Scammers Stole Personal Data of Ledger Crypto Wallet Users

RBK-cryptoPublicado em 2026-01-05Última atualização em 2026-01-05

Resumo

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

Perguntas relacionadas

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.

Leituras Relacionadas

Supply Chain, Energy, and Bloc Formation: Untangling the Core Threads of 2026 AI Investment

The core thesis for 2026 investment is a shift from traditional growth-inflation analysis towards a geopolitical framework of strategic blocs, supply chain reconfiguration, and capital expenditure (capex) direction. The US is moving from a global guarantor role towards a more bounded "camp system," reshaping trade, security, and technology flows. Key investment themes emerge from this realignment: production-capable US-aligned economies (e.g., Japan, South Korea), regional security focusing on Latin America, and the hard constraint of energy/grid capacity enabling reshoring. Europe's strength lies not in macro growth but in its high-quality "pick-and-shovel" industrial, electrical, and automation exporters serving the global capex cycle. AI remains the central US-China strategic battleground, driving massive investment in compute, power, and manufacturing stacks, with robotics gaining prominence. The investment implication is a rotation away from crowded US mega-cap tech momentum toward global beneficiaries of this restructuring: electrification equipment, industrial automation, energy storage, grid infrastructure, and select non-US markets. 2026 will be defined by investment intensity driven by geopolitical repositioning, not near-term commercial maturity.

marsbitHá 4m

Supply Chain, Energy, and Bloc Formation: Untangling the Core Threads of 2026 AI Investment

marsbitHá 4m

Appeals Court Rejects Sam Bankman-Fried Bid For New FTX Trial

A federal appeals court has rejected Sam Bankman-Fried's bid for a new trial, upholding his convictions in the FTX fraud case. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals denied defense claims of an unfair trial, sharply narrowing his legal options. His team could still petition the US Supreme Court. The ruling reinforces the legal precedent from one of crypto's most consequential cases, keeping focus on FTX's collapse, customer losses, and ongoing bankruptcy proceedings. For the market, the decision underscores the lasting impact of FTX on regulatory debates concerning exchange oversight, custody rules, and asset segregation as the industry works to rebuild trust.

bitcoinistHá 8m

Appeals Court Rejects Sam Bankman-Fried Bid For New FTX Trial

bitcoinistHá 8m

Apple Also Has to Pay Rent Now

Apple Pays Rent Too: The Two-Way Flow of "Traffic Tax" and "AI Capability Rent" Between Tech Giants For over two decades, Google has paid Apple an estimated $20 billion annually to remain the default search engine on Safari, a "traffic tax" for a critical user entry point. However, in 2026, the direction of this cash flow partially reversed. Apple agreed to pay Google roughly $1 billion per year to license its Gemini AI models, as Apple's own models reportedly struggled with complex tasks. This creates a unique dynamic: Apple acts as the "landlord" in the established search ecosystem, collecting rent from Google for access. Simultaneously, in the emerging AI arena, Apple becomes the "tenant," paying Google for access to cutting-edge AI capabilities it cannot currently match internally. While Apple claims its new models are "distilled" from Gemini outputs and contain "not a drop" of Google's original code, core dependencies remain. Its knowledge base is refined using Gemini's outputs, and its most powerful cloud model runs on Google's infrastructure. Apple has structured the deal as non-exclusive, allowing it to theoretically switch AI suppliers—a hedge against over-reliance. The future hinges on whether advanced AI models become a commodity (cheap and abundant) or remain a concentrated, scarce resource (expensive and controlled by few). Apple is betting on the former, leveraging its massive device ecosystem to be a powerful, choosy customer. If the latter proves true, its bargaining power could erode. This power dynamic is extending to developers. Apple, Google, and WeChat are all pushing for apps to expose their core functions as standardized "actions" or "intents" that their respective AI assistants (Siri, Gemini, WeChat AI) can directly call. The new scarce resource is no longer just app store visibility, but "being selected by the AI." The currency of "rent" has changed from a 30% revenue share to ceding control over how users interact with an app's functions.

marsbitHá 42m

marsbitHá 42m

Missed the SpaceX IPO? WEEX's "First Trade Protection" Lets You Experience US Stock Trading Risk-Free.

With the excitement around SpaceX's recent public listing reigniting interest in the US stock market, Chinese investors face significant challenges accessing compliant and convenient trading channels following regulatory actions against major online brokers. This article explores the available options, highlighting their risks and limitations. Traditional paths for US stock investments remain problematic. Qualified Domestic Institutional Investor (QDII) and Listed Open-Ended Fund (LOF) products, while compliant, suffer from high fees, significant purchase premiums, and a very limited selection of assets. Small, unregulated offshore brokers pose substantial risks, including potential insolvency. While secure, VIP accounts at banks in Hong Kong or Singapore require high minimum deposits (often 1-2 million RMB) and in-person visits, placing them out of reach for most retail investors. The article positions cryptocurrency exchanges, specifically their TradFi (traditional finance on-chain) offerings, as a compelling alternative. Platforms like WEEX are noted for providing access to a wide range of US stocks and ETFs, including SpaceX (SPCXON), through tokenized assets. This method offers advantages such as a single account for both crypto and traditional assets, USDT-based settlement avoiding fiat complexities, flexible leverage, and robust risk management. To attract users, WEEX is promoting a "First Trade Guarantee" campaign. Running from June 15 to July 8 (UTC+8), it features a $30,000 prize pool. Users who trade $500 worth of US stock contracts can qualify for a guarantee on their first eligible trade: 100% loss coverage up to $30 or a 20% bonus on profits up to $30. The campaign is presented as a low-risk opportunity for both crypto natives and traditional investors to experience US stock trading.

marsbitHá 44m

Missed the SpaceX IPO? WEEX's "First Trade Protection" Lets You Experience US Stock Trading Risk-Free.

marsbitHá 44m

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

How Hard Is It to Make a Chip? A Division Error Cost $475 Million Chip expert Shi Kan, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Sciences and a popular tech creator, explains the immense challenges of chip development. Chips are foundational to modern technology, but their creation is extraordinarily difficult. The journey from sand to a functional chip involves complex design and manufacturing, but a critical bottleneck is verification—ensuring the design works flawlessly before costly production. A single, undetected bug can have catastrophic consequences, as illustrated by the infamous 1994 Intel Pentium FDIV bug. A flaw in the floating-point division unit forced a recall costing $475 million. Unlike software, chips cannot be easily patched after manufacture, making "first-time success" paramount. However, industry surveys show only 24% of chip projects achieve this; over three-quarters require at least one costly re-spin due to design flaws. Verification has thus become the dominant phase, consuming up to 70% of the design cycle. The core challenge is a "verification impossible triangle" between high performance, good debuggability, and low cost. Exhaustively verifying a modern CPU core could take 15,000 years with software simulation, or 30 years with advanced hardware emulation—timeframes utterly impractical for development. Despite being essential, verification is often seen as unglamorous "dirty work," receiving less academic attention than fields like AI. Shi and his team are tackling this by developing an agile verification research framework called ENCORE, based on FPGA technology, to improve verification efficiency and debug capability. Beyond research, Shi engages in public science communication through long-form video content, aiming to demystify chip technology, AI, and computer science. He argues for the value of pursuing "hard and long-term" endeavors, whether in the meticulous world of chip verification or in creating substantive educational content, believing such sustained effort is likely the right path forward.

marsbitHá 53m

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

marsbitHá 53m

Trading

Spot

Futuros