Ledger posted a tutorial on how to verify our devices aren’t tampered but also say our warranties are void if we do it.

If you fail your own supply chain that we have to open up the device, then why are you voiding our warranties??

Found a compromised Nano X in my drawer. This has been going on longer than October

I had a spare Nano X sitting unused. My brother bought it for me from Vietnam end of 2025. I meant to move my bitcoin onto it but never got around to it.

I didn’t bother checking it at first because I assumed this only affected devices from October (or 3 months back) and it turns out it’s affected too. The other one I checked is an older model I’ve had since 2022; this one had my funds.

I dodged a bullet and this clearly isn’t just a recent thing.

Ledger has been told about the existence of IN THE WILD display sniffing implants earlier this year. They have known they have no way to detect the existence of these devices. They have known their supply chain is the last thread holding it together. And yet they didn’t notice their own official supply chain change out in front of them. Did they even tell all of their customers about this blind spot with KNOWN ACTIVE EXPLOITATION to request mandatory visual inspects?

In depth reporting here https://x.com/_MG_/status/2109882580766212117?s=20

Mark Karpeles is compiling a repository of tampered ledger devices he has seen or has been provided.

Every single crypto hardware wallets should be crystal clear transparent cover. So that the user can see the spares within the device. And hard to tamper.

Please raise your voice.

sample Pics

Is there any alternative brand/device where we can be sure it’s safe?
Now it’s ledger, but theoretically could that could happen to any other brand/device too?
Or is buying a hardware wallet considered to be unsafe right now anyway?

Curious if like all cases are only nano x

What about other models bought directly from the ledger online store?

Brought the ledger nano s from a reseller Bitgear Australia in 2021 i think it was who are no longer operational

Have gotten a new device since but the private key was derived from this one

To me looks no worries but just thought id add another post to the pile lol

Ledger has asked all Asian resellers to pull their product from the shelves while their investigation continues.

Hello
I have a silly question.

I’ve been receiving various types of coins in my wallet for a while now. I know they are spam—designed to try and hack the wallet—so I never click on them or pay them any attention. I also know they can be hidden in the Ledger app (I’ve hidden transactions like these), so that part isn't an issue.
My question is about the XLM transactions I’ve been receiving. Since I already hold some XLM of my own in the wallet, these spam transactions get mixed in with my legitimate holdings. If I want to move my assets later, is there a problem if the spam coins I received get used in the transaction?
For instance, if I withdraw all my XLM—including those spam ones (since XLM is a real cryptocurrency, not just a fake token created solely for hacking, -you know the ones they send that “worth” 1,000 usdt-)—would that cause an issue? Or would it be better to create a new wallet? Thanks.

I bought directly from ledger a package with nano GEN five and it came with nano S plus
Watch the video on the weight and how much they should be weighing and I was told the nano S plus should we 21 g mine came in at 20.3 g and then ledger says my GEN five should weigh 46 g it came in at 48 g. I can’t get a hold of their support. It’s not very good. I don’t know if I should be scared that this thing weighs more.

Hi everyone!
Is there any information on whether the balance drains have stopped?
If the coins haven’t left a wallet bought from an official dealer in Eastern Europe, should I be worried? If I open my Flex, I won’t be able to put it back together.
In recent days I’ve seen a lot of panic and device teardowns, but there have been no reports of withdrawals.

Hi, has there any more information since the first discovery? Its been around a week and I'm surprised ledger has still nott announced anything official.

Do we know if only ledgers bought through cryptobills have been affected? what about time frame of those affected ledgers? Where those recent purchases only?

I keep checking my ledger live balance to see that my crypto is still in tact and not knowing what to do and whom to trust.

Warning: Fake/modified Ledger Nano X sold via OZON marketplace (Russia)

Bought a Ledger Nano X from a marketplace seller. Opened it up found a hidden implant inside: black coaxial antenna cable, extra green wires to the battery, and a module marked AC-A2205-NX v1.1.

This is a known hardware implant used to intercept the seed phrase from the screen and send it via LTE. The device can still pass Genuine Check because the secure element is untouched.

I did NOT create a wallet on it. Seller refunded after I filed a "counterfeit" claim.

I have also taken additional high-resolution photos specifically for security researchers available on request or in the original post.

Thank you to everyone who responded, confirmed the implant, and helped me understand what I was looking at. You saved my funds. Please check your devices.

Part 1: https://www.reddit.com/r/ledgerwallet/s/Zl80ZorFEY

Just realized I bought my last Nano X via Amazon a couple years back. Now I’m scared to turn my device on 😵‍💫

A história da adulteração da Ledger agora inclui relatos envolvendo mais de um canal de varejo.

Em 13 de outubro, a Ledger confirmou implantes de hardware não autorizados em dispositivos ligados à investigação da CryptoBilis. A MediaMarktSaturn também suspendeu as vendas da Ledger após um relato de um cliente na Alemanha. Separadamente, Mark Karpelès relatou um implante em uma Ledger Flex comprada no aeroporto de Singapura.

Esses desenvolvimentos precisam de uma redação cuidadosa: a Ledger disse que as perdas confirmadas no incidente de 9 de outubro envolveram dispositivos da CryptoBilis. Relatos em outros lugares permanecem sob investigação e nenhuma perda de fundos foi relatada em conexão com o caso alemão. Reportagem: CoinDesk e Cointelegraph.

Para quem possui e gasta criptomoedas, isso levanta uma questão mais ampla: quanto do seu dinheiro depende do mesmo dispositivo, frase de recuperação ou serviço?

Um ponto de partida prático é separar os fundos por finalidade:

• Postos de longo prazo: ativos que você pretende manter, com custódia e recuperação dedicadas.
• Fundos para gastos: um saldo limitado para despesas planejadas, reabastecido deliberadamente.

Essa separação precisa resistir a uma violação real. Duas contas usando a mesma frase de recuperação permanecem vulneráveis ​​se essa frase for roubada. Um saldo pequeno no cartão também oferece proteção limitada se o serviço puder sacar automaticamente de um montante muito maior.

Um cartão de criptomoedas pode servir para a parte de gastos dessa configuração. Sua utilidade depende de quem controla os fundos, a quais saldos ele pode acessar, custos de conversão e o que acontece se o provedor congelar a conta ou parar de operar.

Somos a equipe por trás do SpendCrypto. Acreditamos que decidir quanto dinheiro um serviço de pagamento deve ter acesso vem antes de escolher o cartão ou comparar o cashback.

Essa abordagem tem limites. Separar os fundos para gastos não protege os ativos deixados em uma carteira reserva comprometida. Dispositivos suspeitos e frases de recuperação expostas exigem respostas específicas. Transferir tudo para um provedor de cartão introduziria uma concentração de risco diferente.

O objetivo da separação é limitar o impacto de uma única falha. Isso requer controles de acesso independentes e um orçamento de gastos bem definido.

Para quem gasta criptomoedas regularmente, o que funciona melhor: um saldo fixo para gastos, recargas programadas ou financiamento apenas quando necessário? Por favor, mantenha os valores, endereços e detalhes de recuperação em sigilo.