Scammers Stole Personal Data of Ledger Crypto Wallet Users

RBK-cryptoPublished on 2026-01-05Last updated on 2026-01-05

Abstract

Summary: Cryptocurrency hardware wallet manufacturer Ledger has suffered another data breach, this time through its e-commerce payment partner, Global-e. According to crypto investigator ZachXBT, the incident compromised users' personal data, including names and contact information. An email shared by ZachXBT, reportedly sent to affected users, stated that Global-e detected suspicious activity and that an unauthorized party had accessed certain personal data. At the time of reporting, Ledger had not yet released an official statement with details of the incident. This is not Ledger's first breach; in 2020, the data of over 270,000 customers was compromised, which led to years of targeted phishing attempts against users. The summary also notes that the American exchange Coinbase faced a major data breach in 2025, causing an estimated hundreds of millions of dollars in damage.

Another data breach of users of the popular crypto wallet manufacturer Ledger has occurred through the payment system Global-e. As reported by crypto detective ZachXBT, the incident resulted in the disclosure of customers' personal data, including names and contact information.

ZachXBT shared a fragment of an email received by some users:

"Suspicious activity was detected in a part of our network at Global-e. We took steps to isolate and secure our systems. We engaged independent digital forensics experts to investigate the incident and determined that there was unauthorized access to some personal data, including name and contact information."

No official statement from Ledger with details of the incident has been published at the time of writing.

As stated on the crypto wallet manufacturer's website, Global-e offers e-commerce solutions. Since October 9, 2023, Ledger has been using the Global-e platform to sell Ledger products through the official Ledger website.

In 2020, the company already reported a data compromise of over 270 thousand wallet buyers, including delivery addresses, their phone numbers, and email addresses. It was reported that after the incident, the personal information of 4,865 users from Russia, among others, became publicly available.

After the incident, for several years, Ledger users received phishing mailings electronically and even in paper form. The goal of these letters was to obtain additional information that could lead to the theft of cryptocurrency.

A major user data leak in 2025 also affected the American crypto exchange Coinbase, where, according to expert estimates, the damage amounted to several hundred million dollars.

What will happen to the regulation of the cryptocurrency market in Russia in 2026

Bitcoin turned 17 years old

Bitcoin as 'digital gold': what an investor should know

Related Questions

QWhat company experienced a recent data breach affecting users of its crypto wallet?

ALedger, the manufacturer of a popular crypto wallet, experienced a data breach through its payment system, Global-e.

QWhich payment system was the source of the Ledger user data leak?

AThe data leak occurred through the Global-e payment system, which Ledger uses for e-commerce and product sales on its official website.

QWhat type of user information was compromised in the Ledger data breach according to the email shared by ZachXBT?

AThe compromised information included users' names and contact information.

QHad Ledger experienced a similar data security incident prior to this one?

AYes, in 2020, Ledger reported a data breach that compromised the information of over 270,000 customers, including delivery addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses.

QWhat was a long-term consequence for users after Ledger's 2020 data breach?

AFor several years after the 2020 incident, Ledger users received phishing messages via email and even physical mail, aimed at stealing additional information to facilitate cryptocurrency theft.

Related Reads

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbit30m ago

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbit30m ago

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

The U.S. Congress is struggling to advance the crypto market structure bill known as the Clarity Act, with bipartisan compromise proving difficult. Key hurdles include unresolved disputes over "yield" products and, more critically, the inclusion of strong ethics provisions for elected officials—a non-negotiable demand for many Democrats. While a compromise on yield was reached in May, securing only limited Democratic support in committee, the separate Senate Agriculture Committee version later passed with no Democratic votes due to the ethics impasse. As Republicans push for a full Senate vote in July, demands for ethics rules have expanded, and other contentious issues like developer protections and concerns from law enforcement and large banks further complicate negotiations. Despite consensus on the need for legislation, the path forward is unclear. Recent discussions between senators and White House officials aim to find acceptable ethics language. Some lawmakers question whether a compromise text can garner enough bipartisan support, with one Democrat stating the current proposal lacks the strong ethics provisions required for their vote. Potential short-term goals for the crypto community include symbolic Senate action before the August recess, a longer-term aim for passage by 2026, or establishing a detailed framework that addresses ethics and other compromises. The process remains arduous, relying on the traditional, vote-by-vote effort to build bipartisan support.

marsbit49m ago

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

marsbit49m ago

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

"The Rivalry Between Kalshi and Polymarket Founders Turns Bitter and Litigious" The intense feud between Tarek Mansour, CEO of Kalshi, and Shayne Coplan, founder of Polymarket, has escalated far beyond typical business competition into personal animosity and regulatory battles. Both lead billion-dollar prediction market platforms, but their approaches differ sharply. Kalshi positions itself as the compliant operator, securing U.S. regulatory approval before launching. In contrast, Polymarket initially operated offshore, allowing U.S. users to access its platform via VPN, which drew regulatory scrutiny. The conflict reached a peak in November 2024 when FBI agents raided Coplan's New York apartment. While Coplan publicly blamed political motives, his team privately suspected Kalshi was involved. According to sources, Kalshi's lawyers had previously reported Polymarket's operations to federal prosecutors, highlighting its accessibility to U.S. users despite a ban. This incident fueled mutual accusations and underhanded tactics, including social media smear campaigns and attempts to sabotage each other's major business deals. Their rivalry also played out in Washington, influencing regulatory debates. Kalshi actively lobbied against Polymarket's practices, framing them as illegal and unethical. Polymarket, after facing a CFTC fine and investigation, later acquired a licensed U.S. firm to launch a domestic app, regaining a foothold. Despite the hostility, both companies have seen massive growth, with combined trading volumes soaring. However, increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly around insider trading on Polymarket's platform, continues to pose challenges. The founders' deep-seated mutual disdain ensures their battle for market dominance remains as much a personal vendetta as a commercial one.

marsbit58m ago

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

marsbit58m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片