In late July 2025, a pro-Ukrainian hacker group known as Silent Crow, in collaboration with the Belarusian Cyber Partisans group, claimed responsibility for a crippling cyberattack on Russia’s national airline, Aeroflot. The operation is reported to have destroyed thousands of servers, disrupting ticketing and scheduling systems. It led to the cancellation of more than 100 flights. This cyberattack has also stranded passengers and inflicted multimillion-dollar losses. (1)

Silent Crow, the hacker group, revealed soon after that this cyber-attack was the result of a year-long operation. The attack had deeply penetrated Aeroflot’s network and seized control over the personal computers of employees, including high-ranking executives. (2)

Before this latest cyber attack, particularly since the onset of the full-scale invasion in 2022, Russia has consistently launched cyber operations aimed at disrupting Ukraine's essential infrastructure. One of the most significant incidents took place in December 2023. During that time, Sandworm, a group linked to the Russian military, launched a massive cyberattack on Kyivstar, Ukraine’s largest mobile operator. (3) This attack disabled mobile and internet connectivity for millions of users. It also disabled regional air-raid alert systems, leaving civilians exposed during missile attacks. (4) Ukrainian authorities characterized it as the most extensive cyberattack on the nation since the war began. The International Criminal Court has subsequently initiated an investigation to determine whether it qualifies as a war crime. (5)

The Aeroflot and Kyivstar incidents together demonstrate how cyberattacks have evolved into a central component of modern warfare. They have reshaped both the conduct of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the broader understanding of war itself. In the context of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, cyber operations have been used not only for mere espionage but also to disrupt systems and send strategic messages. This illustrates that digital tools can serve many purposes in modern statecraft. (6)

What is cyberwarfare?

Cyberwarfare refers to the use of offensive or defensive digital operations by state or non-state actors. Its purpose is to disrupt, damage, or gain a strategic advantage over an adversary by manipulating or destroying digital systems, networks, or data to achieve political, military, or economic objectives. This modern form of warfare bypasses physical battlefields. Instead, it exploits vulnerabilities in interconnected digital infrastructures across military, governmental, and civilian domains. (7)

The emergence of cyberwarfare as a strategic pillar in modern power politics stems from the world's increasing reliance on digital infrastructure. Its appeal lies in its relatively low cost, difficulty of attribution, as well as its ability to empower both small states and non-state actors. As digital systems underpin critical infrastructure, economies, and governance, cyber capabilities have become integral to national defense and global competition. (8)

Impacts and forms of cyberwarfare

Cyberwarfare isn’t only about politics or power struggles between states. It also significantly affects our daily lives in ways we often overlook. Our reliance on digital systems for essential services like banking, healthcare, education, and even basic communication means that cyberattacks have immediate consequences. Hospitals can lose access to critical patient data, students can be locked out of online learning platforms, and personal financial accounts can be compromised in moments. Because our lives are so deeply tied to digital infrastructure, cyberwarfare reaches much closer to home than we might think. (9)

Cyberwarfare takes many forms. It can disrupt essential services, spread through trusted supply chains, or hide inside networks for months without detection. (10) These attacks reach far beyond governments, often spilling into civilian life and critical infrastructure. A prominent example is Stuxnet, a worm that quietly damaged Iran’s nuclear centrifuges while operators saw nothing unusual. (11) It proved that cyberattacks can cross into the physical world, causing real harm and reshaping how nations think about security and conflict.

Cyberwarfare is central to global power politics

Cyberwarfare has become a powerful tool in global politics because it delivers high impact at a minimal cost. In cyberspace, attackers often have the upper hand, since offensive attacks are fast, hard to trace, and challenging to attribute. As a result, striking back is highly uncertain. Without clearly identifying who is responsible for the attack, responding risks escalating the conflict in the wrong direction. Moreover, each successful attack tends to reveal new vulnerabilities in the target, which in turn encourages further strikes. The case of Stuxnet demonstrated that even highly secured facilities can be compromised, underscoring how offense can outpace defense. This has driven nations such as the U.S., Russia, and China to strengthen their own offensive capabilities. Ultimately, in today’s interconnected world, the power to control or disrupt digital networks has become a fundamental indicator of a nation’s power. (12)

Case study: U.S.-China cyberwarfare: A new frontier in strategic rivalry

The U.S.-China cyber conflict shows how digital warfare has become a central front in great-power competition. Both nations are rapidly expanding their cyber capabilities to protect their global influence. Chinese state-sponsored groups, such as Volt Typhoon and APT41, have breached critical U.S. infrastructure, from power systems to ports and telecommunications networks. (13) These operations are not just espionage; they are preparation for potential sabotage and part of Beijing’s broader strategy to expand its global influence. They also aim to secure China’s rise as a technological power and challenge U.S. dominance in both economic and security domains.

In response, the United States has begun intensifying its offensive cyber strategies and enhancing its resilience. (14) This escalating digital competition introduces a new dimension to their rivalry as two global powers.

