Illegal Miners Threatened with Criminal Punishment. What to Prepare For

RBK-cryptoОпубліковано о 2025-12-09Востаннє оновлено о 2025-12-09

Анотація

Russian authorities plan to introduce both administrative and criminal liability for illegal cryptocurrency mining, as announced by Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak. The government aims to regulate the digital currency market and establish penalties for mining violations. Legal experts suggest that criminal charges should be reserved for cases involving significant public danger, such as large-scale damage to energy infrastructure or threats to grid stability, rather than duplicating existing laws. They argue that administrative fines are sufficient for minor offenses like small-scale home mining. The distinction between criminal and administrative liability will likely be based on the scale of damage and the amount of illicit income generated. A previous legislative draft proposed substantial fines for unregistered mining, but it was criticized for lacking proportionality. Amendments to both the Administrative and Criminal Codes are expected by 2026 to address these issues. Despite mining being legalized in Russia in 2024, an estimated 70% of miners remain unregistered due to challenges in legalizing previously imported equipment.

As stated by Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak at the meeting of the Council for Strategic Development and National Projects on December 8, the government plans to establish both administrative and criminal liability for violations related to cryptocurrency mining.

"We will legislatively regulate the issue of digital currency circulation, as well as establish administrative liability for violations of digital currency mining legislation and criminal liability for illegal mining," Novak said.

Lawyers explained to "RBC-Crypto" where the line between administrative and criminal liability might lie and what could influence the assessment of the severity of the crime.

"Eliminating the Gap"

Criminal liability for mining could make sense if it applies to socially dangerous consequences from illegal mining, rather than duplicating existing offenses, says Yuri Brisov, partner at Digital & Analogue Partners. He explained that criminal liability is considered justified when substantial harm to protected public relations can be caused or there is no other way to effectively stop the violation. Also, creating a separate offense is necessary to eliminate a gap.

Currently, Russian law has liability for electricity theft (Art. 158 of the Criminal Code), damage to power supply (Art. 165 of the Criminal Code), illegal entrepreneurship (if the activity is systematic and large-scale), and illegal miners are also usually subject to norms on tax evasion and violation of power grid operation rules, the lawyer said.

According to him, the problem is that these norms cover only specific aspects of illegal mining. If the new criminal article is targeted, for example, "illegal mining resulting in damage to energy infrastructure on a large scale" — this is not duplication, but gap elimination, the expert noted. He added that if the article is general ("mining without permission"), it will become redundant because the same thing is already addressed by administrative measures.

For comparison, the US does not have a separate criminal article for mining, but it has effective existing norms: energy theft, damage to public utilities, and collectively, these norms are sufficient for courts to effectively prosecute illegal mining, Brisov explained. A similar situation, he said, exists in Germany, France, and in general, the dominant approach in Europe is that there is no need to single out mining as a separate criminal offense if the basic norms work.

When the Damage is Too Great

In Russia, criminal liability for illegal mining could be justified when damage is caused to the energy system (or a threat to its stability is recorded) on a large scale, Brisov believes. According to him, this does not duplicate theft because damage can occur without theft, and it does not duplicate administrative liability because the latter is powerless against major violations.

"Large underground farms can create emergency loads on power grids, disable facilities, cause multi-million dollar damage, and administrative fines are clearly insufficient for such violations, as the public danger and potential damage are too great. At the same time, for 'home mining,' where the maximum risk is blowing the fuses in the house, fines are quite sufficient," the lawyer says.

Search for Justice

The line between criminal and administrative liability will most likely be determined by the amount of damage caused and the illegally obtained income, that is, by the volume of mined cryptocurrency, believes Denis Polyakov, head of the "Digital Economy" practice at the GMT Legal law firm.

The lawyer suggested that the draft law from the Ministry of Digital Development, which appeared this summer, will form the basis for defining the offenses. Polyakov recalled that the ministry proposed introducing administrative liability for illegal mining, illegal activities of mining infrastructure operators (MIO), and failure to submit reports to the Federal Tax Service on mined digital currency.

"The violation itself regarding 'illegal mining' consists of mining cryptocurrency on the territory of Russia without being included in the register. That is, to recognize a violation, it is sufficient to prove that a person is engaged in mining and is not included in the register," Polyakov explained.

According to him, the Ministry of Digital Development's draft law proposed the following fine amounts: from 200 to 400 thousand rubles for individual entrepreneurs and from 1 to 2 million rubles for legal entities. However, these fines were subsequently removed from the draft law, and one of the reasons was that the document proposed only administrative liability, the expert said.

"Effectively, this would mean that any violations, whether illegal mining with 3 ASICs (devices for cryptocurrency mining) or mining with 1000 ASICs, would be subject to the same measures of liability, which is not fair," Polyakov said.

According to him, simultaneous amendments to both the Administrative Code (KoAP) and the Criminal Code (UK) are expected in 2026. These changes should take into account the specifics of possible violations and their consequences, the lawyer says.

Other Proposals

Novak instructed to work on strengthening liability for illegal mining back in mid-July. Among the violations mentioned at the time were illegal connection to power grids, electricity theft, and violation of the mining ban.

In October, the State Duma proposed finalizing the Administrative Code regarding non-compliance with current requirements for cryptocurrency mining, and making electricity theft for mining a separate criminal offense. The latter initiative suggests that electricity theft for cryptocurrency mining is defined as an aggravating circumstance.

