#Ledger确认用户设备遭植入未授权硬件
Overnight, hardware wallets went from being the safest way to store your coins to a very unreliable one, because hardware wallets sold by official distributors may have been fitted with devices planted by hackers.
I just saw the news saying the Ledger supply-chain attack may have spread to Europe! It has been confirmed that hardware wallets sold by an official distributor were found to contain implanted devices!
This is a supply-chain attack. Hackers have come up with a new scheme: they exploit the supply chain. Hardware wallets can’t be handed directly to end users as soon as they come off the production line; during the sales process, they inevitably pass through distributors, shipping, and other stages. This time, it seems the hackers directly bought the credentials of a distributor, openly fitted the hardware wallets with theft devices, and then shipped them to customers.
In theory, the distributor was officially approved. If customers are robbed this way, is Ledger officially responsible for compensating them? This is another new issue that urgently needs to be addressed.
However, Ledger has set a terrible precedent this time, alerting hackers around the world to the fact that this can be done. In the future, more people may start looking for ways to exploit the supply chain. After all, the global supply chain is long, and every stage—from factory production lines to shipping and distributors—has security vulnerabilities that could be exploited. So from now on, customers using hardware wallets will also need to be able to tell whether their devices have been tampered with or implanted with something, which is beyond the capabilities of most retail investors.
I think the theft involving Ledger hardware wallets should benefit leading exchanges like Binance. Compared with hardware wallets, storing your assets with a leading exchange is obviously safer and more reliable, and you can earn interest too. Clearly, the major exchanges are no longer at risk of disappearing or going bankrupt; they’re extremely secure and have substantial reserves. Even if they were hacked, they’d have the means to compensate customers. To put it bluntly, if your assets are stolen, at least you can go make a fuss at the exchange and maybe get them back. But if they’re stolen from your own hardware wallet, you won’t even know who to complain to.
In fact, I’ve long believed that hardware wallets aren’t suitable for individual users, because they require ongoing, careful maintenance—something individual users aren’t equipped to do. Serious problems like losing the wallet, damaging it, or forgetting the password could easily occur, and there’s almost no way to resolve them. $BNB
Overnight, hardware wallets went from being the safest way to store your coins to a very unreliable one, because hardware wallets sold by official distributors may have been fitted with devices planted by hackers.
I just saw the news saying the Ledger supply-chain attack may have spread to Europe! It has been confirmed that hardware wallets sold by an official distributor were found to contain implanted devices!
This is a supply-chain attack. Hackers have come up with a new scheme: they exploit the supply chain. Hardware wallets can’t be handed directly to end users as soon as they come off the production line; during the sales process, they inevitably pass through distributors, shipping, and other stages. This time, it seems the hackers directly bought the credentials of a distributor, openly fitted the hardware wallets with theft devices, and then shipped them to customers.
In theory, the distributor was officially approved. If customers are robbed this way, is Ledger officially responsible for compensating them? This is another new issue that urgently needs to be addressed.
However, Ledger has set a terrible precedent this time, alerting hackers around the world to the fact that this can be done. In the future, more people may start looking for ways to exploit the supply chain. After all, the global supply chain is long, and every stage—from factory production lines to shipping and distributors—has security vulnerabilities that could be exploited. So from now on, customers using hardware wallets will also need to be able to tell whether their devices have been tampered with or implanted with something, which is beyond the capabilities of most retail investors.
I think the theft involving Ledger hardware wallets should benefit leading exchanges like Binance. Compared with hardware wallets, storing your assets with a leading exchange is obviously safer and more reliable, and you can earn interest too. Clearly, the major exchanges are no longer at risk of disappearing or going bankrupt; they’re extremely secure and have substantial reserves. Even if they were hacked, they’d have the means to compensate customers. To put it bluntly, if your assets are stolen, at least you can go make a fuss at the exchange and maybe get them back. But if they’re stolen from your own hardware wallet, you won’t even know who to complain to.
In fact, I’ve long believed that hardware wallets aren’t suitable for individual users, because they require ongoing, careful maintenance—something individual users aren’t equipped to do. Serious problems like losing the wallet, damaging it, or forgetting the password could easily occur, and there’s almost no way to resolve them. $BNB