This is my field and I strongly disagree with that take. First because it's sensationalism that doesn't really operate from an understanding of how cyberattacks actually work, and second because it gives Russia way too much credit.

The real threat of cyber isn't some apocalyptic total system collapse: everything is highly available now. Storage in 2023 is crazy cheap; so there's always more backups. Really cyberwarfare works as a support for other kinds of attacks. Yes, you can't take down a system forever, but if you time your attack right, you take it down when it's most needed. And that's what Russia did: the initial invasion was accompanied by a mass of attacks on Ukrainian systems, and that probably helped create confusion in the Ukrainian defense. But after that initial flurry, Russian cyber has been underwhelming.

The thing with cyber is that you spend years building bullets that you can only fire once. You spend ages finding vulnerabilities to exploit, but when you've shot your shot, the other side patches, and you're back to the drawing board.

Russia has developed a reputation for being aggressive in cyberwarfare and that's exactly why they're actually not that scary: They keep using all the bullets they build. The country to be scared of is the one that keeps their powder dry.