- July 13, 2026
- 11:08 am
- World News
The hacking of Ksenia Sobchak’s resources and the publication of alleged personal correspondence unexpectedly escalated into an internal scandal within the Russian government. Vladimir Solovyov effectively accused the journalist and her mother, Senator Lyudmila Narusova, of treason, and then publicly suggested the existence of a conspiracy within Putin’s entourage.
The story began on July 8, 2026, when unknown individuals gained access to Ksenia Sobchak’s email and then temporarily took over her Telegram channels “Sobchak” and “Bloody Baroness.”
Screenshots of the journalist’s alleged personal messages appeared on these resources. Representatives of Sobchak’s media holding announced the hack and warned readers that publications appearing after 2:00 PM were not related to the editorial team. Later, access to the channels was restored, and the controversial posts were deleted.
However, the story did not end there.
Already on July 9, the hacker group Black Mirror published a new part of the alleged archive. It contained correspondence attributed to Sobchak, former head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Andriy Yermak, Russian officials, Kremlin employees, and people associated with state information structures.
The hackers claim to have obtained Sobchak’s correspondence archive for the period from 2015 to 2026. Its declared volume is over 350 gigabytes, but it is currently impossible to independently confirm the existence of the entire array in this size.
What was found in Sobchak’s alleged correspondence
The most serious part of the leak was not personal conversations, but messages showing possible mechanisms of interaction between Sobchak’s media holding and the Russian government.
The published materials feature the head of the public projects department of the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation Sergey Novikov, head of ANO “Dialogue” Vladimir Tabak, representatives of the Moscow mayor’s office, editors of Sobchak’s projects, and media managers associated with the Kremlin.
The content of certain dialogues suggests that the editorial team could receive instructions regarding the coverage of topics sensitive to the Russian authorities.
In particular, attacks by Ukrainian drones on Moscow, the consequences of strikes on Russian oil refining facilities, and the growing fuel shortage were discussed.
According to the published screenshots, after the drone attack on Moscow on June 18, 2026, government representatives expressed dissatisfaction with Sobchak over how her resources reported on the events.
Sobchak allegedly demanded that the chief editor of her news projects, Sergey Titov, prepare a report on the publications. In response, he reported that the editorial team deliberately did not show most of the materials they had.
According to the alleged author of the message, journalists had hundreds of videos from the scene, including footage of strikes and fires, but used only a small part of these materials.
The correspondence also discussed that the editorial team switched to official messages on the topic of the fuel crisis but was not ready to claim that the situation was normal when numerous complaints about gasoline shortages were coming from different regions.
These fragments may indicate that not only formal state censorship operates in Russia. Media loyal to or dependent on the Kremlin may receive unofficial instructions, independently limit publications, and negotiate with officials on acceptable boundaries for covering events.
Sobchak’s fear of the “foreign agent” status
Certain messages show that Sobchak might have feared being recognized as a “foreign agent.”
In the alleged conversations, she tries to find out which agreements her editorial team violated and promises to provide documents confirming compliance with established requirements.
At the same time, the journalist allegedly complains that the rules are constantly changing: the editorial team does not understand whether it is allowed to show smoke after an attack, a flying drone, the sky over the city, or specific consequences of strikes.
A paradoxical situation arises.
On the one hand, Sobchak’s media holding positions itself as a journalistic project. On the other hand, the published materials create the impression that the editorial team constantly coordinates the boundaries of what is permissible with officials and fears punishment for overly detailed coverage of reality.
NANews — Israel News | Nikk.Agency notes: this part of the leak may be the most dangerous for the Russian government. It shows not just pressure on journalists but a possible system of tacit agreements between the Kremlin and formally non-state media.
Correspondence with Andriy Yermak
The most politically loud part of the leak was the alleged correspondence between Sobchak and Andriy Yermak, who at the time of the mentioned conversations headed the Office of the President of Ukraine.
According to the authors of the publication, Sobchak and Yermak communicated in March 2022 — shortly after the start of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Sobchak allegedly reported that she left Russia with her child, while her mother Lyudmila Narusova and husband Konstantin Bogomolov remained in the country.
She also talked about the possible relocation of part of the editorial team and the continuation of work outside Russia.
The materials suggest that during that period, Sobchak could have been in Israel. In the spring of 2022, there was also information in the media about her having Israeli citizenship.
However, the published fragments do not yet prove that Sobchak passed secret information to Yermak, information about the Russian leadership, or data related to military decisions.
