White and Grey

People are maximalists. After we are born and as we grow up, we see a world clearly divided into goodness and evil, black and white. With time, when expertise and experience start to influence our inner world, the outlook of the young person, whether male or female, starts to change, noting grey and other color shades in their life – in their actions, opinions, and relation to the world and the objects in it.

Many of my peers, who are now approaching their 40th birthday, will surely remember the glossy printed catalogues actively distributed by mobile phone retailers. I personally often leafed through them, marking down the most coveted cellular phones. Back then, I was a student and thus could only afford the most basic make, which was Siemens C35. In addition, I had a conniving plan in action, namely to talk only in short, 5-second intervals, since they were not charged for by mobile network operators.

From the first time that I held a mobile phone in my hand, I cannot imagine my life without it, which holds true for the absolute majority of my fellow earthlings. However, back then, the device in my hand was hardly a cultural phenomenon, more so a guide into the brave new information society.

Wireless communications systems, together with the World Wide Web and global digital services, have changed our planet, rendering it small and crowded. The Information Age began with the arrival of first communicators, available to the general public, followed by smartphones that superseded almost every single-purpose device: CD, DVD and MP3 players, pocket books and language translators, portable radio stations, amateur cameras, and video cameras.

Handheld mobile devices, or smartphones, as we now call them, have provided mankind with new communication opportunities, becoming a staple of our culture and enriching our colloquial language with a variety of new words, expressions, and rules of etiquette.

In this article, I would like to discuss a couple of terms that often come up while choosing or purchasing a smartphone, namely “Rostest” or “Eurotest”. Although they may be introduced briefly, I as an expert am aware of quite a few details, and even some “terrible” secrets, that I would like to share with you.

From a technical standpoint, my first mobile phone and the device I am currently holding in my hand and using to write this text are light years apart. Unlike their forerunners, modern devices have a multitude of functions and are classified as information technology equipment. As portable communications equipment grew in popularity, technical committees involving experts with special training adapted the technical laws and regulations concerning mobile phones, or means of communication, as they are formally known.

However, we are getting ahead of ourselves. Let us start with the history of standardization in Russia, as it harbors the answers to our questions about the origin of these terms.

More than 30 years ago, on September 9, 1991, heavy, cold rain was pelting down on the streets of the European capital of Russia. It washed over the city, taking with it the summer dust and the whiff of communism that departed the country a mere six months ago. The historic name given to the city by the Russian tsar Peter the Great having been restored three days prior, Saint Petersburg began a new life in a new country, open to the world and having great hopes for the future. The city mayor by the not-yet-notorious surname Sobchak was establishing contacts with his American colleagues. This was the day the first call using a mobile telephone was made from the Governor’s office in Saint Petersburg. Anatoly Sobchak was calling his Seattle colleague, Norman Rice.

In 1991, the system for standardization and assessing (confirming) conformity, inherited from the Soviet Union, was not particularly fit for imported products; furthermore, the Soviet consumer was not familiar with such notions as “the free market” and “the protection of consumer rights”. Back then, only one label existed to prove that the product has undergone the procedure of state quality control – the State quality mark of the USSR shaped as a Reuleaux pentagon. There is something endearingly Russian in this Soviet Constructivist design.

A year after the coming into force of the law “On the Protection of Consumer Rights” the list of products subject to mandatory certification was established and the conformity mark came into use. The general public started to call this mark “Rostest”, as its name sounded similar to the organization established in 1992 under the auspices of the Moscow Center for Standardization and Metrology, which was the Federal Budgetary Institution “Rostest-Moscow”.

It was the similarity in names that gave rise to the expression “"Rostest" products”, cementing the association of the RST conformity mark (or PCT, as people from overseas proudly call it, since the Cyrillic letters of the acronym correspond to these three English letters) with the abovementioned organization. For members of the general public who are not experts in certification, this correlation has gotten so strong that even decades later, the mark almost having become obsolete, I have to address queries on the quality of a particular product, even though it has never fallen under the scope of the Federal Budgetary Institution “Rostest - Scientific and Research Center for Applied Metrology” (Federal Budgetary Institution “ROSTEST-MOSCOW” prior to December 2024), or JSC “ROSTEST”.

In reality, the situation is a bit different. Certification is no longer a state monopoly or a right belonging to one organization. It has evolved into a system encompassing commercial structures: certification bodies, testing laboratories, product manufacturers and suppliers, and, of course, consumers. The state only provides legal regulation and oversight of the participants. This does not mean that a state unitary enterprise may not become a member of the system, it just operates according to generally established rules. (I can imagine you smiling ironically upon hearing these words; however, this is the way it should be.)

Establishing such a system was a vital necessity in the forming free market, whose products needed to be safe for the general public, but at the same time not create discriminatory conditions for budding Russian businesses as far as possible. The mark of conformity was applied by the manufacturer after the successful completion of the conformity procedure with state standards at one of many certification bodies all around the country.

Naturally, certification bodies and testing laboratories were initially formed as part of enterprises or associations that, whether recently private or still controlled by the state, possessed the required expertise and equipment.

Since 1994, the economy of Russia has strived to enter the global market; however, differences in technical legislation (state and industry standards, safety regulations, and other rules) created barriers, impeding the turnover of goods.

