Who Is Planting Backdoors in Ledger Crypto Wallets?

(zetter-zeroday.com)

61 points | by hacb 3 hours ago

8 comments

  • Trustable8 55 minutes ago
    I just opened a ledger up, its stupid easy to do. Why wouldn't they make this a sealed unit with and glue it to make it impossible to open without damaging? Also why would you not glue the entire circuit board? The entire board is covered in test pads which make it super easy to solder dodgy stuff onto.
    • phh 48 minutes ago
      At the price of an eSIM and a LTE modem (and of the stolen 100$M), destroying a glued casing and making your own costs next to nothing. Looking at the photos, even without the test pads soldering directly on the components seem pretty easy.
    • bayindirh 41 minutes ago
      I believe epoxy-filling them a-la IronKey is a good idea, but for longevity reasons, I'd prefer the rechargeable battery to be replaceable.

      Maybe it increases the price quite a lot, IDK.

    • deanc 21 minutes ago
      Depending on who is responsible for this, do you not think these people would have the ability to circumvent physical anti-tampering measures?
      • dansquizsoft 9 minutes ago
        Not an excuse for ledger making a sub-par product to begin with...
    • vincnetas 53 minutes ago
      why not make it transparent?
      • Create 41 minutes ago
        Sony SRF-39FP has a transparent case, designed to thwart contraband concealment. The radio often appears on the commissary lists of U.S. federal prisons, hence the "FP" suffix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRF-39 Sony D-FJ003FP, Sony WM-FX193FP, SONY SRF-M35FP
  • sorenjan 1 hour ago
    Shouldn't it be possible to track who bought the esim, where the data is sent, and who owns the wallets where the stolen crypto is transferred?
    • flotzam 46 minutes ago
      It's easy to buy eSIMs anonymously. Either directly with cryptocurrency, or with a prepaid virtual credit card bought with cryptocurrency.
    • karel-3d 1 hour ago
      They tracked the traffic (not the eSIMs) to some servers in Hong Kong, managed by Alibaba.
  • dwh452 1 hour ago
    how can the implant send the seed words to an attacker? doesn't a crypto wallet have to talk an application on the host computer? wouldn't the communication between the wallet and the host computer never allow for the seed words to be sent from the wallet to the outside world? in other words how could an "implant" tampering of the wallet make the host computer suddenly start sending seed phrases to third parties?
    • littlecranky67 50 minutes ago
      They sniffed the LCD interface and OCR'ed the seed words when they were displayed using an implanted tiny CPU. This is a very sophisticated attack.
      • donkey_brains 35 minutes ago
        They were almost certainly not doing the OCR on the device. Such a CPU would be too power-hungry and the process would still be too error-prone given the limited compute. They would just send the raw data to the C2, which could send it to an emulator, snapshot the output and send it to an LLM.
        • dezgeg 31 minutes ago
          Well it doesn't need to be a generic purpose OCR, just one that works for this single UI layout and font.
        • thousand_nights 30 minutes ago
          i don't think OCRing a bitmap font is very expensive or power hungry, if you know the exact pixel configurations of the glyphs ahead of time
          • foobarbecue 15 minutes ago
            Exactly. No O, just CR.
            • usrusr 3 minutes ago
              Wire character recognition
    • lxgr 1 hour ago
      The attackers added their own tiny 4G or 5G board.
    • trillic 1 hour ago
      They put an eSIM in the device…
    • karel-3d 1 hour ago
      There is an eSIM with worldwide data in the device.
    • kg 1 hour ago
      Though it's not what happened in this case, you could tamper with a crypto wallet to make it emulate a USB keyboard and once connected, send a series of keystrokes to download and run an exploit.
    • ovi256 1 hour ago
      The implant could fabricate a reason to connect to a host computer. Like "Cannot display seed words, connect to a computer to debug"
  • coliveira 55 minutes ago
    Every bitcoin in existence will eventually be hacked. It's just a matter of time.
    • littlecranky67 52 minutes ago
      Yet we trust our daily money system to be based on printed colorful paper that no one can reproduce.
      • dbspin 49 minutes ago
        Because it works... The level of counterfeit currency is readily measurable. Currency can be withdrawn and replaced. Individual stolen notes can be tracked. Counterfeiting of the dollar and the euro today is a relatively minor problem

        https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pr/date/2025/html/ecb.pr2502... https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/banknote https://www.cranecurrency.com/news-insights/85-decline-in-us...