Mining was legalized in Russia in 2024, after which the industry began to "whiten," but the share of illegal business remains high — according to expert estimates, only about 30% of miners are officially registered. Industry participants cite the lack of a mechanism for legalizing equipment that was previously imported through gray schemes as the main reason preventing many miners from "coming out of the shadows," and call for this problem to be solved.

Arkham Announced "De-anonymization" of ZCash. Which Transactions Are Tracked

Tether Invested in Humanoid Robots. When Will They Be Launched

Only 7 Native Tokens Remain in the Green Since the Start of the Year. And It's Not Bitcoin

Пов'язані матеріали

The Revived Codex, Carrying OpenAI's Hopes for IPO

This article analyzes the intense recent development of OpenAI's Codex, positioning it as a crucial component for OpenAI's impending IPO. Over the past two months, Codex has seen a rapid series of major updates focused on integrating into real enterprise workflows. Key new features include enhanced context capture (Appshots, file previews, built-in browser), long-running task execution ("Goal Mode"), remote operation (phone control, lock-screen access), and enterprise management tools (plugin sharing, access tokens, automated risk review). These updates aim to make Codex a comprehensive AI workbench that can "see the scene, push tasks, and manage risks." The author argues that while ChatGPT proves OpenAI's massive user base and API provides foundational revenue, Codex represents OpenAI's clearest path to demonstrating tangible, high-value commercial viability. It targets developers and engineering teams—a segment already accustomed to paying for efficiency gains in costly software development cycles. This is critical because, despite higher overall revenue, OpenAI's adjusted operating margins remain deeply negative, highlighting the challenge of outrunning immense compute costs. The pressure is amplified by competitor Anthropic's success with Claude Code, which has shown that a focused approach on high-value enterprise and developer workflows can lead to a path toward profitability. Codex's aggressive evolution is thus seen as OpenAI's strategic move to capture a similar enterprise-ready, revenue-generating narrative essential for its market debut. In essence, "ChatGPT proved OpenAI has users. Codex needs to prove OpenAI is a business that can make money."

marsbit24 хв тому

The Revived Codex, Carrying OpenAI's Hopes for IPO

marsbit24 хв тому

a16z: 7 Charts to Understand How Tokenization Is Changing the Nature of Assets

a16z: 7 Charts on How Tokenization is Transforming the Nature of Assets Tokenized Assets, often referred to as "real-world assets" (RWA), are altering the form, flow, and structure of the financial system. The market recently surpassed $30 billion (excluding stablecoins), driven largely by tokenized U.S. Treasuries. These offer investors digital, yield-bearing assets with efficient settlement. Growth varies significantly by asset class. Asset-backed credit leads in speed, followed by niche financial assets, while venture capital and active strategies took longer to scale. U.S. Treasuries and commodities dominate, holding about two-thirds of the current market share. Within commodities, gold tokenization dominates entirely due to its standardization and historical appeal in crypto. The ecosystem is spread across multiple blockchains. Ethereum holds over half the market, with others like BNB Chain, Solana, and Stellar holding significant shares. However, a key insight is that most tokenized assets currently lack "composability." While the total market is large, only a small fraction (e.g., 5% of tokenized bonds) is used within DeFi protocols. Many tokens are simply digital records of off-chain assets, not natively programmable financial building blocks. In contrast, smaller categories like reinsurance tokens see very high on-chain usage. Looking ahead, forecasts for the tokenized asset market by 2030 range from $2 trillion to over $30 trillion, representing immense potential growth from today's ~$340 billion base. Yet, relative to global markets (e.g., $140T+ in bonds), tokenization's penetration remains minuscule (<0.02%). The current phase focuses on digitizing straightforward assets for efficiency. The next major challenge is bringing more complex financial instruments on-chain and integrating tokenized assets into truly composable, internet-native financial infrastructure.

marsbit54 хв тому

a16z: 7 Charts to Understand How Tokenization Is Changing the Nature of Assets

marsbit54 хв тому

Data Theft at Will! Major Vulnerability Exposed in This Popular AI Programming Tool

A critical vulnerability in Anthropic's Claude Code AI programming tool allowed attackers to bypass its network sandbox for over five months, enabling potential data exfiltration. Independent researcher Aonan Guan discovered a second complete bypass exploiting a null-byte injection in the SOCKS5 proxy. This flaw, present since the sandbox's launch in October 2025, let processes inside the sandbox access any host, contrary to user-configured domain whitelists. The attack chain involved manipulating hostnames (e.g., `attacker.com\x00.google.com`). JavaScript's `endsWith()` check would pass `.google.com`, while the underlying C `getaddrinfo()` function would only parse `attacker.com` due to the null byte, creating a parser discrepancy. Combined with a previously disclosed prompt injection method, this could leak API keys, credentials, and internal data. Anthropic silently fixed the issue in April 2026 without a security advisory, CVE, or user notification. The researcher noted that Claude Code itself confirmed the vulnerability's severity when tested. This incident highlights broader industry issues, as similar vulnerabilities found in Google's Gemini CLI and GitHub's Copilot Agent also lacked public disclosures. The report criticizes the false sense of security created by a broken sandbox and emphasizes the need for defense-in-depth and transparency in AI tool security.

marsbit4 год тому

Data Theft at Will! Major Vulnerability Exposed in This Popular AI Programming Tool

marsbit4 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片