Russia's New SIM Rules Target Anonymous Phone Numbers

Russia is preparing new anti-fraud rules that will sharply shrink the number of authorized SIM card sellers to curb anonymous mobile use.

Moscow is planning a major overhaul of its mobile market with a new set of regulations dubbed "Anti-Fraud 3.0." According to TechRadar, these rules aim to dramatically reduce the number of intermediaries authorized to sell SIM cards. The primary goal is to combat fraud and malicious online activities that rely on anonymously registered mobile numbers, which are often used for everything from spam calls to coordinating attacks. This move represents a significant tightening of control over how mobile identities are issued and managed within the country, shifting the landscape for both consumers and businesses that operate there.

The core mechanism of Anti-Fraud 3.0 is centralization and stricter control. The proposal would effectively eliminate thousands of smaller, independent dealers and sub-dealers who currently sell SIM cards in kiosks, small shops, and markets. Sales would be restricted to official stores of the mobile network operators and a few large, authorized retail chains. This consolidation makes it easier for regulators to enforce identity verification rules, as every sale would be processed through a limited number of vetted channels. Another key detail is that new SIM cards might be sold without any pre-loaded credit, a measure likely intended to de-incentivize the mass acquisition of disposable numbers for fraudulent purposes.

This initiative is not happening in a vacuum. Globally, governments are increasingly scrutinizing anonymous communication channels as a vector for crime and misinformation. Many countries, including India and several in the EU, have already implemented mandatory ID registration for SIM card purchases. Russia's move is an extension of this trend, but with a particular focus on its vast and often loosely regulated network of third-party sellers. It also aligns with a broader pattern of increasing state control over the digital sphere in Russia, where authorities have progressively sought more visibility into online communications and digital identities to enhance law enforcement capabilities.

For technology leaders, the implications are twofold. First, security teams should recognize this as a national-level effort to de-anonymize a key part of the digital infrastructure, which could theoretically make it harder for certain types of attackers to operate. However, the more immediate impact is on user-facing services. Founders and CTOs whose products rely on SMS for two-factor authentication (2FA), account recovery, or user onboarding in Russia must prepare for potential disruption. Legitimate users may find it more difficult or inconvenient to acquire new SIM cards, which could introduce friction into sign-up flows and increase customer support loads.

The key thing to watch is whether these proposals become law and how they are implemented. The timeline and the final list of authorized sellers will be critical details. Companies operating in the region should monitor the legislative process and begin evaluating alternative user verification methods, such as authenticator apps or email-based systems, to reduce their sole reliance on SMS. The effectiveness of the new system in actually curbing fraud, versus simply creating hurdles for ordinary citizens and businesses, will be the ultimate measure of its success and may influence how other nations approach similar challenges.

This regulatory shift in Russia directly impacts SMS-based two-factor authentication and user verification systems. Engineering and security teams with users in the region must anticipate potential friction in onboarding flows and a changing landscape for digital identity verification, as anonymous SIMs become harder to acquire.

Companies operating in Russia that rely on mobile numbers for user acquisition, marketing, or security may face higher customer friction. The reduced availability of SIM cards could slow user growth and require a strategic shift toward alternative verification methods, impacting operational costs and market reach.