This is where the zone of interpretations begins, which Vladimir Solovyov took advantage of.
Solovyov saw “treason” and “conspiracy”
On July 12, Vladimir Solovyov began the program “Sunday Evening” with a discussion of the published materials.
He did not directly name Sobchak’s surname but spoke about the “Israeli journalist,” her senator mother, and contacts with the former head of the Office of the President of Ukraine. From the context, it was obvious that it was about Ksenia Sobchak and Lyudmila Narusova.
Solovyov stated that these people allegedly acted in the interests of opponents of the Kremlin, supporters of Alexei Navalny, and persons recognized by the Russian authorities as “foreign agents.”
The propagandist was particularly outraged that Sobchak and Narusova belong to a family historically close to Putin.
Ksenia Sobchak’s father, Anatoly Sobchak, was the mayor of St. Petersburg and played an important role in the early political career of Putin. That is why Solovyov presented Sobchak’s alleged actions as a personal betrayal of a person to whom her family allegedly owes much.
At the same time, the propagandist made a reservation: his accusations make sense only if the published correspondence is genuine.
After that, Solovyov linked the leak to statements by Volodymyr Zelensky that Ukraine’s desire to end the war could be supported not only by Kyiv’s foreign partners but also by certain people in Putin’s entourage.
The propagandist began publicly asking questions about who could collect information, pass it to Ukraine, and act against the continuation of the war.
As a result, he allowed for the existence of an entire group within the Russian elite, which he called participants in a possible conspiracy.
Why Solovyov’s reaction is more important than the leak itself
Solovyov did not present any evidence of an organized conspiracy within Putin’s entourage.
There is also no confirmation that Sobchak passed state secrets to Yermak or acted on behalf of the Ukrainian authorities.
However, the reaction of one of the main Kremlin propagandists shows how nervous the atmosphere is becoming within the Russian system.
Even the alleged communication of a person from the Russian elite with a Ukrainian official is now perceived not as a private contact but as a possible sign of treason.
Solovyov effectively transferred the logic of searching for “internal enemies” to Putin’s closest entourage.
Previously, Russian propaganda more often accused emigrants, independent journalists, oppositionists, and anti-war activists of treason. Now suspicions were voiced against the daughter of Putin’s political mentor and a current Russian senator.
How Sobchak explains the publication
Sobchak initially stated that the published correspondence is fake.
Later, she suggested that the attackers could have studied open publications of her editorial team and then fabricated messages that outwardly correspond to real events.
According to her version, the attack’s goal could have been an attempt to discredit her and the employees of the media holding.
Sobchak also linked the possible organization of a campaign against her with a criminal case previously initiated against former employees of her projects and with a conflict around the head of the Russian state corporation “Rostec” Sergey Chemezov.
At the same time, there is no unequivocal independent confirmation or refutation of the entire published archive yet.
The fact of hacking the email and Telegram resources is confirmed. The appearance of screenshots, voice messages, and other files is confirmed. Solovyov’s public reaction is also confirmed.
But the authenticity of each individual message must be checked separately.
A scandal that the Kremlin will find difficult to silence
Even if part of the published materials turns out to be fake, the leak has already dealt a blow to Sobchak’s reputation and showed the depth of distrust within the Russian elite.
If the correspondence is confirmed, it may become evidence of how the Kremlin manages the information agenda through unofficial agreements, the threat of “foreign agent” status, personal instructions to editorial teams, and control over the coverage of the war.
In this story, Sobchak’s correspondence with Yermak is not the only important aspect.
Much more serious is the possible cooperation of Russian media projects with state structures, where journalists deliberately hide most of the information about strikes, fires, the fuel crisis, and the consequences of the war.
Solovyov tried to turn this story into a tale of “traitors,” Navalny, Ukraine, and a conspiracy around Putin.
But as a result, he inadvertently confirmed something else: within the Russian regime, fear is growing of people from their own circle who may be interested in ending the war or simply not ready to fully submit to propaganda.
And the longer the Russian aggression against Ukraine continues, the more often the Kremlin looks for threats not abroad but among those who have been considered part of the system for years.
The leak of Sobchak’s correspondence caused panic in the Kremlin: Solovyov spoke of treason and conspiracy around Putin
If you want to see the Israeli-Ukrainian agenda without the Russian lens — add NANews to Google.
https://www.google.com/preferences/source?q=news.nikk.co.il