      • Muromec 8 minutes ago
        Doesn't matter as long as the real money is not disappearing from my wallet
      • albedoa 3 minutes ago
        Yes, you are getting it.
      • cedilla 33 minutes ago
        It's very very very very hard to forge money convincingly enough to fool central banks. It's basically impossible for anyone but nation-state actors, and the only known cases date back decades. Today, it's even harder, because even if central banks were unable to identify forgeries, duplicate serial numbers or ones that have never been issued would be detected very quickly.

        Even making forgeries that can fool normal automated tests, like those done in an ATM, is incredibly hard. It's certainly possible, just way too expensive.

      • StilesCrisis 43 minutes ago
        You sound sarcastic but it's true. Unless you have government-level resources, you can't make a perfect $20 bill. They don't use paper--water would destroy it--they use a special fabric with a single supplier that only sells to the government. They don't print; they stamp. There are watermarks, security strips, and other features that can't easily be reproduced. Doing it right would be a massive investment, at the risk of being caught and losing everything.
      • hvb2 49 minutes ago
        It's very hard to steal a lot of physical currency.. Even with the biggest bills, it becomes unmanageable. Digitally it obviously doesn't matter if your transferring 1 Bitcoin or 10K
  • artisinal 1 hour ago
    The bigger question is, who is still buying Ledger Crypto Wallets? Wasn't this their fourth breach?
    • thenthenthen 1 hour ago
      All hw wallets are being breached. Big, easy target. I think a lot of people are interested in this breach and the people behind it. 100 million worth? This might works both ways.. curious about the further investigations. My hunch… after major crackdowns on scam centers in the golden triangle, this is their latest dab to wealth?
      • theturtletalks 0 minutes ago
        Stable coins are spreading like wildfire in Asia. It’s poised to overtake even the US is terms of spending. People use it to send money back home and ledgers MITM attack happened in Asia.
    • motionlessveloc 1 hour ago
      Ledger the company was not breached (this time around). The devices here were modified by a middleman in the distribution chain and sold to unsuspecting buyers.
      • artisinal 1 hour ago
        From what I read, an official reseller was breached. It was the decision of Ledger to use that reseller in the first place and to not do a check on their distribution chain. They could have sold straight to the customer instead.
        • dfadsadsf 1 hour ago
          You need to have reseller in most countries otherwise your customers will have to deal with long shipping time, customs, etc. The same for selling in physical stores.
          • artisinal 1 hour ago
            It was the decision of Ledger to use a reseller and to increase their attack vector just so the customer wouldn't be inconvenienced with three more days of shipping. Bad decision in my opinion.

            It was also the decision of the customers to still buy a Ledger device despite being breached multiple times.

  • aa-jv 1 hour ago
    The crypto lunatic fringe have long frustrated me with their assertions of sovereign this and that.

    There is no sovereignty in crypto if YOU ARE NOT BUILDING YOUR OWN HARDWARE.

    Any claims of sanctity or reliability in the software stack are rendered null and void until someone with a tunneling electron microscope has completed an audit of your chips.

    THIS is why Taiwan matters so much, people: there is NO sovereignty for as long as your chips are being imported. You can trust all you want - but trust is nothing without verification. We are all serf-subjects of the wafer-producing overlords.

    Ledger clearly drank the koolaid. Crypto people: invest in hardware. NOT software. Anything less is utter futility.

