How a Third-Party Leak Fueled Phishing Against Ledger Users

Key takeaways

• A breach at a trading partner can expose customer order data even if wallet systems remain secure.

• The actual context of the order, such as product, price, and contact or shipping details, can make phishing attempts appear legitimate and harder to detect.

• Treat incoming “support” messages as untrustworthy until they are verified through official Ledger resources.

In early January 2026, some Ledger customers were notified that personal and order information related to purchases on Ledger.com had been accessed during a security incident involving Global-e, a third-party e-commerce partner that acts as a “merchant of record” for certain orders.

Ledger emphasized that its own hardware and software systems were not breached. However, the exposed purchase data was enough to trigger a second familiar act: very specific phishing attempts that appear legitimate because they reference real-world details.

This article explains why breaches on providers outside of a wallet company can still put users at risk, what types of leaked data make phishing scams more compelling, and how to evaluate “supportive” messages using the principles Ledger repeatedly highlights in its scam advisories.

The Global-e incident, explained

Ledger’s warning in January 2026 concerned a security incident at Global-e, a third-party e-commerce partner used by many brands that may act as a “merchant of record” for certain Ledger.com purchases.

In practical terms, Global-e sits within the payment and fulfillment chain and contains customer and order information necessary to process and ship physical products.

According to Ledger’s customer notice and multiple reports, unauthorized access occurred within Global-e’s information systems. The data involved was related to customers who made purchases through this Global-e payment flow.

The exposure was described as information related to the order, the type of data that can include contact and shipping identifiers, along with purchase metadata, such as what was ordered.

Ledger emphasized that the incident was independent of its devices and self-custody infrastructure. As a result, it exposed no private keys, recovery phrases, or account balances.

Did you know? When attackers obtain verified order data, they can create phishing messages that appear authentic enough to overcome the user’s initial skepticism.

What leaked data is most useful to phishers and why

When people hear “data breach,” they often think of passwords or payment cards first. In this incident, the most relevant risk was context—enough real-world detail to make a phishing message appear as if it were clearly directed at you.

Ledger’s notice of the Global-e incident, along with the incident report, described limited exposure to basic personal and contact information and order details linked to Ledger.com purchases processed through Global-e. This included data such as what was purchased and pricing information.

This helps scammers address two common social engineering challenges:

• 1) Credibility: A message that includes your name and references an actual order (“your Nano order,” “your purchase price,” or “your order details”) may look like a legitimate follow-up from a merchant or support team, even if it comes from a criminal. Reports on the incident indicate that the exposed data could include exactly these types of “proof points.”

• 2) Relevance: Order metadata gives attackers a credible pretext for contact, such as delivery issues, “account verification,” “security updates,” or “urgent action required.” Ledger’s ongoing phishing guide emphasizes that the goal of these narratives is often to push victims into high-risk actions, such as revealing a recovery phrase or interacting with a fake support stream.

The Phishing Line in Ledger-Themed Scams

Ledger scam ads describe a consistent set of patterns. The messages impersonate Ledger or a delivery or payment partner and attempt to create urgency around a “security issue,” “account notice,” or “verification required” and then funnel the recipient to a step that puts recovery credentials at risk.

The most common warning signs are behavioral rather than technical. The message states that there is something urgent, such as a wallet is “at risk”, an order is “blocked”, or a “firmware update” is required. It then pushes the recipient to click on a page or form and attempts to extract the 24-word recovery secret phrase.

Ledger will never prompt for that phrase and it should never be entered anywhere other than directly on the device.

These campaigns also tend to spread across multiple channels, including emails, SMS, and sometimes phone calls or physical mail, and can appear more convincing when attackers can reference actual purchase context extracted from leaked order data.

To reduce uncertainty, Ledger offers guidance on common scam types and explains how to validate legitimate communications through its official channels.

Did you know? The 2026 Global-e compromise was not the only time Ledger buyer data was exposed. Following a July 2020 breach of Ledger’s e-commerce and marketing database, a subsequent data set published As of December 2020, it reportedly included more than 1 million email addresses and approximately 272,000 records containing names, physical addresses, and phone numbers.

Practical defenses to consider

When phishing follows a data breach, it typically asks you to offer something confidential, usually your recovery phrase, or to approve an action you didn’t initiate.

That’s why Ledger’s guidance remains consistent across all of its scam warnings: Your 24-word recovery phrase should never be shared and should never be entered into a website, form, or app, even if the message appears official.

A simple way to reduce risk is to evaluate messages using a clear process:

• Treat any “urgent security” message as untrusted by default, especially if it asks you to click to “verify,” “restore,” or “protect” something.

• If the message refers to actual order details, such as product, price, or shipping, remember that this may be exactly what leaked third-party business data allows. It is not proof of legitimacy.

• If in doubt, do not continue the thread. Use official Ledger resources to check current scam patterns and confirm legitimate communication channels.

Follow some rules that don’t change, even when email history does. This is general educational information, not personalized safety tips.

What the Global-e incident teaches about phishing risk

The Global-e incident is a reminder that self-custody can remain technically intact while users still face real risks through the business layer.

A payment partner, shipping workflow, or customer support stack can legitimately contain names, contact details, and order metadata. However, once that type of data set is exposed, it can be reused almost immediately for convincing phishing attempts.

That’s why the longest-lasting protection is to stick to a few rules that don’t change: treat incoming “support” scope as untrusted by default, validate communication channels through official resources, and never reveal or enter your 24-word recovery phrase anywhere except directly on the device.