RUSI have done some interesting tear-downs of Russian kit recovered in Ukraine. And they're absolutely full of Western chips. GPS chips, Inertial guidance chips, little attitude sensors on silicon. I think the average modern Russian cruise missile has something like 15-20 different chips sourced from the US and Western Europe. Some of these are quite specialised, and therefore relatively easy to control the supply of. Because only a limited number of customers need them. So if a new customer comes along, wanting lots, then it ought to raise an alarm.
I'm sure lots of this stuff can be done with generalised chips, which are going to be easier to get hold of, but that means they're going to need to be physically bigger, need more power, give off more heat and need speicalist programming (and therefore testing) by the Russians. So while they can be replaced, it's probably not as easy as you think - and may require major re-designs to the weapon. Re-designing a weapon means you need a new spare parts supply chain, and you have to re-train the maintenance staff. This is one of the legitimate reasons that military stuff is often not using state-of-the-art components and yet still costs more.
Non-experts always look at the specs and the size of the bangs. And miss out stuff like maintenance, compatibility and shelf-life, when talking about weapons systems.
However, stuff I'm reading, from military experts who know way more than me, suggests that Russia's production lines are still grinding out their various flavours of missiles. Often only a handful a month, so way less than they're using up, but it does seem likely that they've either been surprisingly quick at finding ways round sanctions, or they were just sensible and bought stockpiles of the chips they needed. Supposedly Russia is only producing somethine like 12 Kalibr cruise missiles a month, for example. How hard/expensive could it be to have say 3 years of stock of any hard to get components on hand?
On the other hand, they source their tanks' thermal sights from France. Seemingly even after weapons sales sanctions were imposed in 2014. Thanks France! I'm sure they've got a few in stock there too, but they aren't going to be getting a replacement for that. That's a technology they might have to buy in from China (if China will sell) or go back to much worse older tech - and suffer a significant battlefield disadvantage. I don't know how long it would take to develop domestically - it was a significant NATO advantage 30 years ago, but I'm guessing modern tech makes it easier and cheaper to achieve.
Of course re-designing weapons is less of a problem during a war. There's less paperwork and more urgency. Plus rules on testing will tend to get relaxed. Especially if you've got no choice. Where testing can often end up being, "try it on the battlefield and then make a new version once we've found out what all the problems are."