    • RugnirViking 1 hour ago
      not your keys, not your crypto

      not your hardware, not your keys

      not your chips, not your hardware

      not manufactured in house, not your chips

      not your designs, not manufactured by you

      not designed by you personally, not your designs

      ad infinitum. To be truly secure, you must first learn to survive alone in the wilderness and smelt tin

      • ourmandave 42 minutes ago
        ... and smelt tin

        I'll just order my crucible and tongs off Alibaba.

        Wait a second...

      • vitorfblima 39 minutes ago
        Our grandparents stored their crypto under their matresses.
      • orsorna 1 hour ago
        This is why the assertion that crypto allows you and you alone to control your capital is a fallacy. Depends on your threat model of course...
      • aa-jv 1 hour ago
        Yes, that is true.
      • gpderetta 1 hour ago
        big bang or bust.
      • riffraff 1 hour ago
        ah the good old C-x M-c M-smelting
      • stymaar 1 hour ago
        Every cryptographic system has a trust assumption somewhere
        • flir 1 hour ago
          Hm. Computation with paper and pencil?

          (I agree in general, I'm just exploring the statement).

          • cedilla 30 minutes ago
            Unless you are a world-class cryptographer, you have to trust someone that the algorithms are sound.
      • karel-3d 1 hour ago
        Crypto people keep rediscovering we live in a society.
    • dingaling911 1 hour ago
      Seems like maybe crypto having a single point of failure (keys) is a problem rather than hardware.

      You will never be completely secure against failure, the only way to protect yourself is to be able to robustly recover from failure.

      I'd rather be able to say "every single government is in my hardware and they still can't touch it."

      Perhaps possible with multisig, but now you're basically back to trusting banks.

      • rhyperior 1 hour ago
        Keys don’t have to be a SPoF though. Multi-signature schemes are the baseline for security today.
        • dingaling911 43 minutes ago
          Right, but who is the multi in the multisig and what happens if they die.
          • rhyperior 17 minutes ago
            You can be the multi yourself. Choose diverse hardware (ie, not all the same Ledger) and your likelihood of compromise changes significantly in your favor.

            Sure, loss of seed material would be catastrophic so have a backup scheme. The point isn’t that you can make it perfect, but there’s laughably risky and imperfect solutions and putting everything on a single key HW device like this is the poster child.

    • thenthenthen 1 hour ago
      Not sure what you mean? Taiwan, imported, isnt taiwan the biggest exporter of high end chips? 100% these have not been hacked in Taiwan. You mean setting up your own fab? I am confused
      • aa-jv 1 hour ago
        Yes, Taiwan is the biggest exporter of chips. Have you audited your chips today?
        • dada216 59 minutes ago
          I wonder if even people like Intel or AMD or Nvidia do.

          There might be a strict hardware audit process for cryptographic accelerators on IBM Z machines though, I'm not sure, I'm gonna ask though.

          • aa-jv 57 minutes ago
            It is standard practice in many industries to do hardware audits, including random controls of chip supplies.

            These industries are just not sexy enough for the crypto folks to want to learn from, or about.

  • agentdev001 1 hour ago
    Some chollima, its always a chollima.
  • ricardobeat 41 minutes ago
    The idea of a hardware wallet sounded wronged to me from the start.

    Why would you trust some random hardware, that has the sole purpose of holding your money, making it an obvious target, over a general purpose computer you control entirely?

    • wappieslurkz 13 minutes ago
      Strictly speaking, a hardware wallet doesn't hold your "money". Your assets live on the blockchain, and your seed phrase generates the private keys that control them.

      The hardware wallet is just an interface between you, your seed, and the blockchain.

      In other words: as long as you have your seed phrase (and your passphrase, if you set one) on a piece of paper, you can smash your hardware wallet to bits and be fine.

      (This assumes a standard single-signature wallet using the BIP-39 standard)

    • dd8601fn 14 minutes ago
      If there was ever any appeal to me, it’s that vague notion that machines get wiped, rebuilt, compromised, travel, get stolen, etc. A dedicated device could kinda avoid some of that if it mostly sits in a safe or something.

      I never did get one, though.

    • wappieslurkz 5 minutes ago
      [flagged]