Perceiving this problem, the lawmakers undertook an important step, creating the Federal Law “On Technical Regulation”, which formed the basis for the current conformity assessment system. The significance of this law for the Russian economy has been immeasurable.

First of all, it introduced new legal mechanisms for regulating the relations between the regulatory subjects (products, processes, services). Secondly, this law established the requirements for developing national technical regulations based on European directives. For example, the Directive 2014/30/EU “On Electromagnetic Compatibility” formed the basis for developing the Technical Regulations of the Customs Union 020/2011 “Electromagnetic Compatibility of Technical Devices”. Products that underwent an assessment of conformity with the requirements of the national technical regulations were marked by a special sign.

In addition to the development of technical regulations, the work on harmonizing (adapting) standardization documents was underway. International European standards were introduced in the country’s territory through adopting identical or modified versions of GOST [State standard].

If the acronyms IEC, EH, EN appear in the name of the standard after the GOST acronym, you are looking at one of these versions. This process helped dispose of technical barriers and prepare the market for the arrival of global players. Representative offices were opening their doors, and international guarantees were beginning to come into force.

For approximately ten years, two parallel systems existed in the Russian Federation: the system for assessing conformity with the requirements of the technical regulations of the Russian Federation and the mandatory certification under the GOST R state standards. According to the type of product, goods could be marked with either the mark of conformity with state standards, or the mark of conformity with the technical regulations of the Russian Federation, or sometimes both. At the time, telephones still underwent a conformity assessment under the GOST R system, that is, they were assessed for conformity with state standards, such as GOST R 51287-99 “Telephone subscriber equipment. Safety requirements and testing methods”, etc. Side note: these standards were not particularly suitable for assessing the conformity of current mobile devices.

We are fast approaching modern times. Starting from 2013, three states – the Republic of Belarus, the Russian Federation, and the Republic of Kazakhstan – have come together, creating a single customs territory with a barrier-free movement of goods. Subsequently, they were joined by Armenia and Kyrgyzstan (in 2015 and 2014, respectively).

The basis for the technical regulation in these five countries was formed by documents: the technical regulations of the Customs Union, and a little bit later – of the Eurasian Economic Union. The new regulations were still founded on European directives; however, they applied in all five countries, thus possessing an international status. The Eurasian Conformity mark is used as a uniform sign of conformity applied to the products.

Over the course of the last few years, the legislation, as well as the legal and regulatory framework for technical regulation has been converging with the European directives. Currently, it is not uncommon to see both marks – EAC and CE – on the product, meaning that it corresponds to both the technical regulations of the Customs Union and the European Union directives. This is hardly surprising if we take into account that the same international standards are used to assess conformity.

My compliments to those of you who have made it through this very tedious but necessary detour into history! Now you know the meaning of the signs on the cover of your smartphone. And now that we understand the broader context, we are better equipped to answer the question – what are “Rostest” and “Eurotest”?

If you see the EAC mark, this means that the phone has been assessed for conformity with the requirements of the technical regulations, and one may proudly (but incorrectly) state: it is “Rostest”! If you only see the CE mark, the conformity of the device with European directives has been confirmed, and Russian people, loving to inflect, call it “Eurotest” (which is incorrect, too).

We could stop here, but the question remains: what is the difference? My friends, there is one. As similar and harmonized as the laws and standards may be, technical regulations and directives have their differences, reflecting the conformity of the product with a particular set of requirements. Localizing a phone for a given market is not an easy process, which depends on many factors: linguistic aspects, local laws and regulations on frequency allocation, personal data protection, etc.

If a phone does not have the EAC mark, it has not been intended for the EEU market in the first place, and buying such a device means taking on a risk. Naturally, global brands strive to unify their products and allow for their broadband use in a variety of countries. However, it is not uncommon for the back cover of a phone to be removed by a third party and its software to be reinstalled for localization purposes. How much one can then trust such a device, which will store all your information, from bank card numbers to photos of personal documents and images of your favorite pink lotus at your country house – that is only for you to decide.

Contemporary history has left its mark on establishing the technical regulation system. Nowadays we often hear the notion “parallel import” and immediately remember the 1990s, when technical devices were brought into the country by ordinary people or small organizations, to be resold informally at markets or secondhand. Although such goods are imported without the approval of the manufacturer, the products undergo a conformity assessment according to modern standards and in the territory of EEU countries.

In spite of all the criticism and despite the complexity of the present situation, the established system of technical regulation continues to function. Currently, conformity with the requirements is ensured by the supplier and the seller. This pertains to both the marking and the preparation of the device for use in the territory of the Union while observing the warranty liabilities. However, there are still products that were initially intended for other markets and did not undergo a similar conformity assessment. Thus, the terms “Rostest” and “Eurotest” are likely to be in circulation for a long time.

I would also like to note that new circumstances have enabled us to reevaluate inspection as a form of conformity assessment. The “ROSTEST-Moscow” inspection body guarantees a complete product conformity with the requirements of EEU intergovernmental standards after all tests have been completed. This prevents counterfeit and forged goods from entering the market under the guise of products from a respectable manufacturer.

I wish you a pleasant day!

Designed by lori.ru