// Comparison
Hackers vs Sandworm: Which Should You Read?
Two cybersecurity books on Narrative, compared honestly: who each is for, what each does best, and which to read first.
A journalist's investigation into the hacker culture of digital resistance — Anonymous, WikiLeaks, Telecomix, the Chaos Computer Club — and the politics of a free Internet.
A New Era of Cyberwar and the Hunt for the Kremlin's Most Dangerous Hackers
Andy Greenberg
Long-form journalism on the GRU's hacking operations, the best non-technical book on what state-level cyber actually looks like.
Read this if
Skip this if
Key takeaways
- A rare French-language deep dive into hacktivist culture, built on first-hand interviews.
- Captures a specific moment (the WikiLeaks era) in the politics of the free Internet.
- Read it for culture and context, not technique — the human and political side of hacking.
- NotPetya was not a ransomware accident; it was a wartime weapon that overshot.
- Attribution is slow, contested, and political, but it is also possible and increasingly precise.
- The line between cybercrime and statecraft is thinner than the threat-intel literature suggests.
How they compare
We rate Sandworm higher (5/5 against 4/5 for Hackers). For most readers, that means Sandworm is the primary pick and Hackers is a useful follow-up.
Both books target beginner-level readers, so the choice is about topic, not difficulty.
Hackers and Sandworm both cover Narrative, so reading them in sequence reinforces the same material from different angles.