One of the clearest examples of this was Operation Volt Typhoon, revealed in 2023 by Microsoft and U.S. intelligence agencies. (15) This Chinese state-linked group gained access to U.S. critical infrastructure, including telecommunications networks in Guam, which is a key hub for American military operations in the Pacific. (16) Unlike typical cyberespionage campaigns, Volt Typhoon focused on establishing ‘sleeper’ access points. These are hidden backdoors planted in networks that remain inactive until needed. They could be activated during a crisis to disrupt U.S. military logistics, especially if tensions over Taiwan escalated. (17) The group infiltrated routers, servers, and communications providers. This demonstrated a long-term, stealthy approach to cyberwarfare. Their tactics blurred the line between peacetime espionage and wartime sabotage. (18)

Other Chinese groups, such as APT41 (also known as Barium or Winnti), have launched operations against U.S. companies and government systems, blending espionage with financial gain. APT41 has been linked to unauthorized access to healthcare, telecommunications, and software firms, often stealing both sensitive data and trade secrets. (19) What makes these campaigns particularly significant is their dual-use nature. While cybercriminals typically prioritize financial gain, U.S. officials argue that APT41 operates under state direction, combining traditional hacking with strategic intelligence gathering. This demonstrates how China leverages cyber tools not just for military preparation but also for long-term economic and political advantage.

In response, the United States has adopted a multifaceted approach. On the military front, U.S. Cyber Command has been expanded to counter foreign operations and defend critical infrastructure. (20) On the diplomatic side, Washington has openly accused Beijing of cyberattacks. This strategy of publicly “naming and shaming” is intended to hold China accountable and reinforce U.S. alliances. (21)

The Volt Typhoon revelations, in particular, highlighted the severity of the situation: cyberspace is no longer just a domain of espionage, but a potential front line in a future U.S.-China conflict. (22) As experts and officials warn, Chinese cyber operations are designed not merely to steal information but to establish coercive options in the event of war. This positions cyberwarfare as a defining element of great-power competition, one that could shape and influence both U.S.-China relations and global stability in the years ahead. (23)

Conclusion

The Sandworm cyberattack on Kyivstar, along with operations like Volt Typhoon, show that cyberwarfare is now central to modern geopolitics. What was once limited to espionage has become a powerful tool of statecraft. It has become capable of grounding aircraft, disabling infrastructure, and projecting power across borders without traditional military force. Cyberspace is no longer neutral, but it is a contested arena where states and non-state actors compete for influence and security.

As the world grows more dependent on digital systems and infrastructures, the risks will only increase. Cyberattacks are fast, hard to trace, and difficult to stop, giving attackers the advantage while leaving targets uncertain and vulnerable. This has turned cyber operations into a growing threat to global stability.

To confront this challenge, collaboration is essential. Because cyber threats cross borders, no nation can defend itself alone. Sharing intelligence, coordinating defenses, and agreeing on common rules can make attacks more costly and less effective. International cooperation cannot eliminate the risk, but it can strengthen resilience and reduce the likelihood of conflict.

The real question is this: will nations work together to make cyberspace safer for everyone? Shall we?

This article is part of The Outside World, ftrprf’s very own research center.

For organizations, it’s pivotal to thoroughly understand what is happening in society. We help companies generate comprehensive insights into societal change and its potential effects on their strategy and operations, both negative and positive. With actionable societal insights, courageous plans, and a can-do mentality, we connect the outside world to your company's strategy. For these outside-world insights, we use a rigorous methodology that includes data processing, quantitative and qualitative analysis, and a thorough review process to ensure the accuracy and consistency of our findings.

For more information, please contact theoutsideworld@ftrprf.com.

At The Outside World, our very own research center, we keep a pulse on global developments through a societal lens. As part of this mission, we’ve created The Outside World Journal—a weekly digest delivering a curated selection of the most compelling news insights with our interpretation of why this matters and what the consequences for society might be. Read the journal here.

Sources:

