cybercrime-group-moneyTaker
40. Анализ проблемы распространения фейковой информации в интернет-пространстве Текст научной статьи по специальности «СМИ (медиа) и массовые коммуникации – КиберЛенинка, accessed May 12, 2025, https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/analiz-problemy-rasprostraneniya-feykovoy-informatsii-v-internet-prostranstve
41. Журналистика, «фейковые новости» и дезинформация» – South Ural State University, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.susu.ru/sites/default/files/book/zhurnalistika_i_dezinformaciya.pdf
42. Cybersecurity and the Ethical Impact of Disinformation | RSA …, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.rsaconference.com/library/blog/cybersecurity-and-the-ethical-impact-of-disinformation
43. Дипфейки Объяснены: Создание, Риски и Защита в 2024 году – Didit, accessed May 12, 2025, https://didit.me/ru/blog/deepfake-what-it-is-how-it-s-created-and-why-you-should-be-cautious
44. Ethical Technology | Office of Information and Communications Technology, accessed May 12, 2025, https://unite.un.org/content/ethical-technology
45. Web3 marketing agency secrets: Mastering FUD prevention – Take3, accessed May 12, 2025, https://take3.io/fudprevention/
46. Avoid Fear, Uncertainty, & Doubt (FUD) In Sales & Marketing – Startup with Feras, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.startupwithferas.com/avoid-fud-sales-marketing/
47. Why FUD fails and BAD prevails in Digital Security – Antwerp Management School, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.antwerpmanagementschool.be/en/blog/fud-fails-bad-prevails-digital-security
48. Positive Technologies Study Reveals Successful Cyberattacks Nett 5X Profits, accessed May 12, 2025, https://global.ptsecurity.com/about/news/positive-technologies-study-reveals-successful-cyberattacks-nett-5x-profits
49. Positive Technologies at GISEC Global 2025 – ZAWYA, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.zawya.com/en/press-release/companies-news/positive-technologies-at-gisec-global-2025-polqrrn1
50. The Future of Cybersecurity: How Evolving Threats Are Reshaping Our Defences – ITP.net, accessed May 12, 2025, https://www.itp.net/acn/cybersecurity/the-future-of-cybersecurity-how-evolving-threats-are-reshaping-our-defences