Russian authorities recently intensified their crackdown on digital privacy with raids on the team behind the Telegram bot known as "Eye of God," which has gained notoriety for its data lookup capabilities. Sources from various media outlets including Meduza and journalist Andrey Zakharov report these events unfolded within the framework of criminal investigations pertaining to the illegal use of personal data under the recently enacted Article 272.1 of the Russian Criminal Code. This marks the first known application of this legislative change aiming to regulate personal data more strictly and penalize the services exploiting such sensitive information.
The raids reportedly took place approximately a week ago, demonstrating the government’s aggressive stance against data privacy violations as it seeks to limit and control the flow of personal information across the internet. “The whole team of the bot is really being pursued. They are reaching out to whoever they can,” one insider noted, highlighting the extensive scope of the authorities’ operations against the bot's team.
At the center of this controversy is Evgeny Antipov, who has publicly identified himself as the bot's developer. Despite rumors about his departure from Russia, Antipov has refuted these claims, stating, “I think this is about someone else,” asserting he was not involved in any search operations. His responses reflect the tense atmosphere surrounding digital surveillance and legality within Russia.
On February 27, 2025, Antipov announced through his Telegram channel about the need for “small technical changes” to the bot's operations, coinciding with the disturbances caused by the raids. While the bot provided users information through aggregated leak data, Antipov assured users, “Global changes are not planned, this is just cosmetic changes,” implying the service's core functionality would remain intact, albeit altered. He mentioned the adjustments would take up to 48 hours and attributed them to disputes with information suppliers over operational demands.
Historically, the "Eye of God" functioned as both a tool for data lookups and for facilitating information leaks. Users could track down individuals based on leaked databases detailing personal data, including names and phone numbers. This accessibility has caused structured concern among law enforcement and resulted in increased legal scrutiny. The amendments to Article 272.1, which now imposes stiffer sentences for the misuse of personal data, represent broader efforts by the Russian government to adapt its legal apparatus against perceived threats posed by digital services operating without stringent oversight.
Antipov's service had previously attracted the attention of Russian security services, which found its access beneficial. Reports suggest police had actively used the bot for investigations, leading to rising discomfort within other agencies like the Federal Security Service (FSB). Zakharov's commentary indicated there were dissenting views among government bodies about the bot's utility and the potential risks it posed to broader national security paradigms.
The reaction from the public and data users remains mixed, especially considering the changing legality surrounding personal data. Some users may feel the repercussions from legislation enacted to shield personal information could inadvertently inhibit relevant journalistic inquiries and investigations. The nuances of data access and its regulation have sparked considerable debate, with critics pointing out how restrictions could inadvertently hinder their ability to hold administrations accountable.
While Antipov now claims to be abroad, with his family residing within Russia, he contemplates the safety of his return. Conferring with other media members, he stated, “If there are realmente searches, I will not go home, of course,” demonstrating the palpable tension surrounding the enforcement of these new laws and their application. The uncertainty casts doubts not only on his operations but also raises questions about the sustainability of services like "Eye of God" moving forward as the Russian legal environment continues to evolve within its regulatory framework.
With the bot currently non-operational, its future remains uncertain. Antipov's insistence on maintaining the service's functionality amid these turbulent changes speaks to the broader struggle for balance between personal data privacy and state control, positioning this saga at the intersection of technology, legality, and human rights.