1. Antonov, Dmitry; Filipp Lebedev; and Gleb Stolyarov. “Pro-Ukrainian Hackers Claim Massive Cyberattack on Russia’s Aeroflot.” Reuters, July 28, 2025. https://www.reuters.com/en/pro-ukrainian-hackers-claim-massive-cyberattack-russias-aeroflot-2025-07-28
2. BBC News. “Russia Aeroflot Cancels Flights after Pro-Ukraine Hackers Claim Cyber-Attack.” BBC News, July 28, 2025. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c87e0ydy3d4o
3. Rai, Arpan. “Russia-Linked Hackers Claim Cyberattack on Ukraine’s Mobile Networks: ‘Be Prepared.’” The Independent, December 14, 2023. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-hackers-cyberattack-ukraine-kyivstar-b2463785.html
4. Lyngaas, Sean. “Major Cyberattack on Ukrainian Mobile Operator Disrupts Banking Services and Air Raid Sirens.” CNN, December 12, 2023. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/12/europe/ukraine-cyber-attack
5. Deutsch, Anthony, Stephanie van den Berg, and James Pearson. “Exclusive: ICC Probes Cyberattacks in Ukraine as Possible War Crimes, Sources Say.” Reuters, June 14, 2024. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/icc-probes-cyberattacks-ukraine-possible-war-crimes-sources-2024-06-14/
6. Mueller, Grace B., Benjamin Jensen, Brandon Valeriano, Ryan C. Maness, and Jose M. Macias. Cyber Operations during the Russo-Ukrainian War: From Strange Patterns to Alternative Futures. CSIS Briefs. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies, July 13, 2023. https://www.csis.org/analysis/cyber-operations-during-russo-ukrainian-war
7. Rahimi, Nick, and Henry Jones. "Cyber Warfare: Strategies, Impacts, and Future Directions in the Digital Battlefield." Journal of Information Security 16, no. 2 (2025): 252-269. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=141708
8. Rahimi, Nick, and Henry Jones. "Cyber Warfare: Strategies, Impacts, and Future Directions in the Digital Battlefield." Journal of Information Security 16, no. 2 (2025): 252-269. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=141708
9. Andrew, Okram, and Aditya Tiwari. "Cybersecurity and Its Impact in Our Everyday Life." Evolution 5, no. 11 (2025).
10. Herr, Trey; June Lee; William Loomis; and Stewart Scott. Breaking Trust: Shades of Crisis Across an Insecure Software Supply Chain. Washington, DC: Atlantic Council, July 26, 2020. Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep26032.6.
11. Baezner, Marie, and Patrice Robin. 2017. Hotspot Analysis: Stuxnet. October 2017. Zürich: Center for Security Studies (CSS), ETH Zürich. https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/center-for-securities-studies/pdfs/Cyber-Reports-2017-04.pdf.
12. Shaheen, Salma. "Offense–defense balance in cyber warfare." In Cyberspace and International Relations: Theory, Prospects and Challenges, pp. 77-93. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hakan-Mehmetcik/publication/285282612_A_New_Way_of_Conducting_War_Cyberwar_Is_That_Real/links/5c63f67d45851582c3e47db7/A-New-Way-of-Conducting-War-Cyberwar-Is-That-Real.pdf#page=99
13. Dustin Volz. “In Secret Meeting, China Acknowledged Role in U.S. Infrastructure Hacks.” Wall Street Journal, April 10, 2025. https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/in-secret-meeting-china-acknowledged-role-in-u-s-infrastructure-hacks-c5ab37cb
14. Menn, Joseph. “China’s Cyber Sector Amplifies Beijing’s Hacking of U.S. Targets.” The Washington Post, July 16, 2025.https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/07/16/china-hacking-us-targets/
15. Microsoft Threat Intelligence. “Volt Typhoon Targets US Critical Infrastructure with Living-Off-the-Land Techniques.” Microsoft Security Blog, May 25, 2023. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/blog/2023/05/24/volt-typhoon-targets-us-critical-infrastructure-with-living-off-the-land-techniques/
16. Dimitrov, Dimitar, and Evgeni Andreev. "China's Strategic Competition in Cyberspace. Volt Typhoon and Salt Typhoon as a Projection of Power, a More Aggressive Posture and a Future Beyond Espionage." In ENVIRONMENT. TECHNOLOGY. RESOURCES. Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference, vol. 2, pp. 115-122. 2025. https://journals.ru.lv/index.php/ETR/article/download/8618/7065
17. Davidson, Helen, and agencies. “Explainer: What Is Volt Typhoon and Why Is It the ‘Defining Threat of Our Generation’?” The Guardian, February 13, 2024. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/feb/13/volt-typhoon-what-is-it-how-does-it-work-chinese-cyber-operation-china-hackers-explainer
18. Forno, Richard. “What Is Volt Typhoon? A Cybersecurity Expert Explains the Chinese Hackers Targeting US Critical Infrastructure.” UMBC STORIES, April 1, 2024. https://umbc.edu/stories/what-is-volt-typhoon-a-cybersecurity-expert-explains-the-chinese-hackers-targeting-us-critical-infrastructure/
19. Fraser, Nalani, Fred Plan, Jacqueline O’Leary, Vincent Cannon, Raymond Leong, Dan Perez, and Chi-en Shen. “APT41: A Dual Espionage and Cyber Crime Operation.” Google Cloud Blog, August 7, 2019. https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/threat-intelligence/apt41-dual-espionage-and-cyber-crime-operation.
20. Gompert, David C., and Martin Libicki. "Waging cyber war the American way." Survival 57, no. 4 (2015): 7-28. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00396338.2015.1068551.
21. Lewis, James A. “Toward a More Coercive Cyber Strategy,” CSIS, March 4, 2021. https://www.csis.org/analysis/toward-more-coercive-cyber-strategy.
22. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), National Security Agency (NSA), and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). “PRC State-Sponsored Actors Compromise and Maintain Persistent Access to U.S. Critical Infrastructure.” Cybersecurity Advisory AA24-038A, February 7, 2024. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa24-038a.
23. Boyle, Seamus. “In a Crisis, Could China Coerce Taiwan through Cyberspace?” The Diplomat, February 2024. https://thediplomat.com/2024/02/in-a-crisis-could-china-coerce-taiwan-through-cyberspace.